Franklin Township Public Schools



Debate

Should College Athletes Be Paid??? Student-athletes generate billions of dollars for universities and private companies. Student-athletes earn free tuition, which over the course of four years can exceed $200,000. They are also provided with housing, textbooks, food and academic tutoring. When they travel to road games, they are given per diems for meals.

Should college athletes be paid more? Bill Clinton might say it depends on what the definition of "paid" is. There is a significant and growing gap between the value of a scholarship and what a student-athlete genuinely needs. Many people in college sports have argued that the scholarship model needs to be updated so this gap can be closed.

However, when so many others talk about college athletes getting "paid," they are not talking about merely the cost of attendance. They're talking about giving athletes what they're "worth." It's a convincing argument when cast alongside the mind-boggling dollars that are pouring in. The SEC recently surpassed the $1 billion mark for football receipts. The Big Ten is close behind at $905 million. The football programs at Texas, Florida, Georgia, Michigan and Penn State earn between $40 million and $80 million each year in profits. The NCAA received $771 million from CBS and Turner to broadcast last year's basketball tournament.

The NCAA basketball tournaments, or "March Madness," have become a huge business. As Forbes' Chris Smith wrote, CBS and Turner Broadcasting make more than $1 billion off the games, "thanks in part to a $700,000 ad rate for a 30-second spot during the Final Four." Athletic conferences receive millions of dollars in payouts from the NCAA when their teams advance deep into the tournament. Ditto for the coaches of the final squads standing. The NCAA, as a whole, makes $6 billion annually.

The huge amount of money being made off college sports has led some to question whether student-athletes can be considered amateurs any longer, and whether they should, instead, be paid for their efforts. A group of former players has filed an antitrust lawsuit alleging that student athletes are entitled to some of the money the NCAA makes off of using their names and likenesses on merchandise such as jerseys and video games. But on the flip side, the argument can be made that the opportunity to both receive an education and get the exposure to win a major professional contract more than compensates NCAA athletes for their efforts. "Rather than push college athletics further and further from academics, we need to bring it closer," says NCAA president Mike Emmert.

So should NCAA athletes be paid?

Directions:

The class will be split up into 2 teams; one team that thinks college athletes should be paid and the other that does not think college they should be paid. There are two parts to this assignment.

1. Each individual is responsible for a paper supporting his or her side. This paper is a research paper that has a minimum of 2 pages (not double spaced). Any and every source and piece of researched information needs to be cited to make your paper credible. This part of the project will be done on a Google Drive Word Document. As always, you will need to share it with me @ mr.riverso@.

2. Each team needs to choose 3 of their top arguments for a class debate. These 3 arguments will be put into a Google Drive Presentation along with their sources and also shared with me @ mr.riverso@. I understand these may be big groups but you will have 2 whole class periods to work on this and get the top 3 points prepped and ready for your debate. As a group and team you need to think of the other sides argument and make sure that you have evidence (FACTS) to help refute their claims. I feel the best way to achieve a team goal here is assign group tasks within the overall group. For example assign a group of individuals to come up with the top three arguments or a group of people to find rebuttals, etc…

3. You will be given 5 days in class to complete this whole assignment. On the 6th day everything is due in my shared file. That means your paper and your groups Google Presentation with arguments and rebuttals. On the 6th day you will also have your class debate.

1st period: Due April 2nd.

2nd period: Due April 2nd

4th period: Due April 2nd

6th period: Due April 2nd

Debate Rules: The classroom debates are exercises designed to allow you to strengthen your skills in the areas of leadership, interpersonal influence, teambuilding, group problem solving, and oral presentation. All group members are expected to participate in the research, development, and presentation of your debate position. Preparation will require substantial computer research.

***Attack the idea not the person. Do not present opinion as facts!!!

Debate Format

First argument:

4 minute Position Presentation – Pro

4 minute Position Presentation – Con

2 minute Work Period

2 minute Rebuttal - Pro

2 minute Rebuttal – Con

Second Argument:

4 minutes - Pro

4 minutes– Con

2 minute Work Period

2 minute Rebuttal-Pro

2 minute Rebuttal- Con

Third Argument:

4 minutes - Pro

4 minutes– Con

2 minute Work Period

2 minute Rebuttal-Pro

2 minute Rebuttal- Con

Closing Remarks:

4 minutes- Pro

4 Minutes- Con

While a team is not required to use all of the time allocated to each debate component, speakers must stop immediately when the allocated time runs out. Team members are prohibited from speaking to the audience or opposing team except at the times specifically allocated to them. Thus, there can be no immediate, reciprocal interchange of comments between the teams.

