Ladies and minorities...are you in need of a mentor?

[pattybar]

Hello,

A recent post from Susan Arnsdorf (formerly Hellbush) from Creighton noted the willingness to mentor, but had no names of actual debaters in need of mentoring services.

Question: Is it the formal nature of such a program that leaves it lacking in participants, or is it that there is no real need?

I'm certainly glad Jason is around, as the one male debater on my squad would otherwise be without a role model... as aparently one cannot mentor another of different race or gender....

So, are mentors needed?

Patty

[scooter]

Patty:

Sorry, not familiar with the post. Can you describe it more fully, that and explain what the definition of minority might be as well as the notion of (self?) selection.

S

[pattybar]

The message is below...

The terms were not defined. I'm more interested in a couple of things...
a) what if a white guy needs such a mentor
b) what is the function of the 'mentor'?
c) can the 'mentor' judge the mentee?

Patty

Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 12:43:13 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <B9E6EE5F.4A82%susan@creighton.edu>
From: Susan Arnsdorff <susan@creighton.edu>
Subject: Mentoring program


At NPDA nationals last year and at various regional tournaments, the President's Ad Hoc committee on gender diversity has been fortunate enough to collect the names of many individuals who would like to serve as mentors
for individuals in the NPDA who are women and/or members of minority groups.

However, we have no mentees! If you or someone on your team would like to be put into contact with a member of the debate community who would like to connect with you as a friend, advisor, etc., please e-mail me (not the list serve).


Coaches could also bring names of people to the NPDA business meeting at NCA. The idea of this program is not to replace coaches or even for mentors to serve as coaches, but for them to serve as part of a support system. Literature about retention suggests that having a mentor is a key way to
keep individuals in the activity.


Please let me know if you are interested.


Susan Arnsdorff
Director of Individual Events
Creighton University

[scooter]

Well, that is some __funky__ wording and as I am sure that we can agree leaves open the ground for interpretation-- which is an additional discussion to be sure.

But my immediate response: Is this motion replicating the role of coaches or those all ready on the circuit who may serve in capacity of mentors-- regardless of their formal position, gender, or "other minority" status (however one defines said term.)? I might suggest from the lack of response that it is a possibility but without any data can not make that conclusion...

S

[USC MissingLink]

Sounds great... while we're at it, let's have different resolutions for women and minority students so that we can truly include them in our activity. If we can manage it, we can even put together some woman-minority tournaments where these students can discuss the issues that are really important - namely being a woman and/or a minority.

I'm sure that whoever thought this one up had nothing but the best intentions at heart, but I'm concerned that singling out women and/or minority debaters for special care is not going to help the situation but rather create a marked group of debaters percieved by some - unfairly - as inferior and in need of special help.

While we're on the subject, I'm amazed by the amount of attention that these issues are recieving in debate accadamia. The Journal of the American Forensics Association used to publish articles about debate and argumentation. These articles were fascinating. In the last ten years, however, the Journal has dramatically changed it's focus. You have to go back a long way to find an article about <em>debate</em>. From what I understand this was done in order to facilitate the desire for faculty to publish in a more "accademically recognized" forum in order to get things like tenure. For me, personally, this shift has made the JAFA much less relevant to debaters across the community.

Has anyone else noticed this trend? Anyone else disturbed by it? Or am I just being an insensitive white male who's threatened by the challenge of losing my structural dominance of the activity?

jEd

[pattybar]

Jed,

I think you are mostly correct. It does seem to me that creating a group that needs to be mentored is an artificial kind of society and does not serve the real purposes of such relationships.

As someone who joined the community as a coach and was never a competitor, there were several people who were kind enough to help me figure things out the first year... they are called friends--- and they weren't assigned to me. In addition to the people at Creighton, I'd say that Renea Gernant, Tammy Enru, Nick Baccus and Scooter were four coaches who both welcomed and encouraged me as a new coach on the circuit. It seems to me that these sorts of relationships are the ones that are both lasting and helpful, and had I been assigned a "mentor" the relationship would not have worked simply because it was artifically created.

