September 11, 2016 Minutes from Fall 2016 Page 1 of 33 California ...

September 11, 2016 Minutes from Fall 2016 of 33 California High School Speech Association

I. The meeting was called to order by President Prefontaine at 9:07am

II. Roll Call: Absent, Nermin Fraser (VP Activities); Proxy for Matt Fraser (Area 1 Rep), Aleisha

Readye; Proxy for Caiti Gale (YFL Pres), Karen Minick; Proxy for Sharon James (WBFL Pres), Cindy Johnson

III. Minutes from May 2016 offered for review, edit, and comments.

Moved to approve by Johnson Second Underwood Unanimous approval

Osborn: Can we add to the minutes from May all the earlier proposals? Prefontaine: Yes. IV. Officer Reports

President Prefontaine Thank you for all your work yesterday. It was a full day and you accomplished a ton. Thank you

Angel and Mikendra for dinner and lunch. You took great care of all us. Thank you! Ralph Driggs has retired from council. Angel has replaced Mr. Driggs. Thank you, Ralph for all your

help and assistance over the years. You are in our hearts. Caiti Sarvey is now Caiti Gale and expecting a child and newly married. Best wishes. Welcome new members. We have two areas to cover today. We have established a way to make sure proposals have a process.

We bring it forward in one meeting and vote in the next meeting. Send feedback from your league to the chair of the committee that proposed the legislation. Debate committee has eight proposals, talk it over, and then take it home and give feed back to Eric Larsen, [email protected]. Please comment before the state tournament. Because there is not a meeting in January, we will vote in May 2017. Typos or mistakes in the legislation, those may be corrected manually by the President. I am going to ask on an emergency vote of a by-law change. 2/3's needed to approve the eight instances in our by-laws that require action in January will have added the words "no later than January 15th."

Vice President of Activities Fraser No report. Vice President of Curriculum Martha Managhas: We decided that the videos that Rita created, that with the remaining DVD's we will sell

at the state tournament. Those must be purchased at the council meeting or at state. No mailing services are being offered. Under Coaching 101, some links are dead, so Ben called NSDA to receive approval to link to NSDA. They granted such permissions. We were wanting the website to be a one- stop shop. We developed a Google survey as to whether or not one has curriculum and if you would like curriculum. We can take this survey and receive submissions. We will vet them in May so that coaches may receive useful classroom strategies. We are providing materials for competition and for classroom education. UC a-g approval is included.


Matley: $20 per DVD per event? Managhas: Yes. You may give a check to Neil, or credit card. Treasurer Barembaum (Revised Treasure report emailed to Council on 9/7/16, attached below) Barembaum: Please get me any money requests ASAP. We need to approve

Underwood moves Larsen seconds Pielstick: Host fee has been an issue in the past. Is it now? Barembaum: Area 3 issues? Kindred: I think we are good. Wear: I have a concern about the program budget. We are adding more to the program, may we

increase that budget? Barembaum: Program income is growing. So that is not so much an issue. Is there an alternate

amount you wish? Wear: A more realistic amount is $6000. Barembaum: Objections? Okay, then I will update. Wear: Insurance has substantially more coverage. Barembaum: We have a new policy that is year-round and covers us more. It also costs less. Underwood: Year-round? Barembaum: It assumes larger liability.

VOICE PASSES Secretary Niemi No report. Historian Underwood

No report. V. Area Chair Reports (Google document used in Exec Committee--attached at end of minutes)

Area 1 Chair Keller-Firestone Keller-Firestone: Gay Brasher received the Madelyn Overly award given by the National

Communication Association. Only one award is given nationally, and Gay has been selected. Area 2 Chair Darling

Darling: Special thanks to Ralph Driggs. We need a site for State 2018 in Sacramento. We are looking around. Area 3 Chair Kindred Kindred: State 2017 is at Arcadia HS.

Area 4 Chair Osborn Osborn: Area 3 colleague is leaving us. Disdain.

VI. Committee Reports (Google document used in Exec Committee--attached at end of minutes)

Debate Committee (Larsen)


Larsen: We have posted the topic areas for Parli at State 2017. Those are available and we will start writing them soon. We have five proposed policy debate topics for next year and we receive a vote so please give me feedback on your choices. They will narrow it to three in October and finalize in January.

You should be receiving notice that we are asking to increase the number of qualifiers in Parli and

PF. We hope we can get this through for next year, but are not expecting it to be easy. Underwood: Does this gives us fewer debate rounds? Larsen: By one round. We get rid of the bye round late in the tournament. Public Relations Committee (McCoy) McCoy: Check out our Face Book page please! If you have students that are awesom, let us know so

we may contact them for the 60th anniversary book. Thank you Angel for all your hard work and to Ben for his hard work. Three leagues need to pony-up a person each to help with the book. We would like to create a press release form for state. Send us your local press contacts please.

Individual Events Committee (Graber) Graber: I have put it in the notes below. We have Extemp areas listed in the notes. We reworded

some of the areas but they are the same. Karen is here to speak to the by-law proposal. New proposal about impromptu is forthcoming.

Congress Committee (Matley) Matley: Survey about Congress coming out. Please take the survey. We are going to pilot a different

process for bills this year. Each school will be asked to submit legislation. It begs the question about authorship speeches. We will need to discuss that. Please share out.

Minick: How does that timeline work? Matley: We have two weeks. Congress committee may make modifications at time of submission.

We hope this will work. This is much more democratic. Graber: Normally, the league president forwards to you. So now the school? Matley: Yes, league presidents may thank me later. If we receive two of the same, we will select one

of the two. This will be easy. Graber: Is there a penalty if you do not submit legislation? Matley: Yes, state registration is dependent upon submission of legislation. Registration cannot be

completed if it is missing. Curriculum Committee (Martha)

Above report

VII. Old Business Prefontaine: Proposals you received earlier. They are numbered and listed below for your review.

09-11-16A Extemp Sources Osborn: Currently, May 1st is the deadline. So we cleaned that language up. SECOND KELLER-FIRESTONE

QUESTION CALLED BY CUMMINGS SECOND LARSEN


VOICE VOTE PASSES

09-11-16B Impromptu Wordiness SECOND UNDERWOOD Kindred: This gets rid of redundancy.

