INDIANA is considering options for a new competitive season! Feedback?

[David McKenzie]

THIS WILL BE LONG...BUT IT IS IMPORTANT!!!

The IHSFA is looking at four options for a season calendar. I am leading a discussion with Laura Archbold (Northrop) at the fall clinic, and following the discussion we will take a poll of the coaches prior to making a final decision. ANY CHANGES WILL NOT OCCUR THIS YEAR...AND MAY NOT OCCUR FOR 2011-2012. In addition to soliciting Indiana coach opinion at the clinic, I want your opinion as well prior to the clinic.

First - IHSFA philosophy - Our season has always been long in order to enable as many students as possible to experience the benefits of forensics.

Second - The IHSFA is wondering whether the season length and style is (1) putting a strain on school budgets, (2) putting a strain on coaches leading to difficulties in maintaining programs, and (3) putting a strain on students who are already busy with numerous classes, activities, and preparation for the future. - even though forensics is a significant part of that preparation.

Here are the four options under consideration:

Option 1 - The Status Quo: We do see value in our current season structure.

Option 2 - A Shortened Season: The overlapping season structure for debate and speech would continue; however, the tournament season would begin in November and end in February.

Option 3 - The Split Season - Version A: Speech starting in September and ending with the state tournament in December. Debate starting in January and ending with the state tournament in April.

Option 4 - The Split Season - Version B: Debate starting in September and ending with a state tournament in December. Speech starting in January and ending with the state tournament in April.

Feel free to discuss the options in your post, or simply list your preferences and briefly state your reasoning.

If your identity is hidden, please identify yourself as...
1. A current Indiana forensicator
2. A past Indiana forensicator
3. An out-of-state forensicator - maybe identify your state
4. An Indiana coach - esp. if you won't be at clinic
5. An out-of-state coach - (just in case you were surfing, too)

Finally, thanks for your input and spread the word about this because Speech and Debate ROCKS!

[freerunner]

I would stick with Option One. The status quo has worked in the past, and a drastic change might interrupt the natural flow of Indiana Forensics.

[LeftWing]

Status Quo Definantly. I like the way it is, because it's long and fun.

[doublek12]

As a past Indiana forensicator, I too like option 1. Unless I'm missing something, the current schedule works fine, so I wouldn't fix something that isn't broken. However, I came from a large school that didn't have problems raising the funds, so I'm interested to hear what everyone else says.

[cameronman]

Personally, I am partial to choice 4.
I have a taste for speech as well as congress, but interp trumps all haha
I would enjoy a more well-rounded year, not just being able to debate on 3-5 seperate occasions. In additition, Speech, generally, falls in the awkward flu time. I can debate fair enough with a cold, but interp is a totally different idea. Whether it be head-cold or just a runny nose, they directly inhibit a competitiors natural qualitites.

[psettles24]

I definitely favor idea number 1. Option number two would be ok, I guess but number 1 is definitely the better. As for the split season, that would hurt Indiana's competitive success at NFL nationals. If your season is in the fall then you get no competitive experience the second half of the year and that just isn't fair to either side to have to choose.

[iulaur]

My team was HIGHLY affected by the fact the fact that the season overlapped with the Show Choir season. I think Option 3 is the best.

[David McKenzie]

I would stick with Option One. The status quo has worked in the past, and a drastic change might interrupt the natural flow of Indiana Forensics.

Just wanted to remind you all that for the purpose of collecting data; please identify yourself as a current competitor, graduate competitor, coach, state orgination. Use whatever you are currently. Thanks!

[speechie30]

I am a current competitor from IN who can see the benefits of options 3 and 4 but I would prefer to stick to option 1. I believe that it gives all students an option to participate. It is also beneficial to do debate and speech at the same time because sometimes PA kids can cross the information found in creating their cases for debate over to their speech events.

[speechie30]

I can see the benefits of options 3 and 4 but I would prefer to stick to option 1. I believe that it gives all students an option to participate. It is also beneficial to do debate and speech at the same time because sometimes PA kids can cross the information found in creating their cases for debate over to their speech events.

[lclauss29]

current competitor and i'd say option 1. i do see the advantages of the split season, but having to end indiana speech in december, and then needing to wait and remember your piece until june for nationals would be so stressful. at least with full year speech we get more practice and become more comfortable with our events, as well as get more nfl point opportunities.

