Abstract
ABSTRACTIn academic policy debate, annual resolutions focus research, facilitate argument development, and enable extensive preparation by participants. Little wonder, then, that calls to change resolutions mid-season tend to spark controversy and reflection. For example, citing strategic Cold War considerations, several branches of the U.S. military pressed the Speech Association of America to change the National Debate Tournament (NDT) NDT topic on recognition of communist China in 1954. Many called for the 2001–2002 NDT resolution dealing with U.S. policy toward Native Americans to be changed in the wake of the September 11, 2001 airline attacks. In Japan, debate officials withdrew the previously announced high school policy debate topic on nuclear power in arguing that it would be “educationally inappropriate” to debate such issues in the midst of the Fukushima nuclear crisis in 2011. Where do calls for mid-season topic change originate? What motivates them? What explains whether they result in mid-season adjustments? Original archival research exploring such questions promises to contribute relevant content to the historical record, as well as shed light on perennial questions regarding policy debate's status and role as a community of practice in the wider world.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
