Page images
PDF
EPUB

by the replies and the number of schools using each one is as

follows:

Public Speaking-Winans__

Effective Speaking-Phillips..
Fundamentals of Speech-Woolbert-.
Essentials of Speech-Pelsma____
Purposive Speaking-West.

Public Speaking-Shurter_.

Elements of Public Speaking-Houghton_

The Delivery of a Speech-Immel_

Speech Making-Hollister..

Elements of Speech-O'Neill & Weaver.

_5

2

3

2

2

.1

1

1

Public Speaking Today-Lockwood & Thorpe-1
The Speaking of English-Gilson--

Platform Speaking-Collins-

1

The above list indicates only the fundamental text in use. In many cases supplementary material is assigned in other books dealing with theory, in others of the above texts and in books of specimens. About half of those replying indicated that they have their students study speech models in connection with their own speeches.

The prevailing practice is for the students to deliver original speeches applying the theory learned by text and lectures and in which both the ideas and the form of the speech are stressed. Some schools combine this work in original speeches with readings for vocal development and training in delivery. In a few schools most of the time of the course is given to delivery with a study of the voice, enunciation and the principles of expression while the original speech is used only incidentally.

On the kinds of speeches required of students in the fundamental course there is less agreement than in other matters. The best I can do here is to indicate all of the types of speeches used with the number of times each one is mentioned in descriptions of the courses.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

When the above named speeches are used the most prevalent procedure is to begin with short informal speeches, then to proceed to the longer ones, with a final eight to twelve minute speech at the close of the term. Some teachers have their students begin with personal experiences or short informal speeches on familiar subject matter which will emphasize naturalness and directness of style. Later come four or five minute speeches which require the gathering of material and in which the emphasis is upon the logical arrangement. All sorts of topics are used depending generally upon the interests of the student, but present day questions in economics, politics and sociology were mentioned most frequently in the replies to the questionnaires.

In the matter of criticism of speeches the replies showed practical agreement. All teachers criticize the speeches of students mostly before the class or both privately and in class. In one case alone is the criticism given only privately. One teacher says that she gives criticism privately at first and later before the class. Seventeen have the students criticize the speeches of each other, three do not. A device used by one teacher is to have the students write the criticisms on cards and hand them to the speaker at the close of the hour.

It has not been my purpose to offer criticism of this course, but merely to make a summary of the content and of the methods used. This has been made difficult by the lack of agreement as to what the course should offer and the wide variation in method. As a great many of the students take only this course it seemed to me that a summary of this kind would give a good idea of what training in Speech our elementary teachers have.

The chief impression left upon me by this investigation is that the teachers' colleges and normal schools, if they are to meet the purpose for which they were founded, must provide more definite work in speech training. If we are to do anything to make the people of this country more articulate, the work must begin in the elementary schools. This simply means that the teachers in these schools must not only possess good speech, but they must have a knowledge of the problems involved in the teaching of good speech and good reading. In this direction lies one of the great opportunities of the normal schools in American education.

A SURVEY OF INTERCOLLEGIATE DEBATE IN THE MIDWEST DEBATE CONFERENCE

MILDRED FREBURG BERRY
Rockford College

(This Conference is an association of colleges in the Middle West which has for its purpose the promotion of intercollegiate discussion of public questions. Members of the Conference felt that they would be aided materially in solving their own local problems by securing a unified statement of the management of debate in other institutions. A questionnaire was sent to one hundred and three colleges in the Middle West; fifty-six institutions responded. The results are presented here.)

I. THE FINANCING OF DEBATE.

The returns from the questionnaire indicate that most of the colleges have established a definite financial plan which guarantees them a specified sum of money each year for intercollegiate debate.

1. Computing the average, we find that each college spent $697.54 to carry on debate during 1926-27.

2. 42 schools or 78% rely on student assessment. 3 of these schools receive in addition some aid from the general college budget. 39 or 72.7% of the colleges rely entirely on student assessment.