[robbydek]

I definitely favor idea number 1. Option number two would be ok, I guess but number 1 is definitely the better. As for the split season, that would hurt Indiana's competitive success at NFL nationals. If your season is in the fall then you get no competitive experience the second half of the year and that just isn't fair to either side to have to choose.
I see the benefits of options 3 and 4, but I also wonder how it was translate at nationals, besides I think it would greatly increase the number of participants that compete in each (given that each year at sectionals a lot of debaters compete). In other words, I think it would encourage both speech and debaters to double up and compete in the other area, so they would have something to do all year. As a result, it could increase the amount of space needed in a building and therefore cause schools to have to back out from hosting tournaments due to space, when especially in northern Indiana, local tournaments are already far fewer than they once were.
Also, with option 3, I wouldn't be able to help judge sectionals which I love to do, because it is the holiday season and practically impossible to get off at work.

I like option 1 the most, since there’s plenty of opportunity to compete and do other activities, at least for me.

As for option 2, I think it would hurt the results at national tournaments, because you are going to add an extra month between the end of competition and the start of national tournaments.

I would like to suggest another idea, we could always start the speech season in November instead of October and end it in April instead of March, keeping the length the same.

Indiana Speech Alumnus ’08/Judge

[Rae]

I am a current competitor, and am in favor of option one. So long as choir and marching band have conflicting schedules on both halves of the season, there simply is no way to accommodate both groups. Picking either of the two solutions to split the season will leave one group excluded, and the other seeming preferred (although it would be entirely unintentional, of course). The scheduling has never been perfect, but the status quo ensures that both parties have equal treatment at the very least. The other option of condensing the season would make the season more chaotic and crunched for time, while also leaving a gap between the end of the season and the national tournaments. So for right now, I think the best we can do is to continue with a full and combined season.

[The Duke]

I am a current competitor and favor option 4. While I do like #1, I believe to get more schools active we should try something different.

[demonofthekeys]

I would like #1, because I would like all the experience I can get, and a shorter debate season simply doesn't allow for that. I'm sure that speech competitors feel the same way. I am a current Indiana forensicator. However, my second choice would be Option 4, as debate districts and state conflict with ISSMA (a choir and music competition in which many people in our squad compete).

[Jacobi]

Hi Dave,

I was just surfing, but I thought I would offer further feedback on Option 4, which is exactly how Wisconsin is structured (except that Congressional Debate happens on Fridays during the spring speech season, on the eve of one-day speech tournaments; the fall debate season has a mix of one-day and two-day -- Friday afternoon + Saturday -- tournaments).

Kansas and Minnesota are two states off the top of my head that have similar seasons. If Indiana considered the split season and wanted to allow the opportunity for some schools to participate in nearby states, it may make sense to go that route.

My best wishes to you and your association in making those determinations!

Adam
NFL Staff & Former Wisconsin Coach

[DarkDwarf]

Current Forensicator - Option 3 would be best as far as both speech and debate go for my school.

[The Duke]

As an active member of both Speech and Debate, scheduling is difficult with option 1. Not only are there conflicts with winter sports and activities, but also with Speech and Debate tournaments scheduled on the same weekend. I believe the best option is to change for one season and to see where everything falls, as it were.

[FOL!]

I am a past Indiana "forensicator" and believe option 4 would be the best. This is the closest option to what we have now, in my opinion. Generally, debate tournaments are held in the fall, with the season ending in mid-winter. And the big speech tournaments are generally not held until late winter or early spring.

I too would like to see the speech schedule be as close to summer as possible. Not just because I favor speech, but because there is a difference between speech and debate in terms of preparation. Speech is generally focused on a performance, while debate is focused of evidence. It would make sense to have memorized, performance based events closer to the national tournament. This down time in the spring would allow debaters to compile fresh, new evidence which would be very beneficial to their national performance.

Finally, splitting speech and debate would allow students to compete in both, or give those who are only interested in one time off!

Thanks for reaching out to everyone Mr. McKenzie. I don't think many states would ask for STUDENTS opinion in this situation. Very cool!

Keep us posted....

[David McKenzie]

The status quo came out as the recommendation after a lot of fantastic and sometimes passionate discussion. There may be some other work on this in the future - especially as we try to eliminate some conflicts that are happening in the status quo. Your input was greatly appreciated by the council. Good luck this season!!!