Debate Grading Rubric

Names___________________________________________ Date___________________

Team: 1 2

|Criteria |5 |4 |3 |2 |Score |

|1. Organization & Clarity |Completely clear and |Mostly clear and |Clear in some parts |Unclear and | |

|Main arguments and responses|orderly presentation. |orderly in all parts. |but not overall. |disorganized | |

|are outlined in a clear and |Used several visuals |Visuals/props used |Limited visuals/props |throughout. No | |

|orderly way. Enhanced with |and props to enhance |weren’t explained |used, not appropriate |visuals or props | |

|visuals. |presentation. |fully | |used. | |

|2. Opening Statement |Excellent explanation |Many good facts and |Some decent |Few or no real | |

|Explained and defined energy|of energy source using|definitions were given|descriptions but |definitions or | |

|source |many definitions and |with only minor gaps |little supporting |explanations given. | |

| |descriptions | |facts given. | | |

|3. Affirmative Statements: |Very persuasive |Many good arguments |Some decent arguments,|Few or no real | |

|demonstrated knowledge of |arguments are |given with only minor |but little research to|arguments given and | |

|subject supported by |supported by research |problems |support it |no supporting | |

|research | | | |research | |

|4. Negative Rebuttals: |Excellent rebuttals |Many good arguments |Arguments showed |Arguments showed no | |

|Made specific arguments |which focused on the |about the opposing |little knowledge about|real knowledge of the| |

|about the weak points of the|weak points of the |team using some facts |opposing team |opposing team | |

|opposing team |opposing team using |and statistics | | | |

| |specific facts and | | | | |

| |statistics | | | | |

|5. Affirmative Rebuttals: |Used excellent new |Many good facts which |Had some problems |Was unable to give | |

|The team was able to defend |researched facts to |supported their side |coming up with facts |any facts to defend | |

|itself against attack by |support their side | |to defend their side |its side | |

|extending own position using| | | | | |

|additional facts to support | | | | | |

|claim | | | | | |

|6. Closing Statement |Summarized the main |Summarized some but |Lacked detail in |Did not summarize the| |

|Summarized the main points |points in detail, |not all main points, |summary. |main points of both | |

|of the debate |highlighting the |highlighting the | |viewpoints. | |

| |positive points in |positive points in | | | |

| |their argument and the|their argument and the| | | |

| |negative details in |negative details in | | | |

| |their opposition’s |their opposition’s | | | |

| |arguments |arguments | | | |

Total Score _____/30 = ________

|Dimension |Sophisticated |Competent |Needs Work |

|Introduction |Position and exceptions, if any, are clearly |Position is clearly stated. Organization of argument is |Position is vague. Organization of argument is missing, |

| |stated. Organization of the argument is |clear in parts or only partially described and mostly |vague, or not consistently maintained. |

| |completely and clearly outlined and implemented. |implemented. |0-3 pts |

| |5-10 pts |3-5 pts | |

|Research |Research selected is highly relevant to the |Research is relevant to the argument and is mostly |Research selected is not relevant to the argument or is |

| |argument, is presented accurately and completely |accurate and complete – there are some unclear components |Vague and incomplete – components are missing or |

| |– the method, results, and implications are all |or some |inaccurate or unclear. |

| |presented accurately; Theory is relevant, |minor errors in the method, results or implications. |Theory is not relevant or only relevant for some aspects; theory |

| |accurately described and all relevant components |Theory is relevant and accurately described, some |is not clearly articulated and/or has incorrect or |

| |are included; relationship between research and |components may not be present or are unclear. |incomplete components. Relationship between theory |

| |theory is clearly articulated and accurate. |Connection to theory is mostly clear and complete, |and research is unclear or inaccurate, major errors |

| |5-10 pts |or has some minor errors. 3-5 pts |in the logic are present. |

| | | |0-3pts |

|Conclusions |Conclusion is clearly stated and connections to |Conclusion is clearly stated and connections to research |Conclusion may not be clear and the connections to the |

| |the research and position are clear and relevant.|and position are mostly clear, some aspects may not be |research are incorrect or unclear or just a repetition of |

| |The underlying logic is explicit. |connected or minor errors in logic are present. 3-5 pts |the findings without explanation. Underlying logic |

| |5-10 pts | |has major flaws; connection to position is not clear. |

| | | |0-3pts |

|Writing |Paper is coherently organized and the logic is |Paper is generally well organized and most of the argument|Paper is poorly organized and difficult to read – |

| |easy to follow. There are no spelling or |is easy to follow. There are only a few minor spelling or |does not flow logically from one part to another. |

| |grammatical errors and terminology is clearly |grammatical errors, or terms are not clearly defined. |There are several spelling and/or grammatical errors; |

| |defined. Writing is clear and concise and |Writing is mostly clear but may lack conciseness. 3-5 |technical terms may not be defined or are poorly defined. Writing lacks clarity |

| |persuasive. |pts |and conciseness. 0-3 pts |

| |5-10 pts | | |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download