QUESTION CALLED BY CURTIS SECOND MINICK VOICE VOTE PASSES

09-11-16C Manuscript Requirements

SECOND UNDERWOOD Kindred: Manuscript must be, not shall. The second part adds league president and gets rid of wordiness.

QUESTION CALLED KALASHIAN VOICE VOTE PASSES

09-11-16D Clarify Rules on Time Limits

SECOND ORFIELD Kindred: Judge should mark the violation and the tab room checks with the judge. Osborn: We want the actual violation. Wear: Our judges do not read the by-laws. What notice are we giving the judges? Larsen: The rules are the ballot. Ko: This language is before we changed the ballot. We are needing a double check. Kindred: It is on the ballot. Minick: We discussed the box on the back of the ballot. What about tab room checking with the judge. Matley: My concern is that we do not use discretion in the judges room. I would like IE committee to look at this. Ko: Change the word judges to tab room. Kalashian: If the intent is to say overtime because of laughter, we need the judge to have the discretion. The judge is key...we need an added box about laughter. Prefontaine: Remand? Graber: Remand it to committee

REMAND GRABER SECOND WEAR Osborn: We did discuss this in May. This has not changed. I don't feel this should be the judge's discretion. It is a calculated risk...the students cut the piece to 10:30. I would like the emphasis on the coach. But remanding it is not good, it went through the process. IE Committee said yes. Johnson: An amendment process is available. Make a formal motion to amend. Graber: We were recommending this. I think it is worth looking at a second time. Larsen: I have a problem IE Committee telling IE tab what to do. Ko: We need to change the language. Orfield: This has become a discussion of philosophical approach. We don't care about the laughter. They don't deal with audience reaction. Either we need to address this or let it go. Is there a vehicle to address audience reaction? Curtis: The vehicle is the 30 second grace period. If one chooses to write the speech to over 10 mins, that is on the speaker. This seems obvious. Wear: I think that until something is specifically written. We must be clear. Johnson: We do not to remand because paragraph B is not on the proposal.


Ko: This could happen in other rounds. Coaches do not understand that the discretion would be removed. We need to be clear on the intent. Remand. Osborn: Remand?? Just vote no. Matley: It effects other parts of the process in discretion. One cannot expect no discussion, and that discussion will not uncover other issues in the intent. Discussion is not bad.

REMAND QUESTION CURTIS MOVES LARSEN SECOND VOICE VOTE NO

LARSEN CALLS QUESTION CURTIS SECONDS

VOICE VOTE PASSES

09-11-16E OPP Purpose Osborn: When we were looking at the by-laws we noticed the uniqueness was essential to all events. We felt that OPP is unique because of the writing. Creative writing. SECOND CURTIS Curtis: I think this is really important change. This is our one interp event that the student writes themselves. This is the primary focus. Simple change that is needed. Johnson: We are not a writing competition organization. Why not other events. The judge currently has the discretion to evaluate the writing. There is a risk that a better speaker loses a round because they wrote worse. What is the intent of this? Why change this? I am opposed. Larsen: This event in our league to allow others to speak to their hardship and position. Why are looking at the writing? Kalashian: I agree with the last two statements. Status Quo allows the students creativity. They can focus on one element or the other. So if you want to leave it as a student event, leave it as is. Osborn: We are speech and debate, but writing is key. Creativity is key. Johnson: What is currently written is not exclusive of your intent. The judge should make this decision. Not us. Minick: This is semantics. All things are incorporated into the work. Adding this to the ballot is to cause the judge to focus on it. Curtis: This makes OPP different then the other events we offer. We give them the ability to write their own work. We are just codifying this. Kalashian: I worry that people will take creative writing to be academic writing. Could that make the judge change their opinion? Creativity, is key. This is a classic example of how we think it should be versus what students can do and control. Osborn: Minnia touched on this: we should be most impressed by the creative writing. Keller-Firestone: To win it must be good writing. It is key of all our originals.

CURTIS MOVES MATLEY SECONDS VOICE VOTE

DIVISION OF THE HOUSE FAILS 13-14

09-11-16F Duo Physical Contact Osborn: IE Committee pointed out that the wording was from an earlier version in the by-laws. I emailed the proper one to you yesterday. You should have the new one in your email. The changed parts are the same. It comes down to the second section as clarification. We do not ask the judge to assess the penalty. The change is concerning multiple touches. It is the only event rule that has multiple penalties. SECOND MANAGHAS


KALASHIAN MOVES CURTIS SECONDS

VOICE VOTE

09-11-16G Increase LD Prep Time Pielstick: Best practice. SECOND UNDERWOOD

CALLED UNDERWOOD SECOND MATLEY VOICE VOTE

09-11-16H Decrease Restrictions on Debate Judge Paneling Pielstick: In break rounds we can no longer use some judges because they have already been used. If one judges a team in prelim, you are done with them, but in out rounds a judge may judge the same team again. SECOND JOHNSON Orfield: I want to know what problems have been created by this rule in place? Pielstick: Yes, we were short on judges so we had to break this rule. Orfield: In my prior life, in the courtroom I could not listen to a lawyer before. I want to be fair and impartial in order to give a second win. Underwood: As a last result, it is good, We have gone beyond this now. The tab room is deciding what a good judge is. Who is a good judge. Larsen: When you rank the judge in JOT, Nermin is putting them in the final round. Half are not able to be used because they have been used. Kalashian: This motion would make us aligned with other tournaments in the country. Second, we have multiple judges in out rounds anyways. Third, these restrictions have other repurcussions, such as no one else to judge. Fourth, I realized warm bodies are used. In my experiences, I have not seen the worries of Ron. The debate committee supports the motion. Curtis: We are against this proposal. It is too vague. To put into practice, all judges in out rounds could have seen the debaters. Practice is key. My league and I oppose this. Minick: One is assuming one may not be impartial. We cannot assume people will cheat, to quote Cardoza. Johnson: This disqualifies a competent judge if we do not pass this. We need a capable judge. I am in favor of this. Harris: I am in favor a fabulous opinions. We discussed this in the spring. I received no new discussion. Our vote is in favor of this but I want to hear from other league presidents. Graber: Our league was against this. Smacks of elitism. Orfield: We had concerns -- how often this was a problem? We were concerned about the appearance of bias. How is this fair if a judge did not like the debater the first time? I understand the need for judges but it should not be a rule. Larsen: We are split on this. We do not want a higher judge ratio. We would have to vote yes. Kalashian: We did not have a problem with this. If we have to reuse a judge, no problem. Matley: We were in favor of this. BUT, so many parent judges get assigned for finals and get there and are not used. If we are not using parent judges in finals, do not assign them for those rounds. Second: same side not mentioned. Larsen: Flip for sides. Nguyen: This is a common practice.


