AKA Letters to a new Director of Forensics
This is the first of a (I don’t know how many part) series of articles of articles that I’d encourage anyone still involved in forensics (not just new directors) to reexamine. I’ll start off with the man affectionately referred to as the “Godfather of Forensics,” Professor Larry Schnoor. For those of you who don’t know who he is, it’s worth your time to look him up. He’s directed several major tournaments for many years, has forgotten more about forensics than most of us ever learned, and has left a mark on the activity that will be unequaled.
The article I’m selecting from this series is Larry’s keynote address to Pi Kappa Delta, found in the Summer 1995 issue of The Forensic. I don’t know if I’m allowed to put this one online, since The Forensic sadly isn’t found in most of the major databases. But chances are you can probably find someone who has a copy of it.
I won’t spoil a funny story in this article of Larry reminiscing about an extemp question he was asked when he was a competitor. The thought of Larry doing extemp in his trademark style amuses me. He really should have taken 1st place in that round if his story is remotely accurate.
Rather than give a standard article review, I’m going to pull out four particular quotations from this article among many, because these are four ideas that are as true in 2022 as they were in 1995.
We must believe that forensics is an educational laboratory experience for the understanding, appreciation of and gaining skills in the art and craft of oral communication.
Schnoor, Larry. “What Direction Are We Traveling? Keynote Address to the 1995 PKD Professional Development Conference.” The Forensic 80, no. 4 (Summer 1995): 3.
This is what interscholastic debate and intercollegiate forensics helped me (and many others) to do. There are a great deal of social benefits to be gained from forensics as well, but first and foremost, it is an activity that helps students to gain communication skills. For some students, the competitive aspect helps those lessons to become more meaningful.[1]I recognize that’s not true for everyone. I may get to this in another article in this series.
Whatever direction a forensic program takes, it is my firm belief that if it is based on sound educational principles, regardless of budget, travel, or national tournaments, it will be successful and will be recognized as a solid program by colleagues across the nation.
pages 3-4
I think that this is the hope of all of us who direct or have directed a forensics program. We all don’t have access to the same resources, financial or otherwise. But what we do (did) have was a desire to make a difference when it comes in the lives of students because of what forensics did for us.
The hardest part about being considered “solid” is what that word means in the dual aspect of being a coach as well as being a professional who is part of the community. I also think that’s why one of the most important things you can control as a forensics professional is your own ballots. I know that there can be a tendency to not give many comments so as to not overly help others who can then beat your own students. But if forensics is an educational activity, then it’s important to teach others, whether they’re from your school or not. And it’s also a way of developing your own reputation as a professional. Goodness only knows it takes several years (for most people) to get a program to a point where it can be competitive on a larger scale — but in the meantime, you can develop your reputation, which I think eventually filters down to the students you coach.
And I think it’s also important to remember that forensics is a big community made of several smaller communities. I didn’t have the overall resources to go head-to-head against UT-Austin or other large schools on a regular basis, so I had to decide what was our peer group. Who did we want to be compared to? But admittedly, every so often, it’s important to see if a smaller team can hang with the larger ones. And we did so on enough occasions to know it could be done.[2]That said, there are a LOT of factors to consider, such as family, getting promotion/tenure/renewal, that come into play. In no way am I implying that any of these decisions come in a vacuum.
One would also do well to consider the following 12 items by Larry as leading to an “educationally sound philosophy of forensic activities:”
- Does the forensic program teach a code of ethics?
- Does the forensic program help students understand and use the reflective process in reaching conclusions?
- Does the forensic program enable students to gain knowledge and understanding about the communicative process?
- Does the forensic program allow for the students to receive a realistic evaluation of their speech performances in comparison with others?
- Does the forensic program grow out of the curriculum? If not, is the program working at cross purposes with the department? What is needed in order to develop a positive link with the department? Does the program have the respect and support of the department and if not, why not?
- Does the forensic program place too much stress on “national recognition and achievement” in relation to the overall goals and objectives of the program?
- Does the forensic program maintain a sound and proper perspective on winning in relationship to the educational values derived by participants in the program? What is the relationship between the awards received and the educational growth of the student?
- Does the forensic program limit participation to only those students that “win” or does it allow all students with an interest to participate?
- Does the program take an adequate look at the student’s interests, needs, abilities, and capacities?
- Does the program succeed in teaching social responsibility?
- Does the program call for systematic evaluation of the director – coaches – as to what they accomplish and to what they want to accomplish?
- Does the program take advantage of enough opportunities in the community to give students experiences outside of “competition?” (page 5)
This is a long and worthy list. It’s not easy to do all 12 of these items and do them well. I wish I had done more on #12. We did really well on #8. Novice divisions help with #4.
And it’s important that students get pushed sometimes when it comes to #9. I still remember one of my former students (who sadly passed away some years ago) telling me that there was no way she could do impromptu — until she made it consistently to finals at tournaments. Or another student who found that After Dinner Speaking was her jam.
I know of no other activity that is able to instill the awareness, interest, knowledge, understanding, and intense concentration on social problems and propositions as successfully and everlastingly as is done in forensic participation. Addressing the searching questions on civil rights, family abuse, health care, gun control, government regulations, interpersonal communication, and the list could go on and on, allows the participants in forensics to be informed and knowledgeable about events and issues as no other activity can accomplish.
page 6.
And that’s why forensics belongs as a part of high school and college co-curricular education.
Notes