As for the amount of attention paid to these issues, I'm sure it is because they can have trendy, easily understood and politically relevant titles for a vita.

It seems to me that there are some interesting names popping up on these articles and programs, some of whom do not seem to be involved in actually COACHING debaters. I see such actions as purely a way to use the debate community and should be rejected on the basis of honesty alone. It seems to me that a vita lines should be earned by actual involvement with debaters... I'm funny that way.

Coach debate, then write about debate and you will make significant contributions to debate. Anything less is a hollow vita line.

Patty

[DreinCali]

Sorry, this thread is irking me a bit. I don't know if a mentoring program is the answer to all problems, but it seems a nice gesture at the least, and harmless. Some thoughts.

Re: who is targeted:
Susan and co. mean women and ethnic minorities. That was the focus of the committee than spawned the program and I think that is fairly well known. If you don't know why we can go back and argue about it on Shipley's thread devoted to the data controversy on those groups in debate.

Re: Jed
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>create a marked group of debaters percieved by some - unfairly - as inferior and in need of special help.[/quote]

This is some weird and unsupported backlash DA...and by the way I get really tired of the whole "why don't we give them different resolutions too" scenario. No one wants certain groups to <strong>play by different rules</strong>. Please. I fail to see how we should NOT have said program because you think some hypothetical bigots will not like it. And I hate to state the obvious, but if people really want to single out women and ethnic minorities...a majority of the time they're kind of "marked" anyway..physically..you know? Finally, I don't think they'll be walking with their mentors the whole season, so the perception factor is minimal anyway.

Re: Patty
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>had I been assigned a "mentor" the relationship would not have worked simply because it was artifically created[/quote]
First, you would not have been assigned anything unless you signed up for a mentor- if you wanted one. But more importantly, you repeat that 'artificial' relationships do not work but never say why. AA is a artificial mentoring group (sponsors, etc.). Church youth groups are artificial mentoring groups. So? It's awesome when you naturally run into nice people who help you learn the ropes of something. And if not? You find resources to get to people who will help you. That's what this is.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>As for the amount of attention paid to these issues, I'm sure it is because they can have trendy, easily understood and politically relevant titles for a vita....It seems to me that a vita lines should be earned by actual involvement with debaters...Anything less is a hollow vita line.[/quote]

I have no other words than WTF? How do you get to decide that people write about diversity in forensics to be trendy and make their c.v. look good? Can they not possibly care about that issue? Unlike a lot of people on Net Benefits, some academics actually think there is research to be done on these matters (maybe research that would get you to admit there might actually be something frustrating about being a female/minority in debate)
Finally, I think it is dangerous to judge people who do forensics research as dishonest or having "hollow vita lines" if they don't coach debaters. I understand if they make misrepresentations about the activity, but dismissing people on the basis of their coaching duties just smacks of exclusivity. Just evaluate their work, already.

Respond as you will.
Andrea

[ML]

Okay, it's my turn now.

<img src=http://www.net-benefits.net/emoticons/hearhear.gif ALT=":hear"> <img src=http://www.net-benefits.net/emoticons/yes.gif ALT=":yes"> !!!!!

And just a thought re: researchers not actively coaching programs yet still have the nerve to write about it: Good. For. Them. Despite the vibrancy of NPDA in the Western States, forensics is an endangered species. The more we talk about forensics in more generalized academic/professional fora, the greater our chances of thriving. Even if the material calls for change or lambasts us for being elitist, sexist poopheads, I refuse to believe it's nothing we can't successfully refute in response, no challenge we can't meet head on and grow from as a community. If those not involved in the community don't understand why we do things the way we do them, perhaps we'd better figure out a better way of explaining ourselves....

And, many of these non-forensics-active researchers were once active in the community, but became estranged as it and they evolved, developed different research/personal interests, lost their teams because of administrative cuts and adjustments, or simply took jobs at institutions without forensics programs.

If we are a co-curricular activity (and I assert we are and should be), then we are at least somewhat beholden to feedback from others in the field, however misguided we may perceive that feedback to be.

