Seawolf Debate Seawolf Debate 2012-2013

POINTS OF INF ORMATION

The UAA Harvard Debate

by S T E V E J O H N S O N

by A M Y P A R R E N T & W I L E Y C A S O N

(continues on pg. 5)

For the People

(continues on pg. 2)

UAA juniorduring the UAA vs. Harvard exhibition debate

rior to the late 1940s, academic debating didn’t look much like it does today. Early American academic debating was an important part of the collegiate experience, but the travel and tournaments that are a hallmark of modern debating

of competitive debating—with week-end-long competitions scheduled for nearly every weekend of the academic year—is a relatively recent development,

travel that emerged in the 1960s. So what did debate look like before every weekend was consumed with a tournament attended by multiple universi-

students: intramural competition and contract debates. Intramural competition grew from organized student clubs that were established to promote educational opportunities beyond the classroom. Students interested in literature, law and politics would gather to discuss current events; Princeton’s Whig and Cliosophic Societies are prime examples of this. Founded in the 1760s, Princeton’s societies served as a training ground for aspiring leaders. From the Princeton Debate Panel’s history available online:

[American] Revolution were active

an arena in which many future leaders of the Republic, such as James Madison (Whig) and Aaron Burr (Clio) developed and sharpened the skills of persuasion, exposition,

peers.

P

n April 25, UAA debaters Amy Parrent & Wiley Cason found themselves on stage at the Beartooth

Second Amendment. Defending precarious positions is nothing new to these seasoned debaters, but doing so in front of an Alaskan audience of roughly 400 people who all paid to see them take on the

and Coulter King was not only new but intimidating to say the least. Here are the

what was perhaps the most challenging and exhilarating debate of their lives.

Academic debate is not something that should be done in a small room, or with a small audience. Unfortunately, large audiences are hard to come by; and more often than not it is only coaches and competitors in the room when we speak. When you have the privilege to speak to an audience of several hundred, in a sold out

event at the Bears Tooth, it isn’t an opportunity to pass up. During the second amendment debate I was struck with realization of just how important a good audience is to our activity and the integral part it plays in a good

event was a top half British Parliamentary

by members of the audience.

Harvard team, Amy and myself were pretty

and the stage, and made good arguments for and against the second amendment. But the crowd in attendance, all of whom had purchased tickets at least a week in advance, generally was not a

were older, more educated, and listened to

than people on stage generally hope to see

O

Wiley Cason:

champion Harvard team of Josh Zo�er

2

For the people... (continued) debating clubs, though:

Whig and Clio, like similar literary societies at other American colleges, were the main focus of undergraduate life for much of the nineteenth century. Elaborately organized, self-governing youth groups (though often receiving advice from alumni

constructed and taught their own curricula, selected and bought their own books, operated their own libraries (often larger and more accessible than that of the college itself ), and developed and enforced elaborate codes of conduct among their members. Intense competition for members and for college honors led to creative emulation between the

undergraduates easy access to the world outside; their debates trained generations to consider the great public issues of the day, from slavery to American expansion, from wom-en’s rights to the dismemberment of the union.

When university debating societies did reach beyond the walls of their own campuses, they tended to imagine not a sequestered tournament attended by multiple universities and featuring numerous rounds in 2 or 3 days, but a major occasion that was more akin to a

contract debates, would draw large crowds and were an important part of the college’s social calendar. Yale, Princeton and Harvard’s Triangular Debates are an example of this

Debate Association’s online history

well:Yalies began to debate competitively in the 1890s, with ad hoc debates against Harvard. A more formal association of Ivy League debaters began in 1908, when Harvard, Princeton, and Yale agreed to hold three annual debates, known together as Triangulars. Debaters at each

faculty members for the coveted slots.

debate, and judges and presiding

presidents, mayors, U.S. Court of Appeals judges, and even the former

debates were avidly watched by the public, even reported on by widely

York Times. One Times journalist remarked in 1896, "It is generally as important to win this debate [Yale v. Harvard] as to win the football game in the fall."

