IHSA Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes - 2007-08

Speech Advisory Committee

April 2, 2008

The IHSA Speech Advisory Committee met at the IHSA Office in Bloomington on Wednesday, April 2, 2008, beginning at 10:00 a.m.   Committee members present were:  Division 1 Curt Maslanka - Debate Coach, Chicago (Lane); Division 2 Deb Woodard -Activities Director, Gurnee (Warren); Division 3 Kevin Martin - IE Coach, Harvey (Thornton); Division 4 Harvey Green - IE & Drama/GI Coach, Geneseo; Division 5 Diane Hutchins - Principal, Charleston; Division 6 Eric Ewan – IE Coach, Pekin: Division 7 Adam Jenkins - IE Coach, Belleville (West).  Mike Colletti, State Final Debate Manager (Palos Hills, Stagg). Pat Wozney and Jan Heiteen were also in attendance. Ken Carter represented SCOTTIE.  Susie Knoblauch, IHSA Assistant Executive Director, conducted the meeting. 
 
TERMS AND CONDITIONS RECOMMENDATIONS

I.    Debate

1.  Item III-E- On-Line List of Participants

Recommendation:  Change the deadline for the debate List of Participants date from Monday, February 18th as to Wednesday March 4th.  (2 weeks later)

Rationale:  Corresponding weeks for 08-09 would be changing from Feb 23, 2009 to Wednesday, March 4th, 2009. This would leave two week prior to the tournament for the debate manager to schedule rounds.  Since the entries are online scheduling is more manageable and this extended window will allow debate coaches the opportunity to enter students and make changes closer to tournament time.   This would also avoid having entries due on Presidents Day when many schools are not in session. 

approved

2.  Item VIII- A- 6-c. Tournament Rules – Policy Debate

Recommendation:  Delete- Judges shall not reveal their decisions to anyone prior to the announcement of results by the contest manager.
Add- Judges are not prohibited from oral critiques and/or disclosure of their decision to the debaters.         

Rationale:  This change would confirm the practice that has been occurring with oral critiques after rounds. 

approved

3.  Item VIII- B- 3- d. Tournament Rules – Lincoln-Douglas Debate

Recommendation:  A debater may take no more than four (4) minutes total elapsed preparation time during a round of debate. 

Rationale:  Currently the rules book states three (3) minutes for prep.  This change would bring the prep time in line with the rest of the debate world.  (This section needs to be moved to 3a/b time schedule and all others need to be lettered accordingly)

approved

4.  Item VIII.  B- 6- c. Tournament Rules – Lincoln - Douglas Debate

Recommendation:  Delete:  Judges shall not reveal their decisions to anyone prior to the announcement of results by the contest manager. Add- Judges are not prohibited from oral critiques and/or disclosure of their decision to the debaters.

Rationale:  This change would confirm the practice that has been occurring with oral critiques after rounds. 

approved

5.  Item VIII.- C.  Tournament Rules – Congressional Debate

Recommendation:  The legislation submitted will then be available to school both online and in a mailing.  (Delete:  “both” – and “in a mailing”)

Rationale:  Congress Legislation is only available on-line  

approved

6.  Item VIII-D. Tournament Rules – Public Forum Debate

Recommendation:  Delete:  Judges shall not reveal their decisions to anyone prior to the announcement of results by the contest manager.
Add- Judges are not prohibited from oral critiques and/or disclosure of their  decision to the debaters.

Rationale:  This change would confirm the practice that has been occurring with oral critiques after rounds. 

approved  

DEBATE ADMINISTRATIVE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  Add judges’ names to the List of Participants section of the IHSA Debate on line entry form.
2.  Delete the rubric items on the IHSA Public Forum Ballot
3.  Add Affirmative and Negative Points to the IHSA Lincoln-Douglas Ballot
4.  Long Term Debate Calendar -                                                                                                                             08-09    09-10   10-11   11-12