3. 13 schools receive their entire support for forensics from the general college budget.

The

4. 11 schools are aided by revenue from debate. 35 schools note that they cannot look for any revenue from debate. largest amount of revenue from debate noted is $200.

5. The average assessment on the student for debate is $1.00 plus. The range of assessment is from $.17 to $2.00. Only two schools, however, have an assessment of less than $.50 and in these two cases the student enrollment is over 1500.

II. TYPES OF DEBATE.

1. The preference of the colleges is for one of two types of debate: the "open-forum-no-decision" or the "expert decision" (one judge) debate. 46 schools note that they use the first plan; 44 schools note the second. It must be remembered that each college had the opportunity to record every form it had used. Unfortunately the writer neglected to request that the number of each type used be recorded. Two-thirds of the colleges noted, however, that they used the no-decision-open-forum type most frequently. The following comment is typical of the statements in support of the first plan: "We found the no-decision style followed by an audience discussion very satisfactory. It seemed to produce a more virile and original style of debating. There was more personality displayed than otherwise was the case." Only 22 schools made use of an audience decision on the merits of the question before and after the debate. 25 schools have had decision debates followed by an open forum; 34 have employed the traditional three judges to decide the issue.

2. That colleges show little inclination to reduce the number of speakers on a team is evident from the reports. 56 or all of the colleges maintain that the "3-man team" is the best. 22 schools note, to be sure, that they have participated in "2-man" debates but these seem to have been only single experiences. The notation, "but once, "in answer to this question seems to indicate that it does not have ardent support. Only 3 colleges reported having engaged in a "split-team" debate.

3. In regard to the most popular number of rebuttal speeches, there can be little doubt. It is true that 21 institutions have engaged in 1-rebuttal debates but the highest number of this type in any one college was five. Contrast with this the fact that 52 schools heard six rebuttal speeches in 9 out of every 10 debates. 14 colleges have varied their debates by having two rebuttals but here again it seems to have been the variation rather than the rule.

4. The "off-campus" debate has taken great strides forward. In 43 colleges this form of debate is in favor. The number of such

debates ranges from 2 to 24. There is something more than numbers that convinces the writer of the popularity of this variation in audience. "Our off-campus debates are favored by our debaters." "We debated the McNary-Haugen Bill before ten nearby farm clubs; it went over." "It is my intention to arrange an extensive program of debates before civic organizations next year. Some of the debates will be intercollegiate, some between two 0teams. These are all to be no-decision debates but the audience will vote on the question before and after the debate." "We held five debates before organizations and 18 before high school or community groups." "Our most popular debates are held before luncheon clubs and the Chamber of Commerce." R-College writes of the off-campus debate: "In each case the audience was a farm group and the debaters felt that the debates were the most interesting and profitable in which they had ever engaged." These are typical comments made in support of this type of debate.

III. ADMINISTRATION OF DEBATE.

1. 45 of the 56 institutions responding award academic credit for debate. The average number of credits is 2 hours a semester. The method of awarding this credit varies with colleges. One college allows three hours per semester, the total number of hours to be accumulated in this manner not to exceed twelve. Another college awards two hours to members of the first year squad, three hours to members of the sophomore, junior and senior squads. Credit at another institution is given to the members of the squad who are enrolled in the course, "Debate Seminar. At A-College "a student in debate earns two semester hours each year. This may be repeated for four years." In another instance, a student must register for credit in the fall; three hours are given. At WCollege freshmen and sophomores register for "Argumentation and Debate," juniors and seniors for "Seminar in Argumentation and Rhetoric."

[ocr errors]

The question of awarding credit to the entire squad shows a divided opinion. 25 of the 45 schools who award credit believe that it should be given to the entire squad; the remaining twenty award it to the intercollegiate debaters only. Such comments as the following may be helpful: "Credit is awarded to debaters who participate in certain specified debates only." At G-College, "credit is given to all on the squad but those who make the team

« PreviousContinue »