Minick: We have not had a coach meeting to address this. We would abstain. JOHNSON MOVES HARRIS SECONDS

VOICE VOTE DIVISION OF HOUSE

16-9 PASSES

09-11-16I Internet for Evidence in Debate Larsen: Last year we had a protest concerning this. A judge used the internet to check a definition. The teams did not use the internet, the judge did. We thought this language would be more clear. SECOND CURTIS Minick: This seems reasonable. Ko: I personally am for this. It is common at Parli tournaments for judges to check the internet. Larsen: Yes, we do not want the students to push them towards the internet. Graber: We were very divided on this. Debate coaches do not want this to pass. It is very important for a debater in Parli to ask a judge to fact check. This keeps the debaters honest. I will have to abstain. Larsen: We have a mechanism for fact checking. Judges are told not to look at evidence. Johnson: Slippery slope is bad. Parli is suppose to common knowledge. We are continually changing the intent. This is not a good direction. Leahy: This issue is from a push where the topics are going policy. Nguyen: Overall, we were in favor of this. What is the judge wants to check this on their own,. Larsen: Many do this, but we cannot enforce behavior. Kalashian: Our rules are explicit--a debater cannot give a judge evidence. This is a fundamental issue. Why are we wanting to make judges fact checkers?

CURTIS MOVES MATLEY SECONDS VOICE VOTE

PASSES

09-11-16J Penalty for Failure to Pay Dues Pielstick: This clarifies the penalty in order to penalize the league and not a school. This would put the penalty on the school. It makes a financial penalty. SECOND MINICK JOHNSON: This could be a large penalty. You could destroy a program with this. Minick: The league is still punished, read the proposal. If they are not patying dues, how would they pay the fine? Pielstick: The league can cover the fine. It is up to the league to decide. Currently, another league gets the qualifier and that is an award. Graber: How often does this happen? Osborn: I agree with Einar, but why are we penalizing them at all? It is the area chair's affirmative duty to check. Why are we penalizing at all? Ko: The point is that that school being in the tournament could change the results. Curtis: The key issue is that there should be no one competing at the qualifier if dues are not paid. The problem is that the league is harmed when a non-member competes. It changes everything. It is up to the league president and area chair. Matley: This is excessive. It should be up to the league to decide how to deal with the school.


Kalashian: I like what Gregg said. All the checks and balances do not always catch this problem. It changes results of the tournament. The status quo is to screw the league over twice. Wear: We keep bringing up the worst case scenarios. Johnson: I will offer to the committee a motion to solve this without punishment at this level. Vote this down and I will commit to write this. Keller-Firestone: If not today, then the next state tournament will be effected. Graber: This has never been a problem in our league. The responsibility lies with the league president. Barembaum: Dues are due in December. The fine is not too big so schools may abuse the system. Pielstick: I do not think this is done on purpose. In our league we had a occurrence where a school had no money in the account and no check had been sent and it was too late. The fault on the school district, not the school or league. There are always conflicts of who has paid dues. Roll-overs, etc. It is a severe fine but not as large as denying students to attend State. Nguyen: This issue is the last line of the proposal. Johnson: We do not want to harm students. I vote no. Wear: We must make a decision today.

MATLEY CALLS QUESTION JOHNSON SECONDS VOICE VOTE

DIVISION OF THE HOUSE 14-10-3 PASSES

VIII. New Business

May 2017 proposals (Numbering to be updated at the May 2017 meeting. Current copies available on the website)

PRO 09-11-A1 Committee naming

Kindred: Currently there are two different committees that are the same. Grievance committee becomes the protest committee. SECOND HARRIS

PRO 09-11-B1: More spontaneity in Impromptu Graber: This would get rid of topic areas in impromptu so that no prediction is available. The intent is to increase the spontaneity. SECOND CURTIS

PRO 09-11-C1 Graber: We have seen debaters reading evidence with their analysis. There needs to be a clear demarcation. It would not be protest-able at the tournament. SECOND CURTIS Larsen: Debate committee is against this. We think we are making a requirement that has no remedy. Ko: This is a serious problem. Curtis: I would like to see the proposal. Johnson: We are making too many rules. Kalashian: Will we get the proper one? Graber: Once available, it will be posted on line.

PRO 09-11-D1


Minick: I submitted this because it is an example of bait and switch. Is one qualifying the student or the piece? This addresses this. SECOND CURTIS Nguyen: IE Committee is divided on this. Ko: How do we have this discussion before the May meeting? Underwood: You want me to keep the same script with edits allowed? Nguyen: This causes problems in our league because you can switch pieces at auto-qualifiers. Osborn: Advocacy? How does this work if the law is changed after quals? Minick: There are exceptions, but you take the calculated risk. Osborn: So I could not change an advocacy? Minick: Correct. Orfield: The nature of the discussion centers on the actual speech. I could not find someone who was harmed as a result of the status quo. Keller-Firestone: Out of seven qualifiers in HI, I received six new scripts. There is a ton of time to turn them in. It has not gone through league. It is a real nightmare to switch scripts. Minick: Do not vet scripts if they do not keep the same script. The script and student are one unit. Nguyen: This is probably not the best solution.

OVERVIEW OF DEBATE PROPOSALS TO INCREASE PARITY WITH ENTRIES Larsen: Please read the disclaimer for all seven proposals first. This will make it clear. We would like 64 in all debate events. To do that, we had to mess with the schedule. It would be 4 prelims and 4 brackets. Curtis: So all would get more prelim rounds? Larsen: Yes, four rounds. We would go to 2 judge panels, like Nationals. Keller-Firestone: Rooms have always been a problem. This proposal means even more rooms are required. Larsen: We never use more than 64 rooms. We have a document that compares the status quo with our proposals. Ko: This is great and you have worked hard on this. Can you write a detail cover letter on this? Position paper would be nice. Johnson: I'll write it up. Ko: Why not drop policy lower? Larsen: That is not the direction we wanted to go. Kalashian: Our starting point is to see as many students as possible at State.

