Georgine Hodgkinson, Professor of Communication Studies

Motivating Debate Students: Coursework and Curriculum Design that Supports Students, Earth Week & OneBook Efforts

By

Georgine Hodgkinson, Professor of Communication Studies

Type B Sabbatical Leave – Spring 2014

Report Submission: October 20, 2014

Abstract

This project was approved for a Type B Sabbatical (.2 fte) and designed to meet the following three objectives: First, this project was an opportunity for me to strengthen my academic background in coaching techniques—curriculum relevant to my work with students enrolled in Communication Studies 311 (Argumentation and Debate). Second, it provided for curriculum adaptations designed to facilitate student engagement in campus life during the spring 2014 semester. Finally, it supported collegiality by contributing related project activities and results to a shared D2L site. All of these objectives were achieved. In fact, my involvement with campus activities during the Spring 2014 semester surpassed initially planned involvement—I even got to interview Michael Pollan during the Earth Day Sustainable Food Festival!

Introduction

This project focused on three primary objectives. The first objective promised the successful completion of a graduate level course to improve coaching skills. The second was to redesign Comm 311 curriculum to compliment CRC’s OneBook text selection and Earth Week activities. And finally, the third objective was to share relevant coaching materials, OneBook-related curriculum redesign results, and Earth Week live debate reflections with interested faculty via the Comm 311 shared D2L site.

Discussion of Completed Tasks and Objectives:

A Detailed Account of the Leave

The first completed task for this sabbatical project was the completion of a graduate-level course on coaching titled, Motivating Athletes:

Coaching Course Information:

Top of Form
COURSE #: / KINE_728
Category: / Sports and Coaching
Course Title: / Motivating Athletes
Semester Credits: / 3
Cost: / $315.00
Description: / Motivation is one of the central issues in human affairs, and nowhere is the concept of motivation more misunderstood than in sports. This course explores determinants of achievement, expectancies, incentive values of success and failure, and personality factors that come into play when a person participates in competition. Positive coaching techniques and advice from hundreds of winners motivate the student to "go for the gold!"
Bottom of Form

As indicated by the transcript in Attachment A, I successfully completed this course last spring with an “A.” The textbooks used in this class In Pursuit of Excellence: How to Win in Sport and Life Through Mental Training by Terry Orlick and What Makes Winners Win: Over 100 Athletes, Coaches, and Managers Tell You the Secrets of Success by Charlie Jones, along with research papers required in the course, contributed to an expanded background on coaching techniques. The course was particularly relevant since it allowed me to adapt assignments to my Comm 311 class.

The second objective for this leave focused on adapting Comm 311 curriculum to link with OneBook and Earth Week activities. These objectives were also met. I used the following debate resolution in Comm 311: Resolved: That the United States Federal Government should significantly strengthen food production regulation(s) in an effort to improve the quality of food consumed by the general public. Hence, our class debates and related preparation utilized sources such as Pollan’s Omnivore’s Dilemma; I even assigned this book as a required class text. In addition to this direct OneBook tie, Comm 311 students also participated in Earth Day activities. Specifically, they hosted a “Students Debate Food Issues” event. (See attachment B for the related assignment, Attachment C for event promotional information, and the Inside CRC link for more highlights of my interview with Michael Pollan).

In addition, we discussed student experiences after their Earth Day debates on D2L. To give you a sense of the impact this sabbatical project had on students, I have included a few of the responses they posted on our class discussion board that week:

Discussion Prompt: So...What do you think about our class event: Communication Studies Students Debate Food Issues? How do you feel about your performance? Which debate do you think was the most interesting? Which of your classmates most surprised you? Impressed you? Is mostlikely to be the next president?

I thought that our class event for Earth Week Debates was really nerve racking, but pretty fun. The material for the debate wasn't too bad, but the only thing that made me nervous was public speaking. Aside from that, I thoroughly enjoyed the event - the Michael Pollon interview and our participation for public debates. I felt my performance was decent, definitely know that I could do better for future presentations with memorization and connecting with the audience though...it'll just take practice. I learned more that with more practice, the more confidence you'll have when delivering a speech in front of a public audience; no matter how nervous you feel beforehand. … I was not surprised, but impressed with Jordan's performance due to his lack of using his notes. It strengthened his connection with the audience and showed his confidence very well. I actually think that everyone did a great job during these debates. It was really fun to have all of us together and participate for a public event.-Melanie Quebral

I was really nervous to debate in front of people that weren't in our class. It was actually really fun to speak to a larger audience though. Larissa and Salwa definitely had some great evidence and really good quotes and I could tell they did the research and I commend them for that. As for who is likely to be the next president I think I’ll just have to wait and see if one day one of us ends up on the presidential ballot. –Jon Michael Nepomuceno

I think everyone did a great job! Everyone added something new to the final debate. It was nice to have a different audience even though a lot of people left after the first two debate. There were not that many people by the time by team went so that was good.-Tajinder Kaur

I think I did pretty well. Not as well as I would have liked, but I found myself not relying on my notes as much as I did during practice. I know that I rushed through the speech and spoke really fast. I wasn't as nervous as I thought I'd be, as I was pretty comfortable seeing familiar faces in the audience…. I really liked Alex and Ben's debate. I thought they're points were really good and well presented. Really, everyone did an exceptional job with the speeches. :o)-Salwa Mikbel

I think we all did well, so well, in fact, that none of the people who originally watched the first two debates should have left. They just don't know what good debates are. It was different debating with other people in the room, but a good kind of different. I have to give a shout out to Christian to improving 1000 times his first speech and basically winning our side (farm subsidies don't feed America, by the way). I also have to give it to Ben and Alex for laughing at my speech during the debate, a good way to discredit me. Besides that, good job everyone.–Jordan Eldridge

The third objective for this sabbatical project was to share the results and the curriculum developed with other faculty on our shared D2L site: “CRC Arg(you)Mentation.” On this site I have added related materials under the “Content Tab” titled “Debate and Campus Life.” Here, other instructors have access to in-class materials I created for this project. I have enrolled Patty Felkner, Chair of the Professional Standards Committee, in this shared D2L site. Please let me know if any other committee members are interested in taking a look at this shared site.