Each Triangulars debate was three-on-three. Resolution topics ranged from current political andeconomic events, such as the independence of Panam (1904) or the repeal of the prohibition amendment(1919) to social questions like

purpose of a college education (1985). Much of the Seawolf Debate

focused on recapturing this connection between debating and “the people” who do not eat, sleep and breathe debate. Don’t misunderstand: I believe that competitive tournament debating is an

intensity and frequency of debating in

the tournament model accelerates skill acquisition in ways unparalleled by any

other academic experience. But the

Outside, in an environment not conducive to public access (do non-debat-ers really want to watch four rounds per day over three days that stretch from 8 am until 10 pm?)—sometimes makes it hard to remember that debate is, and must be, for the people.

recapture some of the connection between debating and the non-debating public.

intramural debating competition for students not active on the competitive team, is now approaching its 10th year and was, for the third year in a row,

90 students registered for just over 60

round was an excellent debate over whether we should strip churches of their

-pub, combined a compelling issue (repeal the 2nd Amendment?) with great food and beer for an atmosphere that rivaled the description of Yale’s Triangular debates. We not only were successful in

but we sold out the over 400 seats in the theatre and discovered—much to our delight—that tickets were being scalped for double their face value on Craigslist. Debating is, and has always been, a potent educational activity. But it’s important to remember that it’s also the default model of collective decision-making in our culture—whether in the legislature, boardroom or commu-nity group. We’re proud of what we’ve done to honor the tradition of debating and believe that the best debates are those

arguments, but also those who engage with the arguments they observe through critical consideration of the issues at hand. ◊

The Seawolf Debate Program’s intiatives aredesigned to recapture some of the connection between debating and the non-debating public.

Matt Stinson speaks on behalf of his teammates, Matthieu Ostrander, Andrew Kerosky, and Matthew Fox during the 2012 Ethics Bowl

3

L

Taking the Plunge: From DDF to BPby B L A K E S T E E N H O V E N

W

Making Debaters Out of Middle Schoolersby J U D Y J E S S E N

ast February, I registered for the Cabin Fever Debates, UAA’s intramural debate tournament. I wasn’t entirely sure what to expect, but it ended up being one of the

college career. While Cabin Fever is designed to allow novices to have an opportunity to compete, I wasn’t entirely new to debate. I spent a lot of time debating in high school as part of South Anchorage High School’s Drama, Debate, and Forensics team. High School students in Anchorage have the opportunity to compete in a variety of formats: Public Forum, Lincoln-Douglas, and Policy, the style I most enjoyed. I went from competing in local tournaments to

to travelling to Harvard for their national invitational tournament in early 2008.

develop important skills that have been immeasurably valuable, I didn’t debate

I had heard about the Cabin Fever Debates when I started at UAA, but I had a few reservations. My biggest concern was competing in the British Parliamentary style, with which I was very

unfamiliar. I wasn’t sure if the skills I had learned in previous styles would be

decided to compete, I knew I needed to

concerns were legitimate.If you ask a veteran debater or

debate formats, the most frequent response is, “Good debate is good debate.”

(continues on pg. 6)

hen I volunteered to help out the Clark Middle School debaters, I had no idea what I was getting myself into. I was thinking to myself, “I’m new to the UAA program, I’m new to the format

terrible idea.” I didn’t feel like I was

involved, so I essentially took a

I really did not want to look stupid in front of the middle school students. With one other volunteer from the team (Emerson White), I entered a room full of students who were pretty sure I knew everything about all things debate. Oh, and their teacher. I thought to myself, I

snow a bunch of pubescent newbies, but I was likely not going to be able to fool the

together a debate and Emerson and I suggested strategies that would help

included, was thankful, and I made plans to come back and help them some more. When I came back a handful of our suggestions had been integrated, and the students were enthusiastic to work more on their materials. Turns out enthusiasm accomplishes a lot. We worked on building a stronger foundation in their preparation material, and talked about having more substance to frame and

we talked about structuring prep docu-ments to be more user-friendly. Suddenly their speeches were longer, the material had more context, and they were just way better. When I left after that last session

together, I was feeling much more optimistic. My feelings, though, were nothing compared to the level of excitement the students had. Watching the students go through their tournament was so much fun for

rounds and thank me for helping them, and tell me that they won because of sign-posting, or because they answered “the why?” Beyond their fundamental skills, though, these students were way

a week, and it was nothing short of incredible. Clark broke one team into

(continues on pg. 6)