5.  Investigate using the ISU facilities as the State Final Venue, UIS has been a wonderful state site and Thomas Bartl has worked tremendously well with the IHSA and the Illinois debate coaches.  However, some feel that the ease to ISU, Amtrak, and renovations of Stevenson Hall and a nearby Marriott being built close to campus could accommodate the needs of the tournament and return the tournament to its traditional location. Susie will begin discussion with ISU. 
6.  All legislation bills will continue to be posted online and IHSA deadlines will be strictly adhered.  This information will also appear under the debate season calendar link.
7.  The IHSA debate website will continue to provide all pertinent information necessary for coaches to enter students and find out information regarding topics and deadlines.
8.  The IHSA will add to the debate calendar link on the IHSA website when bills are due (Jan. 30th).  All online posting dates will be included, in addition to NFL topics and the IHSA Tournament Rules, Manuals and Terms and Conditions.
9.  The IHSA will make all debate ballots available online
10.  Have coaches e-mail available to managers – This information could be used to e-mail debate coaches information regarding meeting and avoid the cost(s) in sending mailings.
11.  Publish the list of judges prior to contest so coaches can be better prepared to make their strike list. 
12.  Continue to promote the four debate events throughout the state.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS RECOMMENDATIONS
II.  Drama & Group Interpretation
1.  Item II- B.  Dates and Sites

Recommendation:  Dates for the contest are:  Sectional – March 20 & 21, 2009
                                                     State – March 26 & 27, 2009
Rationale:  This would place Drama - Group Interp back on their standardized calendar date and not conflict with Easter weekend.

approved

2.  Item III-E.  On-line List of Participants
Recommendation:  List of Participant Deadline….date of Wednesday the 25th of February.

Rationale:  This date would align the calendar in addition to avoiding the Monday after the IE state tournament and Presidents Day in which many schools are not in session.  This would still allow three weeks for information to be sent to the sectional tournament managers.   

approved

3.  Item VIII- D- 1. Tournament Rules
Recommendation:  Definition: Group Interp…compilations and original material.

Rationale:  There was some confusion if original material could be used in Group Interp.  This clearly spells out that original material may be used in Group Interpretation. Point of clarification is that material may be, but is not limited to original material, screenplays and graphic novels as well.

approved

4.  Item VIII-D-2. Tournament Rules

Recommendation:  The purpose of Group Interpretation is to give students experience in
the group performance of literature. The interrelatedness of the narrator(s), the
movement of the literature and character voices control the performance.
Add:  Group Interp encourages students to create an ensemble performance which showcases their interpretive skills and group work without the aid of costumes, make-up, set or props. Successful Group Interp. performances should be based primarily on interpretation.  Focus should be primarily off-stage, although mixed focus (a combination of off-stage and on-stage focus) is allowed. 

Rationale:  This will better clarify the intent of the Group Interpretation event.

approved

5.  Item VIII –D-5-g. Tournament Rules
Recommendation:  (Effective for the 2009 - 2010 seasons) Participating schools will be provided standard group interp. pieces.  No additional pieces are allowed by the competing schools.

Rationale:  To better level the playing field and avoid high production cost for schools, standard group interp pieces will be utilized by all sectionals and state final venues beginning in two years (2010-11 season).  The two year window will allow time for schools to make the necessary adjustments.  This change will also eliminate the need for the set design prohibition (g).  Groups meeting this summer will review and make more detailed recommendation of the specific pieces selected.

tabled

6.  Items X – D – Sportsmanship/Teamwork Awards

Recommendation:  A sportsmanship/teamwork award will be presented to the schools whose director, cast and crew in Drama and GI worked best behind the scenes.  Adult staff at UIS will be used to make this determination and selection.

Rationale:  In a time when sportsmanship and team work are such key elements to interscholastic competition it would be appropriate to recognize the school that goes above and beyond in working with tournament management and UIS personnel through out the competition weekend. 