PRO 09-11-E1 (This proposal of multiple motions will be consolidated into one proposal that will be posted on

chssa.org) SECOND NIEMI

IX. GOOD OF THE ORDER Prefontaine: There is no order of succession in our constitution. As a body we should address the duties and responsibilities of officers and their replacements.


Barembaum: On the CHSSA website you may see the "Support Us" button. We get money from the vendors listed. Please try these vendors and help us out. Every little bit helps.

Next CHSSA, check the website for details. Meeting adjourned at 1:11 PM Respectfully submitted by Reed Niemi CHSSA Secretary


Exec Committee Reports 9 Sept 2016

Time: 5:21 PM

Sharon Prefontaine, Martha Mangahas, Nermin Fraser (absent), Mikendra McCoy, Linda Darling, Shirley Keller-‐Firestone, Jennifer Kindred, Ron Underwood, Neil Barembaum, David Matley, Gregg Osborn, Eric Larsen, Ben Cummings, Reed Niemi, Kathy Graber

President Report-‐Prefontaine

3 day meeting work for all? Task groups should remain on the task they chose and also produce a deliverable to contribute to the program we give out. (60th Anniversary).

Group 1 Data:

Group 2 website

Group 3 program

Group 4 state program

Thank you to Angel and Mikendra for taking care of dinner arrangements and lunch throughout the weekend!

It was great to watch everyone collaborate. Truly inspiring.

VP Activities Report-‐Fraser

State 2017 -‐ Area 3 SCDL -‐-‐ Arcadia High

● April 28-‐30** (State dates for this year) ○ Online by: March 14 ○ Postmarked by: March 21

● Easter (Western) -‐ April 16 ● Easter (Orthodox) -‐ April 16 ● Passover -‐ April 11-‐April 18


Curriculum Committee -‐ Mangahas I. DVD sales. -‐ decide to stop providing free DVDs at state competition -‐ since DVDs are all available online, consensus was to cease reproducing them and only sell the remaining

stock at state tournaments and have area chairs keep a stockpile for new coaches -‐ if we create new DVDs, focus should be on events that are unique to CHSSA II. Curriculum development goals for 2016-‐2017 -‐ curriculum should have two areas of focus:

A. Curriculum for speech/debate classes not specific to competition -‐ For further development based on surveys of teacher needs (see Item III)

B. Specific curriculum to support teams and competition. This will include: . Quick Start Guides for Events – Areas of Need

-‐ Area of focus was decided to be creating a catalogue of introductory “quick start guides” for all the events (focusing specifically on events unique to CHSSA).

-‐ Plan o Submit proposal for how we would the website would organize these manuals o Canvas seasoned coaches for their handbooks o Create a google folder for submissions throughout the year o Edit and curate at May meeting

-‐ OO, OPP, OA, EXPOS, HI, DI, TI, OI, DUO, National Extemp, International Extemp, Impromptu, Lincoln Douglas,

Policy Debate -‐ Called NSDA – they said they could use their one-‐sheet event description for overlapping events with following

conditions: o cite date is was created o credit them

-‐ ideally, each event on our website would contain a sub-‐menu consisting of: o event one-‐sheet o rules o sample ballot o successful script o successful video of a performance o lesson plans // “quick start guides” *** this will be particularly important for events unique to CHSSA *** III. Areas for further development:

A. General classroom support – how to incorporate debate and speech exercises in classrooms -‐ Speaking Across the Curriculum type lesson plans, etc. The idea here is to establish CHSSA as a resource for ALL classroom teachers, a go-‐to.


-‐ We created a Google Form surveying council members if they have lessons and materials that they can contribute to CHSSA to be shared with teacher members

B. Creating outreach for ethnic diversity and low SES schools. PR Committee-‐McCoy

● Angel is aptly named, as she has been an Angel; thank you for putting feet to our ideas! ● Media Influence is growing ...

○ Website is getting new updates all the time! Thanks Ben for placing those there! ■ Coaches corner -‐ mentor/mentee questions and answers and soundbites.

● Need your help on this one; please fill out the paper. ● Blog addition -‐ Hoping to generate some communication online

○ Videos for each of the three areas (competition, classroom, career) will be finished ■ Those are the links that will be on the “mailers” to schools and community organizations

to take them to the website. ○ Bulletin’s will be placed on the webpage to see our history. ○ 1st Newsletter send out this weekend!

■ Area chairs and league presidents, need your email lists for updates ■ Need to know first year coaches names and schools: for book, for help.

○ Facebook page is getting 1000% more hits! ■ Like the California HIgh School page! Then share with everyone! ■ Student testimonials are creating quite the viewing; please get your kiddos the join as

well. ● [email protected]

○ Upcoming Press ■ The book:

● Still need people for the committee to create that from a few areas: ○ CFL, WBFL, OCSL

■ Press Releases for upcoming tournament to qualifying schools ■ Press release for 60th Jubilee for local newspapers

● Looking to add a sheet, like NSDA does for press release information on the state forms so that we can help get the news out!

Treasurer Report-‐Barembaum

● Report was emailed to council. I want to update the budget. If you can get me budget requests I can incorporate them before we approve the budget. If you are in charge of spending money for your area of work, please make sure that the budget reflects the amount of money you need for the year. Until the budget is approved changes can be made.

● Budget needs to be approved at this meeting. That means that we are approving the expenditure of funds for this year. As much time as you would consider when a separate request for funds is made during other meetings, you are considering many requests for funds right now. So if the budget is going to mean anything, it needs to reflect the money that we want to spend and the way we want to spend it.


● We are still accepting credit cards. If anyone has questions or is experiencing difficulties, please refer them to me. I also am able to take credit cards at this meeting.

Historian Report-‐Underwood Secretary Report-‐Niemi

● No January meeting no minutes!!! I love you all. Area 1 Report-‐Keller-‐Firestone Thanks to everyone who helped with the State Tournament. Gay Brasher has won The Marcella Oberle National Award for Outstanding Teaching given by the National Communication Association. They give only one award nationwide each year. Congratulations! Hoon Ko is the Representative at Large from CFL. Welcome back!

Area 2 Report -‐ Darling

Nothing new to report; still looking for a site for 2018. Congrats to Martha for being elected VP Curric. Welcome Ben as new curric rep and Angel Ronald as rep at large. Thanks to Ralph for his years of service.