Veteran DDF students (from left to right) Ruth Miller, Paige Perez, Johanna Richter, Elizabeth Jackson, Jacob Parish, Nicole Eldred, Terek Rutherford, and Skylar Hektner compete in the final round of the 4th Annual Northern LightsBritish Parliamentary Tournament held at UAA on April 19-20th. 32 Anchorage area high schoolers competed in this year’s tournament.

Alumni Spotlightby E R I K P E D E R S O N

T

Jon Stinson, Andrew Kerosky, Matt Ostrander, and Matt Stinson speak before a full

Johnson was in 1994 as a sophomore at a small Jesuit University in Omaha, Nebraska called Creighton University. As the Creighton debate coach, Steve called me to ask if I wanted to come to participate in the debate practices. I thought that any debate team that would have me was probably not a debate team with which I wanted to be associated. I declined and, of course, thought it was the wise choice at the time because as far as I knew beer was not served in debate. More impor-tantly though, my high school debate coach in South Dakota had warned me that college debate focuses less on persuasion, logic, and the construction of arguments and is more focused on research and speed reading. Steve was persistent and I eventually went to one of his practices. It was evident immediately that Steve was not the policy debate bogey man I was warned about and he was focused on communi-cating arguments logically and persua-sively. He even steered his programs towards types of debate, like parliamen-tary, that reward persuasive arguments. I then went to a couple of tournaments. A few months later, Steve said that he and Shawnalee were moving to

Anchorage to teach at the University of Alaska. Before I had a chance to say “well, it has been nice knowing you,” Steve asked if I wanted to debate at UAA for him. I really did not have to think about it too long because my Dad made the snap-decision for me when I told him I had an opportunity to move to Alaska. I will never forget the exchange…

opportunity to debate at another school in…” He interrupted, “you are going.” “But dad, I haven’t even told you yet where…” I replied. To which he interrupted again, “it doesn’t matter, you are going.”

I think he, in part, counseled this approach because he also made the assumption that beer was not served in debate.

1995. In addition, to the wonderful experience of living in one of the most beautiful places on earth, going to UAA for debate was one of the best opportunities of my life. From UAA debate, I learned a lot about communi-cation that I take with me in every interaction that I have. At UAA, I met some great friends, unique people, and

very talented debaters that I remember fondly. Oh, and debate even dispelled one of the stereotypes I had about the event. We went to the World Debate tournament in 1997 which was held in Cork, Ireland. Murphy’s Irish Stout sponsored the event and I learned that beer IS served in debate. Since I moved from Alaska in 1999, I have lived in the Washington, D.C. area. I currently live in Arlington, Virginia with my wife Shannon. In 2009, I was appointed by President Obama to serve as part of his Administration at the Department of

Bureau as the Legislative Director. Part of what I do is to determine on a daily

-nicate Department views on pieces of legislation introduced by the Congress that have an impact on U.S. foreign

-tion, I worked on Capitol Hill for former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle on his Democratic Senate Floor

round of the US Open at Claremont Colleges.Kelsey was selected to be the 2013 UAA Student Commencement Speaker.

4

2004 until 2009, I worked as the Congressional Liaison at the congressio-nally created and mandated U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Com-mission. In each of these jobs, communication skills learned from debate have been crucially important. ◊

Senior Kelsey Waldorf sspeaks in the semifinal

house during our fall exhibition debate.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Erik Pederson competed for UAA from 1995-1998, and represented the Seawolves at the 1997 World Universities Debate Championship in Cork, Ireland.