Anyway, go Dre. I would be interested in hearing what some actual womyeon (if I use every vowel, I can't offend anyone can I?) and minorities think of the program before *we* decide it would be too harmful for them to participate in it.

ML

[USC MissingLink]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>womyeon[/quote]What do you have against the vowels 'a' and 'i'? I find it terribly offensive that you would use the letters 'o', 'e' and 'y' (which isn't even a real vowel) and then label them as "every" vowel in the next sentence. 'a' happens to be my favorite letter - probably from years and years of a grading system that ingrains so much value into that letter. I appreciate you're trying to be sensitive ML, but really. Be more careful with your language please ;) :lol: ;)

[scooter]

"ethnic minorities. That was the focus of the committee than spawned the program and I think that is fairly well known."

Not exactly, Dre. I had no idea of what said committee's charge was as the term minority has often been used (including in the post as noted above) without reference to ethnic, and I am not certain of how many students knew (or could agree with/chose to participate in the program).

As far as disad, I see Patty's point on the shift within the journals, maybe...: Nothing like a debate/forensics journal being used as a rationale to __not__ support forensics (in tenure review circles, they called it the debate da.), ironic in that many of the articles may be written by people not familiar with the inner aspects of the organization, activity, etc. I am reading that point in Patty's post.

Let's face it, not as many articles praise debate and the intricacies of the argumentation technique like they used to (voila the critical shift that I think that Jed and Patty are discussing, and that critical shift __when that is often all that is presented__ seems to not paint a pretty picture of debate. I know: Self-solve, publish something that addresses these contentions. See prior note on the debate da).

As far as the notion of minorites as covered under the proposal, I see both points but I do fear an additional DA beyond what Jed intimates: There are other minorities that have to deal with fallout in NPDA land (Mars, for anyone that knows that story) and I think that beyond those points as noted above, there may be a perception of exclusion of such groups as per the program-- which is just not very nice.

Wow, bummer mood...

S

Jed: You forgot the foreign vowels such as the "oe" thing, you know, like when it's jammed together. Man, I love that one! You excluded it! Nasty foreign vowel-phobe!

[pattybar]

Scooter has part of my post... the rest is more that I know some who are simply using debate for vita but have no interest in actual debaters. They speak poorly of the debaters within their programs and discourage participation in debate. Their institution does debate but they don't want to coach it. They created the problem within their own program, then use the strength of that program's name in debate to get published. I find that unfair and unethical and I won't support such actions.

If you are interested in and supportive of debate and if you take advantage of the opportunities you have available to participate in debate, then great... publish on it all you'd like.

If you could be involved on a regular basis with debaters but choose not to and if you give your papers titles that are likely to appeal to deans so you can get funding to go to conferences -- and if you focus on the aspects of debate that are trendy in academia but not central to debate, then you are just using debate for a vita line and you should stop.

Patty

[darkcloud4579]

No, I don't need a mentor. But it is a nice gesture. Misguided, but nice. I'm not sure about all the underlying ideas behind this whole thing. I'm not sure that a "mentor" can do something that a coach couldn't. If "minorities" or "women" at schools aren't doing well and could do better with someone who "looks like them" or deals with their issues, then I can understand.

I can find this to be more of an issue with minority (gag at that term) students who might debate and feel that judges (who are often coaches) will drop them based on preconcieved stereotypes that they don't apply to other (read: white male) debaters.

I had a judge at a tournament drop us though we soundly beat the other team, simply because our case was anti-affirmative action. The opp ran a pro AA case and basically said "minorities need help", of course we blasted their case and they didn't really know what to do with us. He picked them up and basically said that he didn't feel comfortable with our analysis.

The rest of this is unrelated to that point......

I'll admit that happens a lot more out this way than it does when I go to bigger tournies with people who know what they are watching. But how do you help it? Like, we're going to get into the habit of sending our newbies to smaller, local yokel tournies because they are cheap. There are 4 yr vs. 2 yr biases, biases because our kids know more, biases because the judges don't know what the hell parl is...especially in Illinois specifically..

I dunno....any ideas?

