Modesty Takes a long Time - 2/4/2002

Implementation

School Debate Team

Students selected for the debate training squad, after being identified in Sec 2, should undergo more specialised and intensive training in Term 4 and in the December holidays. The number invited should be relatively small – 5 to 8 each year. Given the small number of places on the team and the amount of time and attention required of developing a debater, 5 to 8 in the training squad is reasonable.

As attrition is expected, if 4 remain by the beginning of the next year, our goals would have been met.

As an added incentive for potential debaters to commit to debates, those not already in the ELDDS as members should be made associate members of the ELDDS. This gives the guarantee that they are contributing to the school in a manner which is recognised.

Second, only ELDDS members should be allowed to represent the school as Sec 2 debaters. This special privilege lies with the fact that they have received the exposure and training in Sec 1 from the ELDDS and that they do not have another CCA as an added commitment. Only the best 2-4 Sec 1s should be invited to join the training team in Term 4 / Dec holidays of their Sec 1 year. Not only has this to do with the maturity level of Sec 1s, it also has to do with the fact that those not selected can prove themselves in the Sec 2 debates in the following year by representing their class and win a place on the squad.

So potentially, the entire debate training team should look like this after several years of running the system.

By the end of December and the beginning of January, there should be

Sec 2s : 2 (the best of the sec 1s from ELDDS)

Sec 3s : 6

Sec 4s : 6

Total : 14


Given that the official teams consist of 5 members each (including reserves), 14 debaters gives 2 full teams, with 4 understudys / reseachers. Seen from another perspective, 12 also means 2 "proper teams" and 2 "shadow" teams, which is very useful for sparring during practice and preparation.

Making sure the team stays together and that they will continue to represent the school in the future.

Developing the Debating Wing of the ELDDS

While this proposal has thus recognised that good debaters in Sec 2 may not necessarily be members of the ELDDS, and thus has established a need for a systematic way of spotting and grooming talent, it is still important that the ELDDS be the primary body in the school from in which debaters are groomed, and by which a debate culture is promoted.

Debate training must be made compulsory as part of the CCA curriculum for all Sec 1 ELDDS members. Even if they do not go on to become school debaters, making sure they understand the functions, technicalities and logic of debates is crucial in disseminating such information to their own classes when they come up to Sec 2.

This training does not have to be so detailed as to refine an individual's style or logic, but it has to be rigorous enough in terms of challenge to cause potential debaters to shine even as Sec 1s.

As part of the debating wing, a database of articles and websites, of motions and arguments should also be developed.

Keeping in touch with Sec 4s. – Expectation for them to help the junior year prepare for at least the next year's debates. Possible cause 1. JC debates don't run concurrent with Sec School debates. 2. Usually more free in 1st three months.

Linking up with other schools

With the Inter-School Debates ending in April, the rest of the year is a lull for school debaters. Without consistent debate activity, school debaters will lose their sharpness and sense of competition. Further, they may even become highly involved in other school activities. This may have the detrimental effect of causing them to withdraw from the Debate Team in the following year.

Hiring a Coach

Goals and results

"A" Division

Debaters go on to represent JCs.

Well - you heard it here first. Probably won't get passed - but at least I've put it out - anyone can use it now !