Area 3-‐Kindred

● State 2017 will be at Arcadia High School. Dates April 28-‐30, 2017. Nermin will have fabulous hotel accommodations for all. The dinner dance will be lit. This will be my last year as Area 3 Chair. I am very grateful to CHSSA for the friendships I’ve made and the opportunities I’ve had. I will still be coaching for now, but it is time for me to start reclaiming some of my weekends.

Area 4 Report-‐Osborn

● Doug Miller is new OCSL President. ● Will be meeting with Josh House at Cypress in the winter to check on progress for 2019.

IE Committee-‐Graber IE will recommend passage of each IE proposal up for a vote this meeting. We asked Gregg Osborn to revise the Duo touching penalty bylaw to reflect the actual language of the By-‐Laws. Once those corrections are made, we will recommend its passage. We discussed the Extemp areas for State 2017-‐-‐topic areas are supposed to be announced in January, but due to the fact that we will not meet in January, we are prepared to announce them now. Basically they remain the same as last year, but we propose changing “The Economy” to “Finance and Economics” to allow for broader questions regarding Wall Street, Business, etc. AND-‐-‐we felt that a couple of the IX areas were too broad, and so we propose slightly more specific language. Here are the proposed areas; the new wording is italicized:


NX: Politics/Government, Finance & Economics, Science & Technology, US Foreign Policy, Social Issues & Controversies IX: The Americas, Africa, Europe/Russia, Asia/Australia/Oceania, Middle East We also discussed Karen Minick’s bylaw change proposal at length regarding changing the rule that allows students to substitute an entirely new speech to replace the speech they qualified with. Her bylaw proposal allows for updating scripts, but would prohibit an entirely new script submission. We are divided on this topic. We have requested feedback from Derek Yuill of SCDL as to this proposal, since Derek makes liberal use of this allowance. Once we receive it, we will consider and share his viewpoint, hopefully on Sunday. We also discussed a new proposal from Iain Lampert of TCFL to increase the likelihood of SPONTANEITY in Impromptu (what a concept!). We endorse the spirit of the proposal, but made a few recommendations to him to amend it slightly. He accepts our suggestions and is revising it. We plan to circulate the revised proposal Sunday for general council discussion. Also: we are studying a thoughtful letter written by a coach at Windsor High School in Area 4 regarding the confusing restrictions in OI. We all feel her concerns are legitimate and likely widespread. We plan to discuss it more thoroughly Saturday morning over breakfast. It may result in a bylaw proposal out of IE committee to hopefully clarify what constitutes an OI. And while we are on the subject, we are looking into the problem of legit OI sourcing-‐-‐i.e., the speech exists online as a video, but the word-‐for-‐word transcription is on a verboten website, as in wordpress.com, which is considered a social media website and therefore illegal. Finally, we are all aghast at the prevalence of companies who advertise their services in writing both “original” speeches and personalized “interps” for speakers who are willing to pay their fees. Jennifer Nguyen noted that one of these companies was a vendor at Nats this year. Not to single any one of these companies out because there are many, but Picket Fence Forensics comes to mind. We think this is a serious problem but are at a loss as to how to curb the practice. Debate Committee -‐ Larsen Topic Areas for Parli at the 2017 State Tournament are suggested as follows.

• VALUE TOPICS: CIVIL RIGHTS, IMMIGRATION, INTERNATIONAL TRADE • FACT TOPICS: The US ECONOMY, HIGHER EDUCATION, NATURAL RESOURCES • POLICY TOPICS: SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT, POVERTY

Motions 09-‐11-‐16G, 09-‐11-‐16H, and 09-‐10-‐16i have the approval of the debate committee. The Policy Resolution for 2017-‐18 is up for a vote in October. I have synopses printed for every league president, and can send the document in an e-‐mail if your prefer. Please share with your league, send me feedback, make California’s vote count! Your choices: Energy Policy, Income Inequality, Education Reform, Domestic Agriculture, Russia. Other states have lobbied us to vote for the Ag topic, but read them all and send me your rankings. We have a workable proposal to bring all forms of debate up to 64 entries. I will e-‐mail this to the council members by Saturday night. We would like your input over the next few months as you share this with your


leagues. Based on the feedback we receive, we will draft a formal proposal in March/April to be brought to the table in May. Congress Committee -‐ Matley I would like to thank Reed Niemi, Hoon Ko, and Neil Barembaum for their creative input, positive attitudes, and strong work ethic. It was a very productive meeting. We drafted the 6 topic areas for the 2017 State Tournament with suggestions for legislation for each League. Those topic areas will be emailed to Ben on Sunday to be posted to the CHSSA website. We discussed a new method of determining the legislation for the 2017 State Tournament and came up with the following plan:

1. Each school with an entry at the State Tournament will be asked to write one bill or resolution from the topic area assigned to their League. Legislation will be due by the deadline for online registration.

2. All Legislation will then be posted on the CHSSA website for students and coaches to review. 3. All schools with entries in Congress will then complete an online ballot (Google Form) to rank their

legislation preference in each topic area. The top legislation from each topic area will be chosen for the State Tournament. An alternate 7th piece of legislation will then be chosen from the most number of 2nd place votes in any of the topic areas.

We discussed a congress survey and brainstormed questions to be used in this survey. One of the primary purposes of this survey was to gather information on this selection process and how schools feel about allowing for authorship speeches. The results of the survey will be shared among members of the congress committee and we will make further recommendations based on the data from this survey. The survey was completed on Saturday during the Area 1 task group meeting on data. Finally, we recommended that we eliminate the wording in the CHSSA By-‐Laws that require Leagues/Coaches to submit legislation by Nov. 15. This provision of our by-‐laws is dated and hasn’t been followed for many years. This by-‐law revision will be presented at the 2017 May meeting.


SEPT 2016 MEETING TASK GROUPS BY AREA

Area 1: Topic Area – Data Collection: Hoon Ko Matt Fraser (Absent) David Matley Shirley Keller Chris Harris Danial Leahy Ron Underwood Aleisha Readye

TASK(S) DISCUSSION: What kinds of data would be most effective to collect to show direct link between forensics and academic/social success? RESEARCH 1: Find 3 or more of the most current data-based article(s) demonstrating link between forensics and academic/social success. Save to computer. RESEARCH 2: If sources are available TIMELINE 1: What were national debate topics over last 10 years? What critical national/international events were taking place each of the last 10 years of State Tournaments [This one still needs completion.]