approved

DRAMA/ GROUP INTERP. ADMINISTRATIVE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  Discussed having the IHSA make available the directors e-mails of the entered competing Drama/GI schools to the sectional managers so they can begin initial contacts in order to more effectively manage their contest, especially regarding Friday start times and hiring of judges.
2.  Suggested to make the online link open between sectionals and state for directors to make changes to the entries.  This would assist in the correct information appearing online and in the state final program.  Currently changes go through the manager who in turn has to contact the IHSA.  
3.  Recommended to investigate a way for entry changes to be sent electronically to site managers.
4.  Recommended to create electronic ballots that are available for judges to adjudicate with laptops at the state finals for Drama/GI.
5.  Suggested to look into a way to post completed critique sheets from the state finals through the IHSA schools center for directors to be able to read all the judges comments from all top shows adjudicated.
6.  Recommended to generate a judge database similar to the IHSA officials’ data base. This could also be use to recruit, retain and rate judges.  This should also include the addition of a top 15 list of judges for directors to rate.
7.  Continue with terms and conditions online, however it was recommended to have a few hard copies for judges available as well.
8.  Suggested to consider reviewing Brookens Auditorium at UIS to see if GI could be run in two flights.
9.  Recommended to incorporate a 10 minute strike time from the point of passing the doorway in Group Interp.  Many groups spend more time preparing their strike than actually doing the strike.  This would assist in adhering to the tight tournament schedule.
10.  Explore going to standard set pieces with site provided carpet in group interp for the 2010 season,
11.  Create on the IHSA online entry link a space for a box to contain “Directors’ Notes” (limited, perhaps, to 200 words or less).  These notes would go in the sectional and state programs. These notes need not be original.  It will be required as part of the entry form. Models of the “Directors’ Notes” could be provide as samples.
 12.  Discussed having the state panels of judges arrive on Thursday night to receive any final instructions or points of emphasis regarding adjudication. Send judges the new critiques in advance for review.
13 Susie will create a packet for judges which would include the logistical information, as well as criteria for judging, focusing on the comment and major purpose for ranking.
14.  Incorporate a new director’s workshop for Drama/GI in the early fall similar to the new directors workshop for IE coaches.
15.  Consider video taping and packaging the final round of GI and the top 6 Dramas for purchase.
16.  Continue to work on ways to assist school in incorporating their fall plays and spring shows into IHSA competition.  Continue to encourage entries.  We are currently at 80 schools that participate in Drama and Group Interp.
17.  Continue to work in partnership with ISTA regarding sessions at convention that cover Drama/GI rules.
18.  Rubric based Drama and GI scoring was discussed.  The committee recommends using a rubric guide with out number assessment for next year and pilot rubric scoring at an invitational competition to review the advantages and disadvantages.  (See item A and B)
19.  Best of Show Award was discussed to be presented at the State Final in Drama.  This award would recognize excellence in set design, make-up, costumes, lighting and sound.  The “Best of Show Judging Sheets” would be evaluated 1 – 12 in 5 categories completed by the current contest play judges as part of their adjudication. A plaque would be awarded to the winner of each Best of Show Category.  A similar type of crew award could be discussed to presented tor Group Interp. performances, based on the preliminary rounds. The committee agreed that the sportsmanship award would be great – however the committee felt that the best of show award would be difficult to monitor because schools receive inequitable amounts of assistance for sets and costumes etc…
20.  A sportsmanship/teamwork award was discussed for the crew/cast in Drama and GI that worked best behind the scenes.  Adult staff at UIS would be used to make this determination and selection.
21.  Judges (selection of and balance in) was discussed.  An official IHSA database of judges that could be used was considered to be generated.
22.  Discussion of judge training and instructions was presented.
23.  Sectional assignments timeline was discussed:  November 1 – schools commitment to do Drama/GI is due to IHSA; after December 1 – IHSA posting for sectional assignments.  It was recommended to send letters in December to director, activity director and principal to try to get a more accurate confirmation of entries. It was suggested that the person who does the original entry is identified as part of the initial entry log on at the IHSA school center site.  Many times directors are contacted and state that they never wanted to be entered and inquired as to who entered them in their building.  
24.  Competition dates will roll back to the standardized calendar - March 21 for Sectionals & March 27 & 28 for Drama – GI State 2009.
25.  Rule book review – consider a summer meeting for a more detailed review – and a summer meeting to discuss critique sheet and judging.
26.  Number of entries advancing from each sectional and total number of entries at the state tournament was reviewed (5-6 additonal shows to state). Concern was expressed with the overall timeline of the tournament.  Cost of securing venue and cost for schools in addition to class time loss was discussed.
27.   Consider loading 4 or more dramas at a time and possibly rearranging the unloading schedule to allow for the 4 shows to be on deck which could improve the overall tournament time schedule.
28.  Load in is a tight schedule and needs to be closely followed by schools.  Some schools take advantage of the time and take a more liberal interpretation of what they can and can not do.  These parameters will be spelled out in the manual.
29.  Recommended to use VIP pictures of the Drama and Group Interps. for situation case examples.
30.  Recommended that a timeline of the sectional committee should be made within 10 days of the posting of assignments and/or prior to Jan. 1
31.  Recommend to consider printing pictures of drama set and cast on site for judges to use as a reference as judging drama which takes two days.  Each director would have a fresh reminder of all twelve shows which can be reviewed with the adjudication forms from the two day drama competition.
 32.  Holding space needs to be corrected in the Drama manual.  The space appears two different times with two different measurements.
33.  Strike to the truck directions need to be clarified in the Drama manual
34.  The manual needs to address the lighting timeline and interpretation for setting projection & specials.  With UIS we are bound to some contractual language for setting lights.
35.  Appropriateness of material was discussed.  IHSA Drama Terms and Conditions VIII. Tournament Rules was referred to as the guideline.  All member school principals are required to approve material and judges can rank down material in which they feel is not suitable for high school performance.
36.  Discussed cast sheets for GI and opening positions.
37.  Concern was expressed that sets are not being built by students.
38.  It was confirmed that students can vocalize during their set up practice time.
39.  Concern about costuming in GI was presented.  The committee felt as if the judges can respond to that issue on their adjudication forms. 
40.  Time for set up in drama and the fact that these rules are being pushed by directors is causing concern and time issues.
41.  Concern was heard regarding adjudication from GI judges regarding rule infractions. 
42.  State final Drama/ GI committee report was reviewed by the Speech Advisory Committee.