5

The UAA Harvard Debate (continued)

means doing anything wrong- applauding and pounding the tables when appropriate- but no one was going to mistake the event for a 2008 Obama campaign stop either.

relatively reserved was asked to stand up and speak their minds, and people lined up

wide range of comments, but all from those who believed in what they were saying, and afterwards, the dynamic of the room

up, the personal investment in sides was there, and the whip speeches (by Amy and Josh) were delivered with a sharpness and intensity level that had been previously lacking from the perfectly competent opening four.

from watching the energy of the audience shift after the public comment, from the way in which it impacted not only the delivery, but the clarity of content in the

thankful when anyone is willing to watch

and discourse are not activities that can be had in a vacuum. Collegiate debate can at times be insular, and it can be tempting to think of yourself as being better or smarter than the average citizen. For at least half the world, that’s a

people around you who are engaged and participating in the discussion opens you up to their thinking; and makes your thinking immeasurably better as well, not to mention your stage presence. I’m thankful to the UAA and to those who showed up to watch us debate for the opportunity, and can think of no better academic program worthy of support at our school than the Seawolf Speech and Debate program. ◊

Whether it comes from our frontier roots, or simply because when it is dark and cold we like to argue, Alaskans know how

dialogue in our great state. As half of the

UAA team speaking that evening, I was most impressed with the audience at this event. From the participation and feedback

from the audience, and the friendly interactions after the debate, I was so appreciative of the engaged citizens who came to the event. Most impressive to me, was the respect shown by everyone. It is easier, I think, to attack the ideas of others

even easier to attack other people who disagree with you. I saw neither of those things from the audience. Instead, I saw

both passion and compassion and real active listening.

the debate is for two particular reasons. First, the goal of debate is to explore ideas in an intelligent and respectful manner. I have been committed to the activity of debate for eight years, and I am happy to be a part of bringing the value of debate to my community. Second, I feel that dialogue is crucial to democracy and when we learn to participate and be mindful of one another, we become better people and better citizens. As Alaskans, we know that we are a part of something special. In addition to the beautiful land we get to have home, we also have strong communities. I have been overwhelmed by the support shown to me and the debate programs I have had the privilege to be a part of, both in my hometown of Sitka, and in Anchorage. We exist in a symbiotic relationship, as debate

one another. I hope that the UAA vs. Harvard debate is a spring board for continuing respect, engagement, and more debates in Alaska. ◊

From the participation and feedback during our speeches, to the floor speeches from the audience... I was so appreciateive of the engaged citizens who came to the event.

“I was impressed by the community turn out and engagement we received. It is refreshing to see people outside the debate community come out participate in an event like this, both as spectators and participants in floor speeches. Debaters have a tendency to become absorbed in our relatively insular community, and it is a wonderful reminder of why this activity is so important to see people so engaged. Overall, it was a fantastic experience.” - Josh Zoffer, Harvard

Pictured below: (from left to right) Coulter King

UAA versus Harvard debate.and Josh Zoffer of Harvard confer during the

Amy Parrent:

From DDF to BP

6

Dean John Stalvey of the College of Arts and Sciences congratulates the 2013 CabinFever Debate Champion Team of Judy Jessen and Heather Guthrie with Director of Debate, Steve Johnson.

this response, I found it to be as frustrating as it was useful. On faceit seems to be redundant at best; you could literally substitute any noun for “good debate” and the statement would hold true. However, the core of the message is that in any style of debate, the goal is the same: to uncover the truth behind an idea through in-depth argumentation. Whoever best achieves this goal in a debate round is the

because there certainly are distinctions and understanding these dissimilarities is necessary for success. But the similarities between styles of debate far

After being awarded Top Speaker for the Cabin Fever Debates, I was invitedto practice with the team and travelled to the US Universities National Debating Championships in La Verne,

and tournaments that UAA competes in is the preparation time for each round. For Cabin Fever, teams have a week to prepare their best arguments for the proposed motion. In normal competition, they get 15 minutes. Coming from policy debate in high school, where the motion stays the same for the whole year, this was a bit of a shock. However, it is exactly this shock that has made collegiate debate so appeal-ing to me. While debating in the British Parlia-mentary style seems to constantly take me out of my element, the skills that I have begun to develop as a result are incredibly valuable. Being put on the spot with only