Area 2: Topic Area – Website /Cummings Kalashian Kalashian Angelique Ronald Linda Darling Ben Cummings Eric Larsen Reed Niemi Martha Mangahas Karen Minick (for Caiti Sarvey)

TASK(S) RESEARCH 1: What are objective, professional criteria for evaluating an effective website? EVALUATION 1: To what extent does the CHSSA website meet the criteria? PRODUCT 1: What specific modifications need to be made to the CHSSA website to meet effectiveness criteria as well as specific needs of the CHSSA audience? Make changes. (Show T-shirts from former years. Make links to league sites.)


Area 3: Topic Area: funding, products/sponsors McCoy/Johnson Kathy Graber Jennifer Nguyen Einar Johnson Jennifer Kindred Mikendra McCoy Susan Foley Cindy Johnson (for Sharon James) Neil Barembaum

DISCUSSION: Sponsors and how to get them Store? Funding from sale of curriculum materials?. Deliverable: Develop 3 products that will be sold at 2017 tournament.

Area 4: Topic Area – Mentoring, Teacher/Coach Support and Retention Michael Orfield Gregg Osborn Erik Pielstick Rachel Wear Minnia Curtis Doug Miller (Absent)

Produce clear Guidelines: Who does what? How? What should CHSSA do? How to share best practices with new coaches? League level? Deliverable: Create ad or info for program.


OPENING SESSION 9:38 9/10/16

Task group discussions-DELIVERABLE (D) Group 1-Mately (Ron, Hoon, Dan) Data/Research articles--what kind of data? (D) Items for the program, e.g. past debate topics Group 2-Cummings Website--(D) coversheets by the end of the meeting. Cummings creating, Graber checking. Professional measure to evaluate the website. Info for the program. Leagues linked to the CHSSA website or can use the CHSSA website for hosting. Send information to [email protected] Group 3-Johnson "Swag"--items available and curriculum. (D) 3 specific items to be sold and the ad for the program Group 4-Orfield Mentoring and support--(D) list of new coaches and pictures of first year coaches. How might we best share information? Webinars? Presentations? Dog and pony show? Best practices for retention or processes for new coaches. Graber shared out their start of the year. Clinics taught by varsity students. Coaches, students, parents all encouraged to attend. (D) program write-up or article, pictures, etc. Prefontaine: From now to 1:15pm working lunch to 4pm. This was hard to plan – concerned about too much to do -- not enough to do. The magazine-style program being is spearheaded by Nermin and PR committee. Graber: Can we meet to discuss other issues? Osborne: Bonuses are completed. Will be shared out with distribution, allocations, and bonuses. Graber: May we address the letter that I shared? There are some valid concerns expressed in the letter. Prefontaine: Is it a proposal? IE committee may want to raise the questions on the website or develop proposals to prompt more focused discussion rather than sharing a general letter.


Task Group Share-outs

4:12pm 9/10/16

Task Group 4 Program Additions/Coach Retention Welcome page for new coaches in the CHSSA State Program shared. Rather than pictures, we will list the names. Websites you cannot live without. Much discussion concerning legitimate websites. Orfield: We are a family and need to share our best practices and help build up a team. FAMILY OF COACHES. We spoke of negatives that keep people from staying on longer with the activity. Administrative support and parental support needed to not burn-out. New Coaches meeting at State Champs--offered twice at the tournament and on the website as a video.

Curtis: Handout and slide show would be desired by our committee. This would help league presidents as well.

Orfield: Power Points with handouts an awesome idea. Also spoke of a "buddy system" for new coaches. It is invaluable for a new coach. Finally we spoke of the value of protocols; e.g., fundraising, best practices. Prefontaine: League websites would allow for this as well through our website.

Orfield: Yes, our website is one-stop shopping and it is looking promising.

Task Group 2 Website Cummings: Analytics shown for the website. Engagement with the website is key. Connecting league websites under CHSSA is also key to traffic. Front page will be the most current content. Cover pages will be available tonight. Benjamin demonstrated web updates and revisions. Please remember to have coaches sign-up for the chssa.org. Once one sign-ups other menus are available, such as curriculum and such.

Matley: Can we at least show it is available and not be invisible if one does not sign-in? Much discussions prevailed.

Graber: Pre-approved list of scripts went by the wayside but how about listing the pieces from the previous State tournament?

Cummings: Face Book shown and reviewed. Alum testimonials and resources. This is for all so have your students follow it. Demonstrated league websites. [email protected]

Task Group 1 Data

Matley: We divided up duties. Ron found articles and studies that have been done to be added to the program. Chris worked on a timeline for topics in the debate events. Word cloud of cultural events over the past 10 years and 60 years. We made two surveys for all schools. One deals with Congress specifically and that will be sent out to schools that competed last year (51 schools total). Main concern is the coach survey and I would like to share that out for you to review. We are wanting demographic data on the state of the activity in California.

Prefontaine: Placement on the assessment form should be coming soon.


Matley: We are wanting to get a better idea of what is going on at the school level. Coach survey is most meaningful if we can follow it and see the direction that the state is moving in at the state level. We would like it every five years.

Niemi: CADA and NFHS collect this data yearly, just like this. It is an organizational best practice. Graber: Turnover is large, may be do it more often. What about coaches that are not teachers at the school?

Task Group 3 Program McCoy: Internal legacy request in the program. Diamond donation page. Change for Change to help nonprofits. Donation letters created. 60th pin designed. Creating a swag bag that would be prepaid and available at the tournament. NSDA does a March 3rd speech and debate day and we would like to do the same...Sleepers Awake! Johnson: What do we need money for? We can utilize the money easily. Support programs in the state. Funding speech and debate from the state level.