[CLT787]

I'm not from Indiana, I'm from NC. I'm not sure how your season operates right now, but the Tarheel League combines both debate and speech in the same tournaments, starting in September and ending with States in April. Honestly this way is effective because competirors are given the entirety of the season to run their events and is a long season. Instead of having individual debate seasons that could be harmful for Nationals competitors, just look at the NC JOT site and see how the tourneys are set up (it may be the same, again--I'm not entirely sure). Plus, it leads to more revenue for the tournaments, more revenue means more profits since the kids can run the tournaments. So that's my two-cents. Hope I helped!! FOr future reference in case you plan on doing more changes on it

[David McKenzie]

UPDATE - The shortened season is eliminated from consideration...primarily because we listened to you students. We, on the council, are taking our time and listening carefully because this will impact programs in Indiana for years. Still under consideration will be (a) speech in the fall and debate in the spring, (b) debate in the fall and speech in the spring, (c) status quo with effort made to avoid other state competitions as much as possible. Your coaches will be voting at State Debate, Sectional Speech, or by e-mail if your school doesn't attend either of the two (and why not???). Let them know what you think is best for the future of Indiana speech and debate (not yourself) because this change will last for decades after you have graduated. THE POLICY WILL NOT BE BE PUT INTO PLACE UNTIL THE 2012-2013 SEASON AT THE EARLIEST. And speaking of 2012, don't forget we host the BRICKYARD NATIONALS IN 2012. Maybe you can lend a hand!

[David McKenzie]

UPDATE #2 - All coaches were asked to vote on the three remaining options at either state debate or sectional. They can still get their vote in by contacting the IHSFA Executive Director if they didn't get a chance to vote. This vote will eliminate the status quo, OR debate in the fall/speech in the spring OR speech in the fall/debate in the spring. LET YOUR SCHOOL'S VOICE BE HEARD.

[speechextemper]

what year will the new decision take effect? next year?

[David McKenzie]

No - the year after. There must be time to get the new schedule on the calendar for the schools in the state. The timetable is for the council to narrow it to the two choices and select actual tournament weekends for the coaches to consider next September and then set the calendar for 2012-2013.

[David McKenzie]

Well, we are now to the final stage of the process. Remember, this would go into effect for the 2012-2013 season. The final two choices that coaches will have as possible options are the STATUS QUO (with every attempt made to miss Show Choir State) and the SPLIT SEASON (Debate in the fall and Speech in the spring). The exact dates for the seasons have not yet been announced but will likely be sent to coaches soon. However, it is likely that debate would start asap each school year - perhaps September. Speech would likely end in April. PLEASE TALK TO YOUR COACH ABOUT WHETHER YOU WOULD RATHER KEEP WHAT WE HAVE NOW OR HAVE A THREE MONTH DEBATE SEASON FOLLOWED BY A THREE MONTH SPEECH SEASON. If I receive the dates, I will try to get you the word. Remember, coaches are going to be asked to look at for the good of their program as well as the good of the state as well. If Indiana is going to remain strong, we need to look out for more than simply ourselves. Feel free to post opinions between now and September 5th. Please identify yourself as a coach, a former competitor, or a current competitor. I will likely compile some data from your responses.

[tgjdlc]

I'm a coach in CA.
Indiana has been very strong at NFL/CFL/and potentially could be at NIE/TOC.
From my experience in CA, where we have entire school year long activities in forensics, competitors benefit from the constant "struggle" to be better; the more they compete, the more fine-tuned they become. I feel it becomes a disadvantage to any competitor to only debate for the first have of the season and then ask them to try and do well at a national championship.

Just my two cents.

[psettles24]

When this was originally posted, I was staunchly opposed to any system other than the status quo. I still do lean in favor of the status quo. However, having become exposed to those in states who operate on the split season system, I can see the merits to both systems. Moving to a split season would encourage teams in the south, such as my own, that don't currently compete in debate, to dive into debate. However, I do feel that the status quo allows those who are extremely competitive in either speech or debate (or even both) to stay in practice in their principle event throughout the year to prepare for national tournaments such as NFL, CFL, and TOC. Since I am a current competitor, but will no longer be in the IHSFA when this is enacted, the only opinion I am going to firmly asert is to examine both sides of the argument. I still stand with believing the status quo is a better system, but I can see that the split season is actually very beneficial as well.

[Jeremy Johnson]

Former competitor in Colorado, current coach in Wisconsin here.

Split seasons, to me, are extremely frustrating. The ability to compete in debate and speech at the same time (especially, if like in my high school experience, you can double-enter) is immensely valuable from a learning perspective and immensely rewarding from a competitive perspective. Wisconsin has a split season; because I compete on the college circuit, I can only really help out in the spring, which is speech-only. I love to coach debate though, so it is especially frustrating. If you have a student who does a fall or spring sport, then they'll only be able to do the opposite season in forensics--debate OR speech, not the potential to do both in the same semester. Being able to do both at any given time is really fantastic.

Just my two cents.

[Ernest Chomicki]

Former competitor in Colorado, current coach in Wisconsin here.

