AFA 2016
American Forensic Association National Individual Events Tournament
Committee Meeting
Wyndham Garden Hotel--Lakeview South Room in Gainesville, FL
9:30-11:45 a.m. and 1-4 p.m.
Attending
Committee Members:
Peter Pober (Chair), Lee Mayfield (Vice-Chair), Larry Schnoor (Tournament Director), Karen Morris (Secretary), David Worth (Webmaster), Leah White (Chair, Board of Trustees), Yaw Kyeremateng (D1), Joe Gantt (D2), Randy Cox (D3), Kelly Jo Wright (outgoing) and Kittie Grace (incoming), (D4), Ken Young (D5), Jennifer Talbert (D6), Tim Brown (D7), Chris Leland (D9), Kellie Roberts (Southern Rep),), Brent Northup (Western Rep), Mark Rittenour (Eastern Rep), Richard Paine (Central Rep), M'Liss Hindman (Two Year Rep) and Frank Thompson (Chair Emeritus)
Guests: Bobby Imbody (2019 host)
Joined later: Alex Brown (Outgoing Student Rep), Erin Schoch (Outgoing Student Rep), Mathew Magee (Incoming Student Rep), Jacob McHugh (Incoming Student Rep)
Call to Order: Peter called meeting to order at 9:01 am. He commended Roberts for being the only host in the history of the AFA-NIET to have hosted the AFA-NIET three times.
Approval of Minutes from November 18, 2015— Mayfield moved to accept the minutes and a second was not needed. Minutes APPROVED.
OFFICER REPORTS
A. NIET Committee Chair—Pober said 2015-2016 had been an amazingly busy year. He reported that he had quite a large number of tournaments using the 8th school waiver due to weather issues. He also said he had a lot of tournaments using the 400 mile rule.
B. Vice Chair--Mayfield said both Brown and Schoch have a done tremendous job as student representative. He said they set high standards for the incoming student representatives to meet.
C. Board of Trustees Chair--White said the board has been discussing increasing the money the student representatives receive to offset the cost to attend NCA. Currently the stipend given to students is 350.00. Committee is in support of increasing this amount to 500.00 per student. The committee gave the board permission to raise the funding to this amount if they have the funding. White will look into funds and act accordingly.
D. Chair Emeritus-- Thompson said he had no report.
E. Tournament Director--Schnoor said it was once again a pleasure working with Roberts. Schnoor said the number of schools are down from last year, but entries are about the same. He said he had one school cancel due to snow and another school cancelled due to the fact that a majority of their members were joining a fraternity. He also reported that Wednesday night he had a school contact him who hadn’t registered and another school entered late as they had some difficulties with SpeechWire. Schnoor also reported that we have no pewter plates this year but a less expensive plate which appears to be both silver and gold. We are saving about $2000.00 on awards this year. Schnoor said we also have plenty of hired judges for the tournament this year.
F. Secretary--Morris asked that the minutes stand as her report. She then passed around a current list of the committee members contact information and bosses’ contact information for members to correct.
G. Webmaster--Worth said that we would be fixing some small issues with the website but he is glad to have that migration over and done with.
TOURNAMENT HOST REPORTS
A. 2016 - University of Florida
Roberts welcomed us back and said she hopes that a 3rd time is a charm. She gave the committee the welcome booklet early. Roberts says she has a class of 22 and says many of them are communication majors who understand Twitter/Instagram and thus there will be lots of fun on social media. Roberts unveiled the 2016 AFA-NIET T-shirt which will sell for $10.00 each. She said hotel manager, Mark McClain has been great to work with. Each time she has hosted the name of the hotel has changed each time before April. However, the rate of 82.00 is the same rate as what we got last time she hosted. Post tournament gathering for the students will be in the ballroom with snacks and tables and pizza at 11:30 on Monday. Roberts reminded us about the tournament details:
· Reitz Union is hub of tournament.
· Reitz Union is 120,000 square feet bigger.
· The Opening Assembly will be at the Union in the Rion Ballroom.
· The University of Florida President and the Mayor of Gainesville will join us Opening.
· Ballot in and out will be in breezeway of Reitz union.
· A shuttle will be provided (4 mini vans).
· Posting will be near breezeway.
· Awards is in the Grand ballroom.
· Judges lounge is 4th level in the Mathews lounge sponsored by Pearson.
· Assigned warm-up rooms will be in packet.