OLD BUSINESS Number: 09-11-16-A

Proposed: 05-14-16B

A Motion to Revise the By-Laws to expand deadline for Extemp sources and eliminate redundancy Submitted by: Jennifer Kindred Second by:___________________ This revision will be a(n): X Deletion from By-Laws: Article IX ,section 1.B .1.a, b, d , paragraph 1

X Addition to By-Laws: Article_ IX ,section 1.B.1a, b,d__ , paragraph_1 B. Specific Rules for each Spontaneous Event 1. Extemporaneous a. Broadly newsworthy topics shall be drawn from publications dated January 1 through May 1 of the current competitive year. one week prior to the State Tournament. A minimum of eleven topics will be written for each round of each extemporaneous speaking event. The topics for each round will be in a distinct topic area not to be used in any other round for the duration of the tournament. The topic areas by round will be determined by the Individual Events Committee and announced at the January meeting. b. Drawing: Each contestant shall draw three topics for each round. Each shall be called to draw by speaking order and panel. Contestants must draw their three topic slips in the correct speaking order and from the correct panel. The contestant shall promptly choose one topic of the three drawn and return the other two topics. Each contestant shall draw topics thirty minutes prior to his/her scheduled speaking time. … d. Use of computers: Extemporaneous Speaking contestant may make use of electronic retrieval devices to store and retrieve their subject files. Students can retrieve extemporaneous files to read, but cannot write speeches or organize their thoughts on the computers. Electronic retrieval devices are defined as laptop computers, netbooks, iPads, or other portable electronic retrieval equipment. Secondary devices such as flash drives or external hard drives are allowed as well. Cell phones or smart phones are prohibited. (Students may not share electronic devices with one another. Rationale:


Housekeeping. - May 1 postdates the State Tournament. - Redundancy - Improved grammar


Number: 09-11-16 B

Proposed: 05-14-16C

A Motion to Revise the By-Laws to eliminate wordiness re impromptu rules

Submitted by: Jennifer Kindred Second by:___________________ This revision will be a(n): X Deletion from By-Laws: Article IX ,section 1.B.2.b , paragraph 1 , page # 1-2 Specific revision: [Exact wording is required. Show strikethroughs original language that is deleted and put any added/changed language in bold print] b. Drawing: Each contestant shall draw three topics from a judge in the round, from which the contestant shall and immediately select one, Rationale: Eliminate wordiness


Number: 09-11-16 C

Proposed: 05-14-16D

A Motion to Revise the By-Laws to clarify manuscript requirements

Submitted by: Jennifer Kindred Second by:___________________ This revision will be a(n): X Deletion from By-Laws: Article IX ,section 2.A.5-6 , paragraph 1 , page # 3

X Addition to By-Laws: Article IX ,section 2.A.5-6 , paragraph 1 , page # 3

X Deletion from By-Laws: Article IX ,section 3.A.5d , paragraph 1 , page # 7

X Addition to By-Laws: Article IX ,section 3.A.6 , paragraph 1 , page # 7

p Other change: Article_____ ,section____ , paragraph___ , page #___ Specific revision: [Exact wording is required. Show strikethroughs original language that is deleted and put any added/changed language in bold print] 5. Manuscript Requirements: A double-spaced typewritten copy of the speech with all quotations underlined must be submitted to the League President prior to the State Qualifying Tournament. The manuscript must follow the MLA style guidelines for internal citations and must include a “works-cited” page., or shall include a disclaimer from the student indicating that the composition was If no outside sources are used, the student will sign the disclaimer on the CHSSA cover sheet. The number of quoted words (including a, an, the) must be specified on the CHSSA cover sheet.

6. Verification of Manuscripts: League Presidents shall forward to the Area Chairperson proper all qualified manuscripts qualified for the State Tournament. with appropriate signatures on the attached coversheets. The coach, contestant, parent/guardian, and a school administrator must sign the CHSSA cover sheet and attach it to all manuscripts submitted for qualification for the State Tournament. Rationale: Clarity & consistency


Number: 09-11-16 D

Proposed: 5-14-16E A Motion to Revise the By-Laws to clarify rules on time limits

Submitted by: Jennifer Kindred Second by:___________________ This revision will be a(n): X Deletion from By-Laws: Article IX ,section 2.A.2 , paragraph 1 , page # 3

X Addition to By-Laws: Article_____ ,section____ , paragraph___ , page #___ X Deletion from By-Laws: Article IX ,section 3.A.3.a , paragraph 1 , page # 7

X Addition to By-Laws: Article_____ ,section____ , paragraph___ , page #___

p Other change: Article_____ ,section____ , paragraph___ , page #___ Specific revision: [Exact wording is required. Show strikethroughs original language that is deleted and put any added/changed language in bold print] a. Presentations shall be no longer than ten minutes; there is no minimum time. If this time limit is exceeded by more than 30 seconds, the speaker will be penalized by a lowering of one rank by tab room officials. Judges should use discretion if the speaker is forced to exceed this time limit due to audience reaction. Rationale: This line does not represent actual practice, can confuse judges and may give the judge more power than we want. The judge is only to record the time.


Number: 09-11-16 E

Proposed: 5-14-16F

A Motion to Revise the By-Laws to Specify the Primary Purpose of OPP

Submitted by: Gregg Osborn Second by:___________________ This revision will be a(n): X Deletion from By-Laws: Article IX ,section 2.B.4.a , paragraph 1

X Addition to By-Laws: Article IX,section 2.B.4.a , paragraph 1 Specific revision: [Exact wording is required. Show strikethroughs original language that is deleted and put any added/changed language in bold print] 4. Original Prose/Poetry: a. Topics: Any appropriate subject may be used, but the primary purpose of the event is to demonstrate the creativity creative writing of the contestant. The presentation may consist of prose or poetry or a combination. The tone may dramatic, humorous, or a combination. More than one written selection may be presented within the allotted time. The entire presentation may or may not be based on a thematic concept. Rationale: The focus of Original Prose Poetry should be on the writing. “Creativity” might include staging, vocal presentation, etc… Whereas, those can be part of the decision, what makes OPP unique is the writing ability of the student.


Number: 09-11-16 F

Proposed: 05-14-16G

A Motion to Revise the By-Laws to modify penalty for physical contact in Duo

Submitted by: Gregg Osborn Second by:___________________ This revision will be a(n): X Deletion from By-Laws: Article IX ,section 3.B.2.b , paragraph 1 , page # 8

X Addition to By-Laws: Article IX ,section 2.A.5-6 , paragraph 1 , page # 3

p Other change: Article_____ ,section____ , paragraph___ , page #___ Specific revision: [Exact wording is required. Show strikethroughs original language that is deleted and put any added/changed language in bold print] b. The partners may react to each other’s verbal and/or non-verbal expressions, but they may not touch each other, except during the introduction. If unintentional physical contact is noted as a violation, the duo will be dropped one rank for each touch. If the physical contact is determined to be intentional, the duo will be given last place in the round. These penalties will be assessed by tournament officials and not by the judges. Physical contact between the partners during the introduction is optional. Rationale: Clarity. Penalty as written is excessive.