In conclusion, I would like to thank the Professional Standards Committee for their support of this project. My involvement with OneBook efforts and Earth Day events turned into a much bigger project than I anticipated, but I am so grateful that I had the opportunity to engage these activities and involve CRC students.

Attachment A

Unofficial Transcript
Term: Spring 2013 NonDegree Prof Dev
College: / Education and Org Leadership
Major: / Major Not Declared
Student Type: / Special
Academic Standing: / Good Standing
Subject / Course / Campus / Level / Title / Grade / Credit Hours / Quality Points / Start and End Dates / R
MSS / 728 / Non Degree Prof Development / 07 / Motivating Athletes / A / 3.000 / 12.00 / I
Term Totals (Non-Degree)
Attempt Hours / Passed Hours / Earned Hours / GPA Hours / Quality Points / GPA
Current Term: / 12.000 / 12.000 / 12.000 / 12.000 / 48.00 / 4.00
Cumulative: / 35.000 / 35.000 / 35.000 / 35.000 / 140.00 / 4.00

The University of La Verne offers Professional Development Courses that are non-classroom courses for educators. These courses are graduate level, non-degree credit courses. They may be taken online or in a paper format. Courses require no classroom attendance. Students are actively involved in the course process through relevant materials, current research and professor contact.

Attachment B

Thursday, April 24

Comm 311 Students: 12-1:20

Winn Center

The format of collegiate debate is somewhat esoteric. To make our debate activity more accessible to people with no collegiate debate background, these debates will be modified after Intelligence Squared debates.

Take a look at the debate on “Don’t Eat Anything With a Face”:

http://intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/past-debates/item/910-dont-eat-anything-with-a-face

For this debate event, students must prepare (and practice!) persuasive “position papers” for and against the resolution. Presentations should be 5 minutes in length. 1st aff speaker and 1st neg speaker will conclude with 1-2 minute summary statements (i.e. final rebuttal speeches—may be impromptu in nature). Position Papers Due: Monday 4/21. Feel free to email me over spring break for early feedback. We will practice position speeches in class, and offer peer critiques, on 4/21!

Position Paper Format:

I.  Introduction:

A.  Catch audience’s attention (1-2 sentences)

B.  State your (and your team member’s) position on the resolution

C.  Preview

II.  Body (2-4 Major Ideas)

A.  Major Idea One: SLUG HERE

1.  Support with Evidence (credible opinion, explanation, data, narrative, explanation…)

2.  Support with Evidence

B.  Major Idea Two: SLUG HERE

1.  Support with Evidence (credible opinion, explanation, data, narrative, explanation…)

2.  Support with Evidence

III.  Conclusion

A.  Review major ideas

B.  End memorably

Consider team approach: Are you and your partner giving two separate arguments to support the resolution OR are you giving the first/second half of one argument? Clarify in your introduction.

Possible Resolutions

Resolved: Farm subsidies make it possible to feed the nation

Resolved: CAFOs are essential given America’s carnivorous appetite

Resolved: GMOs should be labeled

Resolved: Factory Farming does more harm than good

Resolved: “Organic” is overrated

Attachment C

Earth Day Sustainable Food Festival:

Communication Studies 311 Students Debate Food Issues!

Student Debates

Hodgkinson’s Comm 311

12-1:20 | Winn Center

Communication Studies 311: Argumentation and Debate introduces students to theories of argumentation, critical evaluation of evidence, and reasoning in the context of debate. This semester, argumentation and debate students joined OneBook’s food-focused efforts by reading Michael Pollan’s Omnivore’s Dilemma, researching salient issues related to food production, and writing affirmative and negative debate positions on relevant food topics. At this event, CRC students will debate the following resolutions:

Resolved: Farm subsidies make it possible to feed the nation

Affirmative Team: Ray Hernandez, Communication Studies Major

Davina Vo, Communication Studies Major

Negative Team: Jordan Eldridge, Fire Technology Major

Christian Matar, Communication Studies Major

Resolved: CAFOs are essential given America’s carnivorous appetite

Affirmative Team: Salwa Mikbel, BusinessAdmin Communication Studies Major

Larisa Torlak, Astrophysics & Aerospace Engineering Major

Negative Team: Michelle Xayavong, Health Care Administration Major

Jon Michael Nepomuceno, Dance Major

Resolved: Factory farming does more harm than good

Affirmative Team: Alex Fiatoa, Communication Studies Major

Ben Miller, Political Science Major

Negative Team: Caesar Espinoza, Kinesiology Major

Eduardo Olivia, Communication Studies Major

Resolved: “Organic” is overrated

Affirmative Team: Daniel Kolosovski, Communication Studies Major

Paul Castaneda, Communication Studies Major

Negative Team: Melanie Quebral, Communication Studies Major

Tajinder Kaur, Communication Studies Major