· Schnoor said in planning this that the upper buildings are where the bulk of the rooms are. Schnoor announced that since buildings are far apart you may not be able to sign in. Judges please don’t penalize. Hired judges will also know about this. So don’t sign in.
B. 2017 – Bradley University
Young encourages people to stay at the Embassy Suites. He says they offer free WIFI and free breakfast. Young is also working on negotiating a price for both the Norton and HFO. Young says the new Bradley President is a Forensics Alumni and is very excited that they are hosting. Young says he has been given both a class for the fall and spring to help him with hosting.
C. 2018 – Future Host Bids:
Pober asked for a bid and none forthcoming.
D. 2019 – University of Alabama
Imbody said committee had 3 questions. He said he now has the answer for 2 of the 3 questions. Although we could host on Friday – Sunday schedule or Saturday – Monday, he would prefer Friday – Sunday schedule. There would be no classes on campus on Friday as it is an Honors Day. Imbody says the hotels do not want to give numbers three years in advance. Embassy Suites might be an option. At this point, we don’t have a hotel rate or place yet, but Imbody isn’t worried about getting one. Judge base was third concern. Imbody said that this won’t be a problem, alumni group was just started. Imbody is using the graduate school’s public speaking teachers as judges as part of contract.
E. 2020 – Future Host Bids
Pober asked for bids and received none. He encouraged committee members to solicit membership for bids.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
A. AFA-NIET Student Committee: (Schoch and A. Brown/McHugh and Magee)
Mayfield said we would wait for the students to arrive for this report.
B. Distinguished Service Committee: (Mayfield/Roberts/Rittenour/Paine/Northup)
Mayfield said he is looking forward to handing out to Kelly Jo Wright from the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire at the opening assembly.
C. Outstanding New Coach Award: (Mayfield/Roberts/Rittenour/Paine/Northup)
Mayfield is looking forward to handing out two new coach awards to Josh Hamzehee from the University of Northern Iowa and Cameron Logsdon from the University of Nebraska-Omaha.
D. Research: (Thompson)
Thompson said he had no report at this time.
E. Awards: (Pober, Schnoor)
Pober said he would cover his report later within a proposal in new business. He did report that the Lucite is here and all accounted for.
F. All-American IE Team: (Roberts/Rittenour/Paine/Northup)
Roberts said the committee has 23 nominations which include 7 automatic. She also said that there was one district with no nominations. Roberts reminded us that she needs official transcripts in addition to nominators filling out the cover sheet and to use the list as a check list. Each district has varied deadlines, but Roberts has a constant March 15th deadline. She said that she understands that the portion of the application which refers to having a letter from coach isn’t clear as to whether the letter needs to come from the student’s coach or any coach. She will make sure that it is apparent that the letter just needs to be from a coach. Pober reminded us that this is a lot of work for the All American committee and thanked them for their work.
G. Manchester Scholar Series: (Mayfield/Roberts/Rittenour/Paine/Northup)
Mayfield reported that there were no official proposals to approve. Mayfield said the committee had an initial proposal which was too broad and once the author(s) revised the proposal based on committee recommendations, then it didn’t seem like the proposal needed funding.
Pober suggested we increase the award from 2500.00 to 5000.00 if that helps to get people. Northup said that maybe it could be sliding scale based on the project proposed. Worth asked if there were proposals that would be capable of spending 5000.00. Roberts asked if we could slide lower than 2500.00 if warranted. Young suggested we ask Manchester to approve a sliding scale of no more than 5000.00 and no less than a certain amount. Pober will ask Manchester if we could split the award between applicants change the amount to a sliding scale of $500.00-$5000.00. Pober will talk to Manchester. Pober will come back to us in November.
H. Ad Hoc Committee on Future Planning in Forensics: (Paine/Rittenour/
*Schoch/Northup) *replaced by Magee
Paine talked about some of the results of the joint survey which was presented to the members of PKD, NFA, AFA-NIET, PRP and DSR last year and results presented at NCA in November. Highlights of the survey:
· 100 people responded — 63 about AFA-NIET
· Most common factors influencing schools attending/not attending the AFA-NIET:
o Money
o Tradition
o Organizational philosophy/experience
o Tournament length
· Reasons we could lose schools attending:
o Too far to travel
o Too expensive
o Locking out small schools
· 82% of AFA-NIET respondents are happy with the tournament logistics (schedule/cap)
· Those who were unhappy cited the following reasons:
o Closed lines of communication
o Leaders weren’t listening to the membership
o AFA-NIET does not promote diverse programs
o AFA-NIET isn’t encouraging academic scholarship.