Number: 09-11-16 G

Proposed: O5-14-16H

A Motion to Revise the By-Laws to: Increase Prep Time in LD to 4 Minutes

Submitted by: Erik Pielstick Second by:

**Other change: Article__XI___ ,section__1__ , paragraph_F Specific revision: [Exact wording is required. Show strikethroughs original language that is deleted and put any added/changed language in bold print] F. Preparation Time Allotted

1. Policy Debate No more than eight minutes of total preparation time shall be allowed each team during the debate.

2. Lincoln Douglas No more than three (3) four (4) minutes of total preparation time shall be allowed each debater during the debate.

3. Parliamentary Debate a. No preparation time is permitted during the debate presentation period before the

judge(s). b. Twenty minutes of preparation time is allotted to be used before the debaters report to

the judge(s). During the presentation period the next speaker must get up to speak within 20 seconds following the preceding speech.

4. Public Forum Debate. No more than two minutes of total preparation time shall be allowed to each side during the debate.

Rationale:

1. More preparation time allows for students to craft more salient arguments in rebuttals. 2. NSDA time limits are now 4 for preparation, nearly all invitationals have 4 minutes of

preparation time, and many leagues have specified 4 minutes of preparation time as well. 3. LD Debate is structured to be ½ of a Policy debate. In both events, each speaker speaks

for 13 minutes and cross-examines for 3. In Policy, teams have 8 minutes of Prep. LD debaters should have 4 minutes of prep.


Number: 09-11-16H

Proposed: 05-14-16I

A Motion to Revise the By-Laws to: Decrease Restrictions on Debate Judge Paneling.

Submitted by: Scott Wheeler Second by:___________________ This revision will be a(n):

Deletion and Addition: Article___XIV__ ,section__2__ , paragraph_B__ , page #_2__ Specific revision: [Exact wording is required. Show strikethroughs original language that is deleted and put any added/changed language in bold print] B. In Team Debate, Lincoln-Douglas Debate, Parliamentary Debate and Public Forum Debate three judges shall be used in each round up to and including the quarter-final round. In the semi-final and final rounds, five judges shall be used. No judge should score the same debate team or Lincoln-Douglas debater twice during the Tournament. preliminary and double-elimination rounds. A judge may score a previously scored debate team or Lincoln-Douglas entry one additional time in quarterfinals or beyond. Rationale: Despite the best efforts of the tournament director to pre-panel all rounds, we are often left with the judge table looking for judges late in the tournament because the quality / expert judges who were pre-paneled for those rounds are unable to judge the entry a second time. The current rule excludes some of our best judges in an event from judging the late elimination rounds. The proposal change could also help the tournament to run smoother as well by placing fewer constraints on which judges Tab/Judge House can assign to a given round.


Number: 09-11-16 I

Proposed: 05-14-16J

A Motion to Revise the By-Laws to further limit use of the Internet for Evidence during rounds

Submitted by: Debate Committee Second by:___________

This revision will be a(n):

III. **Addition to By-Laws: Article_XI, Section K, paragraph_4_

IV.

4. In all forms of debate, debaters shall not have access to or activate any other electronic devices during the round, other than those specified in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Section K. Debaters shall not be allowed to utilize the Internet during rounds. In a round where the use of computers or cellphones as timers is permissible, Internet access must be disabled. Evidence acquired from the use of the Internet during the round is invalid. Therefore, debaters shall not explicitly encourage or invite judges to acquire evidence from the Internet.

Rationale: While the by-laws clearly state that competitors are not to use the Internet during their debate rounds, there is a need (discovered during a protest) to specify that neither may competitors encourage or invite their judges (or anyone in the audience) to acquire evidence from the Internet during the round or prior to completing the ballot. In Parli, for example, competitors could exceed the limits of the piece of paper from which they are to work by requesting that judges research for evidence that the debaters do not have with them.


Number: 09-11-16 J

Proposed: 05-14-16K

A Motion to Revise the By-Laws to: revise penalty for failure to pay dues prior to entering a State Qualifying tournament Submitted by: Erik Pielstick - CBSR Second by:_____________ This revision will be a(n):

• Deletion from By-Laws: Article_VII , section 6_ , paragraph_D (2) ( i)_ , page #_6 • Addition to By-Laws: Article VII , section 6_ , paragraph_E (1)_ , page #__7

Strike: Article VII , Section 6. D. 2. i i. A league found to have allowed a non-CHSSA paid school to enter a qualifying tournament

will forfeit a qualifier in each affected event for the following competitive year. The forfeited qualifiers would be redistributed to the assigned “designated league” as per item “d” above

Add: Article VII Section 6. (E ) E. All CHSSA member schools in good standing who have eligible and qualified students, and who are members in good standing of recognized Leagues, may participate in state qualification tournaments and the State Tournament. Each school participating in a state qualification tournament must be guaranteed at least one entry in each event.

1. No school shall be admitted to a state qualification tournament unless the school's CHSSA assessments are postmarked on or before two weeks prior to said state qualification contest. A league found to have allowed a non-CHSSA paid school to enter a qualifying tournament will be fined $100 per event in which the school competed. The delinquent school’s dues plus the late fee (as in Article I. Sec 1, a.3), and assessed fines must be paid before any league schools are allowed to pass final registration at the state tournament. Rationale: · It is reasonable to assume that every past failure of a school to pay CHSSA dues, and every past

failure of a league to discover this failure happened as a result of inattention or an administrative mistake and not out of malice or an attempt to reap the benefits of membership for free.

· As such, it is contrary to the mission statement of the organization to punish children for an administrative error by the adults in charge.

· The current penalty system compounds the injustice by not penalizing those responsible, but rather punishing the league’s competitors from dues paying schools the following year by reducing their chances to attend the state tournament.

· The current system also bestows unearned rewards on another league by transferring the qualifying spots denied to the competitors of one league to the competitors of another.

· A financial penalty is more just because it allows children to compete and would allow the league at fault to pay from league resources or collect from those most directly responsible.

· Also, CHSSA makes money rather than losing it

September 11, 2016 Minutes from Fall 2016 Page 1 of 33 California ...

Documents

Transcript of September 11, 2016 Minutes from Fall 2016 Page 1 of 33 California ...