[pattybar]

We have sort of the same problem up here. All we can afford to go to are local tournaments and the parli circuit here is a bit different than the national one and quite different from the Nebraska circuit we are used to .

The best thing you can do for your new teams is to tell them to run intuitively obvious cases, have short explanations for each debate theory/term they want to use and to keep a copy of the rules with them at all times just in case.

Beyond that, you will always have some judges who are unwilling to be open minded and vote against their PC notions etc...I've seen it in all areas. Those judges you can't change.

Patty

[StarDancingGirl]

I suppose the mentorship program is a nice gesture, and I am sure the committee has the best of intentions, but like Jed & Patty mention, I think it singles out particular groups for "special help." As far as retention goes, I think that comes down to individual coaches instruction, an individual's own interests, other commitments, and a wide variety of other issues, the vast majority of which I would wager are not cocerned at all with race or gender issues. The message mentions a sort of "support system"--for what, it's never made clear, but apparently something related to one's particular sex or ethnic status. While I would certainly agree that there are aspects of debate (i.e, the stress, time commitment, competitiveness, adictiveness, etc) that might necessitate support from someone, I don't think that's quite why the mentoring program was set up. Furthermore, I think by limiting mentoring programs only to women and/or minorities, and in particular, mentors who (presumably) only come from those communities, I think that further entrenches whatever sex/race issues the committee is attempting to combat. If the committee really feels as though there are major obstacles faced by women and/or minorities in competition in NPDA, such that they need support, perhaps a better idea would be to be more inclusive, thus faciliating increased interaction and support between the genders and ethnicities. Since there hasn't been this huge outcry for a mentoring system and the mentoring program that was set up hasn't been used, I think that indicates that perhaps the committee's well-intentioned program really isn't necessary after all.

[pattybar]

Hey There,

There are some excellent points I would hate to see missed above.

1) Singling out a particular segment of the group does not seem to be helpful.

2) People leave debate due to reasons outside of NPDA control OR for reasons NPDA does not want to change (schedule)...

3) Retention is a team/coach issue.

It also seems to me that the wrong people were surveyed/consulted about retention and mentoring, namely surveying those who have not left does not tell us anything about why those who are no longer here, left. It is sort of like looking at only living people to see why someone has died... hmmm, makes no sense to me.

Patty

[smiley30girl]

Hey all,
Although I would agree that coach-student relationships are very important and play a key role in retention, I don't understand why a mentor could not also play a key role in the life of a debater. I know that relationships and advice from coaches other than my own have proven very helpful to me. They have been encouraging, and I think that relationships with the coaches on your own team as well as a mentor are completley appropriate.
As for singling out a certain group of people, I dont think that is really harmful when joining the mentor program is voluntary. If women were forced to join, for example, that could be problematic. As for people voluntarily forming support networks, I say go for it.
Audrey :)

[USC MissingLink]

I agree with Audrey in that a mentor could be a good thing and doesn't necessarily come at the expense of other positive relationships in the community. I also agree that the volluntary nature of the situation is good. All I'm saying is, if it's a good thing, it should be available for white males too.

jEd

[scooter]

Agreed on all counts, although again one must ask of the role of the terms "women" and "minority" (as far as I know, ethnicity was assumed only. There are __many__ other minorities that are part of the community that may have felt slighted, etc. etc. see earlier post).

And to further Jed's comment: Even this comment is more complex. Indeed, in a community that has so openly questioned the notion of binary gender constructs (and has openly discussed and included the needs of transgendered people) the effect of creating a "woman as opposed to man" construct is rather atypical of usual NPDA ideology.

Further, in looking directly at Jed's comment, the experience of Whiteness can not be assumed to be singular at all, not to mention that the considerations of many other levels of identity such as (but not limited to)
sexual/affectional orientation and preference, age, ablism, religion, bi and multi racial ethnic identities, etc. etc. all present for a greater consideration of "white male." They all present for unique needs within the NPDA experience, and they can all be considered part of the white male experience/identity. Of course, these variables were not noted in the intent of the original study.


S