Leaving the tournament at the end of the day I was struck by what I had gotten from the experience. First, the students made me a t-shirt thanking me for helping them. Who doesn’t love a free t-shirt? More importantly, though, they taught me a lot about what I’ll be going through in the coming years with the

of their journey just like I am, establish-ing new relationships with new coaches and new peers, navigating a new format in an environment where they just want to succeed. In one week I took what they knew about debate and changed almost every part of it. I was hard on them, and I asked for a lot from them, much like this program will demand of me.Instead of folding and being frustrated

new ones, an attitude I will have to adopt

championship that came at the end of a losing debate season. I can only

similar result in my time on the team. ◊

Making Debaters Out of Middle Schoolers

important issues uniquely mirrors the way we people make decisions on countless ideas every day. My work with the debate team has helped me learn to ask the important questions, to make informed decisions, and ultimately to be a better citizen. ◊

Hannah Foreman and Brittany Bennett prep for a demonstration debate round.

(continued)

(continued)

Another Year for the Trophy Caseby A M I E S T A N L E Y

T

7

his year was a remarkable new beginning for the Seawolves. Having graduated 6 of the team’s top debaters last spring, there were a lot of opportunities and high expectations set for the rising stars and fresh faces of our program. With 9 tournaments under our belt, and a few new trophies to boot, there is no doubt in our mind that the Seawolf Debate team is as strong as ever and has demonstrated the depth of its competitiveness to everyone in the debate community.

traveled to the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) 50th Forensics Classic in Colorado, alma mater of former assistant coach Shawn Briscoe. All three teams advanced to the

including Brittany Bennett & Kelsey Waldorf, Matt Fox & Amy Parrent, and Matthieu Ostrander & Hannah Fore-man as the 1st, 5th, and 7th seed teams respectively. Bennett & Waldorf

competition. At the end of an intense weekend of debating, our six debaters took home 5 of the top 10 speaker awards with Bennett taking 3rd, Waldorf, Ostrander, and Fox tying for 5th, and Parrent taking 7th. Riding the high of the early season success at USAFA, the team excelled once again at the Claremont US Open in California. Of the nearly 100 speak-ers present at the tournament, our debaters claimed 3 of the top 10 speaker awards. Parrent received 3rd, Bennett

& Fox represented UAA alongside the team of Waldorf & Bennett in the same

international tribunals to try serious labor violations in developing nations. Having made a clear name for them on the west coast, the team then traveled to the Yale Invitational on the east coast eager to demonstrate their ability. While

neither team of Parrent & Fox nor Bennett & Waldorf were able to secure a spot in the elimination phase of competition, the lessons learned from facing tough competition became invaluable as the east coast reconvened at the Huber Debates hosted in Vermont. We were fortunate to travel both our top teams and a plethora of novices vying for the chance to prove

Parker Dahl & Emerson White were

Stinson & Matthieu Ostrander

round, along with Bennett & Waldorf

teams. Parrent & Fox prevailed even further as they took home Finalist awards. In addition to the team awards, Bennett was recognized as the 5th place speaker and Waldorf as the 2nd among the 160 individual speakers present. Following their impressive performances and recognition as top speakers, the team of Bennett & Waldorf were chosen to represent UAA at the World Universities Debating Championship in Berlin. In preparation for that tournament, they traveled to Cambridge University to face top European teams. For Waldorf this was

America, and for Bennett only the

again key to their success back home in the US when they competed at the Davis Debates in California. At the Davis Debates, we were pleased to advance 3 of the top 8 teams

Waldorf, and Stinson & Ostrander all fought valiantly to earn a place in the

of Parrent & Fox who represented us in

privatization in space exploration, Parrent & Fox earned the 2nd place award. Nevertheless, four Seawolves distinguished themselves in the top 10 of more than 80 speakers in the tourna-ment once again demonstrating the depth of talent on our team: Parent (2nd speaker), Fox (3rd speaker), Waldorf (5th speaker), and Bennett (9th speaker).

