Here is the final round from the East-West tournament in early June. We were invited to judge, but had some difficulty with the format. Here are some things to keep in mind as you watch the clip.
1. The clip begins with the entry of the 11 judge final round panel. Everyone stands up and applauds them, and as they come in they distribute copies of their judging philosophies to the debaters. This gives the debaters only a few minutes to make adaptations in strategy. There is a short moment of polling of the judges by the Negative team in Japanese, and the judges raised their hands to indicate their agreement with the statements.
2. Yes, the debate is in English! In Academic debate (what the Japanese call policy debate) the pronunciation of words has its own very difficult accent. The judges and the participants have developed their own pronunciation for English words over the years. They told me that we might have trouble understanding because the competition often favors "Japanese-English" - which is what they call this way of speaking. I have great difficulty understanding most of these speeches. I don't think Academic Debate is very interested in teaching English speaking so much at this level, similar to how policy debate has little interest in teaching good public speaking skills in the U.S.
3. Topicality is a challenge to a debate over definitions. It has little to do with the plan. Academic debate is pretty lacking in theory debate. Everyone is a hypo tester, and the T argument challenges the Aff to a battle over interpretation of words. That's why the second T violation sounds so strange - she basically reads definitions for half the resolution, so it's multiple challenges in one. The Aff handles it pretty well in the 2AC by lumping it as a debate about the meaning of "Japanese Government."
4. Counterplans claim mutual exclusivity, but what they really mean is resolutional competition. That is, you can't endorse the resolution and the counterplan at the same time. More like a counterwarrant that has just crawled up on the beach from the primordial sea than a modern counterplan.
5. At the end is every policy debater's dream - the chairperson asks "Is there any appeal from the Negative?" - After the 2AR the Negative is given one last opportunity to appeal to the judges, especially indicating new arguments in the 2AR. Amazing. Rarely do Negative teams invoke this opportunity, I was told.
6. I love the fact that they have people coloring in boxes of chalk on the board to indicate prep time use! Gives it a very game-show feel don't you think?
The processing of videos is slower than I thought it would be, sorry for the slowness. This is a good debate to start with though. The last debate on the final day of the tour versus Sophia University was a huge suprise. First, it was in an intimate, private setting with only 5 observers, all of whom participate in the Japanese policy format they call "Academic Debate." Secondly, it was the most American styled policy debate that happened on the tour. This was very surprising to me as the debate seemed very familiar. Finally, this debate really highlights some of the differences in Japanese "academic debate" and U.S. "policy debate." The major difference is that academic debate accepts hypothesis testing as the only way to make a decision in a round. This becomes a nice moment of cultural communication between the teams over the counterplan in this round.
The topic was That the Japanese Government should encourage companies to introduce equal pay for equal work.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Debate: Japan - Equal Pay for Equal Work
See video at http://progymna.blogspot.com/2009/06/final-round-video-of-east-west.html