Split seasons, to me, are extremely frustrating. The ability to compete in debate and speech at the same time (especially, if like in my high school experience, you can double-enter) is immensely valuable from a learning perspective and immensely rewarding from a competitive perspective. Wisconsin has a split season; because I compete on the college circuit, I can only really help out in the spring, which is speech-only. I love to coach debate though, so it is especially frustrating. If you have a student who does a fall or spring sport, then they'll only be able to do the opposite season in forensics--debate OR speech, not the potential to do both in the same semester. Being able to do both at any given time is really fantastic.

Just my two cents.




I have been coaching here for 12 years as well as been a competitor for 6 years before that. I love that we have split seasons here in Wisconsin. From my understanding, and I could be wrong, but in a lot of states, many students have to pick either debate or forensics, but can't necessarily do both, when the seasons are year long. Not to mention burnout that accompanies that, which we have experienced with only half a season. Students here can engage in Debate, Student Congress and Forensics without having to choose and still remain competitive nationally. True, some students can't do all of these if they engage in seasonal sports, but the diehard public speakers can and mostly do. Even the athletes who really want and love to do these events will always find a way. Mine always have and we are about as big a sport school as one can get.

[Jacobi]

I observe on this thread that people tend to feel comfortable with what they know. I personally applaud Indiana for taking a bold move to assess the efficacy of its structure and examine alternatives. It's great this site can provide a marketplace of ideas, as it were, for evaluating those alternatives.

Having coached for 12 years in Wisconsin as a high school coach, I agree with Ernest on the value of the split season. Wisconsin has had students do well at NFL and NCFL nationals, just as Minnesota and Kansas do, so I don't believe the split season has any bearing on competitive readiness, except if a school is interested in competing in national circuit or even out-of-state regional tournaments outside the traditional seasons.

The one drawback is that while there are about 400 of 500 high schools in Wisconsin who offer speech programs in the spring, and about 100 of which compete on an almost weekly basis, there are only about 50 schools with debate programs in the fall. Much of that is because there are separate coaches, and most speech coaches are not interested in taking on debate.

[BenConstine]

Virginia has a split season, in the sense that States for Debate is completely different from States for Speech, with Debate coming 2-3 weeks later than Speech. It's a perfectly fine system, although I wish Speech States had more than 3 prelim rounds.

Both systems have merit, if they include invitationals. If it's a Virginia style, with Districts-Regionals-States, and that's it, then I don't think it matters.

[plyons95]

I'm Forensicator from TX, and from my standpoint, option 1 is the best choice. One of my favorite things about interp is that it has a long season which carries through the entire year to always keep me busy. Anyone who really has just a passion for interp and performing that I know loves the fact that we get to perform so frequently and throughout the entire year, so in my opinion, the Status Quo option would be best.

[MichaelFerguson]

I am also a competitor from TX, and while I see merit in all plans, I too think option one is the best choice. One you have a longer season, which means more chances for people to qual for State and Bid tournaments and secondly, even though debate and interp are pretty much two different worlds, splitting the two is denying the relationships, connections, and memories you make with people. Also, I have quite a few friends who do both, and I dont think they could stand having them split up. I love a long season. All year. haha. Down here though it's a much different process so I apologize if my post does not have much merit.

[INdebatecoach]

As an Indiana forensics coach, I was strongly in favor of moving to a split season when the discussion first began. Now, I'm still weighing my options and what I think is best for our state and my program.

For those unfamiliar with Indiana's structure, we currently have an overlapping season with debate generally starting in October (for most) and finishing with our state tournament the first weekend in February. Speech generally starts around November and ends with our sectional/state series in March. Very rarely are those tournaments held together (speech/debate). While some have tried to host both speech and debate in their buildings, the reality is that our speech tournaments have become very large and hosting both speech/debate in one day is not physically possible (unless you have two buildings and enough coaches to cover both).

I think the idea the coaches had in first bringing this up for discussion is to hopefully have some programs who focus solely on speech (or debate) with just 1-2 coaches expand their reach into the other segment of forensics. For programs such as mine where I have attempted to do both, it becomes either alternate which tournament to attend every Saturday or burn myself out as a coach.

The question coaches (and students) should ask themselves is whether you think a split season offers our state the opportunity to expand participation for more students and programs or whether there is a better way to encourage growth in participation.

Honestly, I haven't decided yet which choice I think is the best. I'll be interested to hear what coaches have to say at the state coaches' clinic this weekend.

[David McKenzie]

By a total of seven votes, the status quo season defeated debate in the fall and speech in the spring. Thanks to all of you who posted on this thread - current students, former students, and coaches - those from Indiana and from our wonderful neighbors. Your caring is simply further evidence that we are one big forensics family.

All of the input was appreciated. And to those of you who may not have posted but talked to your coaches, thanks for making your voice heard, too. I know all of the coaches took this vote very seriously and sought to do what was in the best interest for Indiana students now and in the future. :D