After an extended break taking

the exception of Bennett & Waldorf who competed admirably at the World Universities Debating Championship in

the pond to the Trinity Intervarsity in Dublin. Parrent and Fox advanced to

Seawolf Debaters at theawards ceremony of theUS Air Force Academy50th Forensics Classic.From left to right: former assistant coach ShawnBriscoe, Matt Fox,Amy Parrent, MatthieuOstrander, Hannah Foreman, Brittany Bennett,Kelsey Waldorf, assistantcoach Amie Stanley.

(continues on pg. 8, TROPHY)

Seawolf Debate Seawolf DebatePOINT S OF INFORMATION

Steve JohnsonDirector of Debate

ADM/Humanities Bldg, Rm 2623211 Providence DriveAnchorage, AK 99508

(907) 786.4391steve.johnson@uaa.alaska.edu

www.uaa.alaska.edu/seawolfdebate

L

Bringing Debate to Lifeby K E L S E Y W A L D O R F

8

ooking back on four years of participation on the Seawolf Debate Team brings back a lot of memories. Memories of late nights in the squad room organizing brief books, competing in out-rounds at national tournaments, tearing my hair out trying to make sense of the European Stability Mechanism, and of course, hours and hours of arguing and deconstructing and asking points of information. But all these memories translate into real skills that will launch my future career, whatever that may end up being.

out of spending six or seven hours a week debating for four years. Some of the most important are critical and analytical thinking skills, public speaking skills, development of

critical and analytical thinking, but debate is one of them. It teaches you to think about issues not in an I-believe-in-that or I-do-not-be-lieve-in-that kind of way, but in a way

and harms on both sides. It limits the amount of black and white in the world, but also helps you to quickly identify what needs to be black and white for purposes of clarity: what issues are we talking about? What issues are we not talking about? Do we all

background in debate will tell you to

to set up the framework for the rest of the conversation. Public speaking skills are crucial for many things in life. Interviews are public speaking, presentations are public speaking, and group meetings are public speaking. How you speak is how you present yourself, and partly how others will judge you. Most public speaking I will do after my debatecareer will pale in comparison to the stress and anxiety of coming up with

anxiety of coming up with arguments on a subject I may or may not know anything about, presenting those arguments, and then watching as other individuals actively tear them down in front of me. If I can give a persuasive speech to a room of debaters, armed with pens and the most recent Economist, I can give a speech to any audience.

Developing a presence is having control over how others see you. I can be calm and unemotional, or I can be

conversational, or formal. Combined with good sense and social skills, having an appropriate presence can lead to countless opportunities. Closelyrelated to composing oneself is having

the debate circuit, in rounds against Yale and Harvard and Cambridge, gave me

something. I am good at this.” Everyone

you room to take risks, knowing that you may make mistakes, but also knowing that you may succeed beyond your wildestexpectations. I learned a lot at UAA. I earned a B.A. in Justice, with minors in Communication and Political Science. I graduated from a rigorous honors college. My resume grew by about two pages. But out of all the classes and extra-curricular activities I engaged in, debate taught me the most valuable skills, applicable to everything I will do. ◊

the single-elimination phase of the tournament, ranked 14th of the 84 teams entered in the competition. Also noteworthy, the team of Ostrander & Stinson were only a single preliminary point away from advancing to the

tournament. Lastly, we rounded out our season at the US Nationals Championship hosted by La Verne University. In the

elimination rounds. After six prelimi-nary rounds, Parrent & Fox advanced with Wiley Cason & Bennett.

Alaskan teams were taken out facing tough competition from teams from Cornell, Stanford, and Yale among others. In addition to the hard-earned accolades our senior teams garnered, we had a particularly young squad this

US Universities Debating Champion-ship. At the end of preliminaries 3 of our novice teams were still in conten-tion to make it to the break, and at the end of competition 3 of our novice speakers placed in the top-third of the

Matt Fox, another graduating debater, speaks to his partner Amy Parrent.

TROPHY (continued)

Amie Stanley Assistant Coach(907) 786.4354 astanle6@alaska.edu

-able performance, combined with the various successes of the entire season, speaks to the depth of our program and holds high promise for the 2013-2014 season. As a very proud coach I cannot wait to see what the future holds for the talented debaters who call this team home. ◊