· Most respondents agree that the AFA-NIET is practicing what they preach
Northup asked how the survey was administered. Paine said five forensics organizations sent it out to their memberships. Pober reminded the committee that the responses about the AFA-NIET being too expensive to qualify and too travel too far away might be skewed as last years’ tournament was in Portland and this year’s is in Florida. Grace suggested to counter the argument about people being disappointed in the academic scholarship, we could offer undergraduate students the opportunity to apply for the Manchester scholarship. Cox offered that in light of the high rate of satisfaction with AFA-NIET, we might be not need to pick at the items that only a few were bothered by.
Paine suggested that we think about adding on-line events to the tournament for those who can’t travel. He also offered as a suggestion to the concern of locking out smaller programs that the AFA-NIET offer a final round in each event open only to those with smaller entries. He suggested calling this a director’s division.
Pober addressed the two initiatives put forth: On-line events and a director’s division.
On-line Events:
Pober reminded us that the last time we looked at this, the committee didn’t like the concept of static taped submissions. Northup asked if this initiative came from the survey or from Paine. Paine said a bit of both: some suggestion from survey and his interpretation. White says we could embrace the on-line arena by having an event called “on-line training” where students would submit a YouTube/How To video. Northup says since Montana is so isolated, he would like this on-line ability. Talbert said PKD did an on-line pitch (5 minutes) and the drawback is that you have to find people to judge. This year PKD had no more than 20 contestants. Talbert says this type of event allows schools to enter who wouldn’t normally come to the tournament. Talbert said this type of event really embraces technology. Pober says that Phi Rho Pi and AFA-NIET have butted up against each other in the past and maybe this could help community colleges attend. Worth expressed that research doesn’t show that computer-mediated speech and face to face is that different from each other and asked Paine’s committee to explore the research. Brown asked the purpose of this proposal: to bridge for technology or increase attendance. Hindman says quality of videos changes from person to person and is afraid that high tech school would have an advantage. White says the description of the event could limit the technology or platform used to create. Cox wanted to know if this should be competitive event or just part of our research. Leland pondered if this type of event would be part of the mission of the AFA-NIET? Pober asked Paine’s committee to think about these ideas and bring back a proposal in November if the committee so desires.
Director’s Division:
White asked if this proposal was to help small programs. Paine explained that this would only be open to small schools (with small entry) and that there would be no double dipping (if you made it to the open quarters then you couldn’t get into director’s division). Pober asked Paine’s committee to bring back a proposal if they would like further discussion on this idea.
I. Ad Hoc Committee on Publishing Fees and Rights: (Worth/Talbert/*A. Brown /Gantt/ Schnoor) *replaced by Magee
Worth will discuss this after Schnoor’s proposal later in the meeting.
J. Ad Hoc Committee-History Project: (*Young/Cox/Worth/Talbert/White/Roberts)
*replaced by Schnoor
Schnoor took this over from Young as tournament director, but has nothing to report at this time. He will continue to use Speechwire to gather information on member schools’ directors of forensics.
White gave an update on the archives at MSU-Mankato. White said the McCaslands have been cataloging so much of the archives as they got a grant. At the end of summer, we will be able to have a link to an on-line database. Pober hopes this helps with research in the future.
K. Ad Hoc Committee on Charter Bylaws Updates: (Morris/Mayfield/Thompson)
Morris says will be summer project with Thompson and in order to update the bylaws of the AFA with the bylaws of the AFA-NIET.
L. Ad Hoc Committee on Championship Speech Archive: (T. Brown/*A. Brown/Roberts/ Gantt) *Replaced by McHugh
Brown says he has unofficially been transcribing past speeches. He is working under the radar in doing this. He will continue to do this until a decision about the AFA-NIET performances being put on YouTube has been reached. The committee is on hold until further notice.
M. Ad Hoc Committee on Regular Season Tournament Sanctioning: (Young/*Schoch/White/Hindman/Gantt) *replaced by McHugh
Young says code of standards and AFA-NIET bylaws have been compared. He will work with the Ad Hoc Committee on Charter Bylaws to share his findings.
N. Ad Hoc Committee to present AFA-NIET Distinguished Alumni Award (Cox/Schnoor/ Hindman/Morris/Worth)
Cox said we are giving it out for the first time and we have a standard design for the plaque. Our guest will arrive on Monday in time enough to judge a final round. Pober says thank you to the committee for their work.
O. Ad Hoc Committee to increase Alumni Communication (Duncan/Santacaterina/Epping/Reid)
Duncan (chair) was not present nor were any committee members. No report at this time.
Pober asked that we give a moment of silence in memory of Danny Ray, Director of Forensics at Marshall University.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Private Password-Protected Site for NIET Final Round Tapes
White said we could get onto the cornerstone project at Mankato. She will look into this a bit more and report back in November.
B. Extemporaneous Speaking Internet Usage Proposal (See addendum A)
This proposal was mentioned in November but since Gantt wasn’t at NCA, committee waited to bring it up in April for Gantt to be present. Gantt said D2 tournaments use internet. Gantt says the technology today makes filing moot. Gantt says extemp rules are too specific and we would never limit any other event like we do extemp. Pober asked the committee for those to speak in favor and against the proposal.
· Wright spoke in favor of since students can get the information quickly.
· Cox said his district is opposed because it can make the difference in research/resource between schools.
· Schoch said single student couldn’t file like larger squads.
· Young says for he is for it, but is concerned about policing for collaboration.
· Paine said you have to be a news junkie today, but with internet being allowed anyone could extemp.
· McHugh is concerned that using the internet might ask people to use outdated sources.
· Gantt countered that sourcing is more accurate with the internet.
· Pober says we discussed this in 2001 and the big argument was a financial argument.
· White wanted to know how to enforce. She also cautioned us that we need to coach students the same way; to teach them to make arguments based on source and not report arguments made by editors.
· Hindman reassured the committee that PRP has allowed internet to be used for the past 5 years and has had no problem.
Pober asked if this was Gantt’s desire to put this as a proposal. Gantt said yes. So Gantt proposes and Wright seconded. MOTION PASSED. Will go into effect in 2016!
C. AFA Membership Reminder
Pober reminded the committee that in order to serve on the AFA-NIET committee, someone from your school has to be an AFA member.
D. NIET Committee Gmail Group
Morris encouraged members to look at the address list being sent around to update not only their contact information, but also their bosses’ address. She encouraged members to visit the AFA-NIET Committee google site to update their district and committee information. She said all minutes from the past six years can be found on the site if new members wanted to familiarize themselves with this committee’s work.
NEW BUSINESS
A. Awards for the NIET
Schnoor talked about the new silver plates and sent them around for us to look at. Cox asked if silver would tarnish and fade in a few years. Mayfield asked about the sizes we have for this year. Schoch says she does not care for the new silver one. Pober called for a straw vote.
Consensus is for the alloy and not the silver. Mayfield asked what it saved us to go with new trophies and Schnoor responded with $2000.00. Mayfield thanked Pober/Roberts/Schnoor for the work in finding new trophies.
B. YouTube vs. DVDs for NIET Final Rounds
Schnoor says we had trouble getting the recordings from Texas State University. Schnoor was able only recently to make copies from the Portland AFA-NIET. Schnoor is looking for an easier way to get the copies from the host and to make copies for people. T. Brown is wondering how this can be done for the archives. Young says he would be in favor of putting PA and LP up on YouTube but is uncertain of the interp. Cox says students change after they graduate and perhaps they wouldn’t want their college performances to be on-line for others to see. He worries about performances being available for the public to see. McHugh says a student can always ask for their performance to be taken down. Northup says that the performance is in the public anyway and we just need to decide whether or not we want to keep it in the room and not push it out of the room. Pober reminded that this isn’t a proposal, but just a discussion. Gantt wondered if there might be an option without YouTube and just have downloaded files. Cox said this would be easier to copy and abuse. Pober sent this back to Worth’s committee to look at just PA and LP.
C. Motion to Eliminate the Binder only in Dramatic Interpretation for a 2-year trial period (Addendum B)
Pober stepped out of Chair position and vice chair Mayfield took over for this discussion since this was Pober’s proposal. Pober said that this discussion occurred quite a bit ago. Pober says full body is very interesting when it comes to interp. Richard seconded Pober’s motion to propose. Wright loved this as a trial and said that since it is Drama, the absence of the book would really promote “character”. White agreed that change is good and coaches keep learning through change. White says this would really help the difference between DI and Prose.
Young is worried that the transfer student who is coming into the AFA-NIET would never have had the chance to use the binder. Young argues that the book is not holding the DI performance back. Young thinks we will sensationalize the performance like High School. McHugh says the students are against because they don’t believe the book is in the way. Paine says each event should teach a new skill set. This proposal would allow DI to be unique. Schnoor says he put this forth many years ago and the students were against this then. Schoch says you would have to have two performances if all national organizations didn’t adopt this rule: one for the AFA-NIET
and one for the other nationals. She thinks the book adds to the character distinction. Mayfield says difference is more than book. Northup says the book makes us interp and reminds us that forensics is about voice. He thinks the use of the book forces students to focus on voice. Young said he moved to table this. Northup seconded. If we table this then it could be brought off the table in November and voted on to go into effect for the 2018 tournament. McHugh said they could talk about it with more students. Thompson asked for a concrete vote. Cox says we defer it and not table. Voting to table. Failed and not tabled. Young moved to defer/Paine seconded. And then it would be unfinished business. DEFERRED TILL NOVEMBER.
NEW BUSINESS
Young asked that the AFA-NIET take charge of streaming of the awards assembly and not the unprofessional way that it is being done now. Mayfield says that is a good idea but should be optional to the host. Northup asks for a one year trial for the hosts to see if this would work. Pober reminded us that we voted against a videographer 6 years ago. Proposal became: A one year trial the host would be responsible for live-streaming of the award assembly. Young argued to have the same standards used each time. Cox says he would donate a camera that can be used to do this and then AFA-NIET used in future. Young will put up the livestreaming on the 2016 host site. He will also bring with him the specifics of how it was done. PASSED
OFFICER ELECTIONS
A. NIET Vice-Chair (2-year term)
Mayfield was nominated for vice chair by A. Brown and Thompson seconded.
Mayfield was elected by acclamation.
B. NIET Tournament Director (1-year term)
Schnoor was nominated by T. Brown and seconded by Mayfield.
Schnoor was elected by acclamation. PASSED
C. NIET Webmaster (2-year term; Chair in consultation with the NIET Committee)
Pober asked if the committee would approve Dave Worth as his reappointment to this non-voting member position. Committee gladly agreed.
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by more than one and quickly seconded by a plethora of voices. Adjournment
at 2:38
Proposal for Internet Usage in Extemporaneous Speaking
(See addendum A)
Current language:
8. In Extemporaneous Speaking the following rules shall apply:
a. Different topic areas will be used for each round.
b. The use of electronic information retrieval systems during any part of preparation time, is strictly prohibited. The Tournament Director will consider requests for exemptions because of handicaps, etc.
c. Attendance in the Extemporaneous Speaking Preparation Room is restricted to monitors appointed by the Tournament Director and contestants in the event.
d. Because Extemporaneous Speaking is an Individual event, contestants are expected to prepare speeches on their own without consultation with others.
Proposed change:
8. In Extemporaneous Speaking the following rules shall apply:
a. Different topic areas will be used for each round.
b. The use of electronic information retrieval systems during any part of preparation time, is strictly prohibited. The Tournament Director will consider requests for exemptions because of handicaps, etc. is allowed. At district tournaments and the AFA-NIET, tournament hosts may provide internet access to contestants but are not required to do so.
c. Attendance in the Extemporaneous Speaking Preparation Room is restricted to monitors appointed by the Tournament Director and contestants in the event.
d. Because Extemporaneous Speaking is an Individual event, contestants are expected to prepare speeches on their own without consultation with others.
Rationale:
*** In researching this issue and our current language toward Internet usage, it became clear that our current ruleset as posted does not reflect current practice. The phrase “use of electronic information retrieval systems” does not differentiate between online and offline activity; therefore, the current practice of retrieving information from a computer not connected to the Internet could also be ruled in violation of the rules. I have constructed the following rationale assuming our current practice; however, whether or not Internet is allowed in preparation time, this discrepancy should be addressed.
Rationale for allowing Internet usage in extemporaneous speaking preparation time:
Competitive equity. With access to online retrieval systems nearly ubiquitous in today’s society (with laptops, smartphones, and tablets all available), the current prohibition on Internet usage only serves to heighten equity issues between programs. Traditional approaches to pre-tournament extemp preparation privilege programs with multiple extemporaneous competitors who can share filing responsibilities. Allowing the Internet in extemp prep would not eliminate these disparities but would level the playing field for the program with 1-2 extemporaneous speakers.
Enforcement. Enforcement of the current ruleset is exceptionally difficult. Not only must the extemp monitors check to ensure that wireless capacity is turned off on all computers (which is difficult), competitors can easily violate the rule by quickly checking a smartphone or other device for additional sources in transit from the extemp prep space to their competition room. The rule only punishes those who adhere to the rule while having little to no way to check those who would violate it.
Accuracy and ethics. There will be less of a motivation for competitors to fabricate or distort evidence/citations if Internet usage is allowed. Once again, the rule only punishes those who adhere to the rule and to the Code of Ethics. While this effect of the rule may be addressed by judges who could question the veracity of a source, in actuality most judges do not have the ability or confidence to make assertions while filling out a ballot.
New information. Competitors can process and include information on rapidly changing topics. This allows speeches to better reflect current information rather than information acquired in the days before the tournament, and diminishes the need to file during the tournament (which harms student wellness).
Pedagogy. While the pedagogical benefits of pre-tournament extemp preparation are certainly understood, it is questionable whether current practice actually requires rigorous preparation prior to the tournament. By accessing RSS feeds, automatic downloaders and other tools that aggregate online information for offline searches, extemp competitors can currently create a digital environment that models online access while still being offline.
Additionally, while Internet access may in some ways change the event, those changes can be positive pedagogically as well. Quick information retrieval, processing, and synthesis are skills that will benefits students in their post-competitive careers. There is no reason why extemporaneous speaking cannot provide those benefits.
Finally, competitors who still maintain a rigorous pre-tournament preparation will still be at a substantial advantage to those learning about a topic during preparation time.
Uniformity with other forensics associations. NFA, PKD, and PRP, along with regional organizations such as the Northwest Forensics Conference, have changed their rulesets to allow for Internet access during preparation time. Allowing online resources will create a more uniform standard for extemporaneous preparation for invitational tournaments throughout the season.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal: Eliminate the binder/manuscript in Dramatic Interpretation for a 2-year period
Addendum B
Proposal: Eliminate the binder/manuscript in Dramatic Interpretation for a 2-year period after which the NIET Committee would revisit the issue and decide whether to extend the period or re-establish the binder/manuscript requirement.
Rationale:
1) The NIET Committee voted to focus the event description for Dramatic Interpretation on “the development of character” with the following approved wording:
Drama Interpretation: A cutting that represents one or more characters from a play or plays of literary merit. A primary focus of this event should be on the development of characterization. This material may be drawn from stage, screen or radio. Use of manuscript is required; Maximum time limit is 10 minutes including introduction.
2) Given this focus, we should consider definitions of “development of character” as articulated by Oral Interpretation scholars both outside of forensics and within our discipline. Charlotte Lee and Timothy Gura in their 8th edition of Oral Interpretation define character as incorporating “bodily action.” They write, “Bodily action includes movements of the head, arms, shoulders, hands, torso, and legs, and changes in posture, facial expressions, and muscle tone of the entire body. Modern interpreters know that the test of bodily action is the ability to communicate the literature at hand. Bodily action is effective only when it suits the material and thus helps elicit the desired response.” They conclude on the following page (117) that “a responsive body is such an important factor in the total process of communication…” Within our discipline, Hindman, Shackelford, and Schlottach wrote in their 1991 Working Forensics: A Competitor’s Guide, “The more details that you add and the more that you rehearse, the easier the characters are to create and control.” They continue in their discussion of Dramatic Interpretation on p. 193,”The character…is shown through focus as well as voice and body.” They conclude with an analysis of “character physicality” that addresses gestures and full upper body use.
3) Our community continues to address the process of recruitment from secondary education. The elimination of the binder would make the transition of those involved in high school Dramatic Interpretation easier.
4) The reason for not making the binder optional in the proposal reverts to a previous discussion about this issue: students could be adjudicated based on the judge’s paradigm and those not following suit might be penalized for one choice or the other. Additionally, given the recent discussion of “standards,” the elimination of the binder for this trial period would put everyone on the same level playing field as it would be the “standard” for DI.
5) The proposal is only for DI. I firmly believe the use of the binder in program events and Dramatic Duo helps to propel time shifts, illuminate intertextual performance issues, and guide the audience across multiple texts. Again, the proposal is only for a 2-year trial period.