Item A - Sample Drama Ballot – Draft Only

Standards for Excellence
These are the official standards for judging all IHSA Dramas

A.  Definition: Dramatics is an event in which students perform in and run (with adult supervision as necessary) an actual dramatic production, cut to fit within the time limits if necessary.

B.   Purpose: The purpose of Dramatics is to give students on-stage experience in acting and other theatre-related skills.

C.  Selection: The choice of a play to be presented shall be from either one-act plays or cuttings from longer plays. They may be either serious or comedic in nature. The play shall not be an operetta or other musical presentation; however, background and
incidental music will be permitted.

1. Acting
1. Voice – Could you hear the performers distinctly?  Are the voices audible? Is the rate too fast or too slow? Was their a variety of rate and inflections?  Was pronunciation and articulation properly done for each character?  If dialect was used was it done correctly? Is diction clear and consistent? Are performers projecting and enunciating clearly to communicate the meaning of the script.  Are vocal choices consistent with the physical characterization and vocal characterization?  Do the actors convey emotional responsiveness, intensity, variety, and projection? 
2. Characterization – Was there a complete bodily and mental re-creation of the characters by the performers?  Were the reactions to other performers correct and effective?  Did we “believe” the performance’s characterization all the time while on the stage?  In addition to physical presentation and vocal interpretation does the cast create believable characters fully realized and developed with in the style of the piece?  Do the actors convey emotional responsiveness with their physical characterization?  
3. Movement – Were the movements of the performers keeping with character?  Was there a great deal of random movement?  Was the pantomime accurate and convincing?  Did the performer seem to have a well controlled, poised body?  Do the performers effectively use movement, facial expressions, stage business, etc. to communicate the physical requirement of the characters on stage?  Do physical choices throughout the production and through an individual actor complete the performance?  Is their clear movement action and reaction?
4. Contrast – Were there clearly contrasting moods?   Were emotional transitions natural and effective?  Were the lines delivered in a manner which seemed natural to the characters in this play? 
5. Cast – Did you feel a smoothness of action which indicates adequate rehearsal and close cooperation and understanding among performers?  Was the cast closely knit rhythmically and correct for the show?
6. Timing – Did the performers pick up cues rapidly?  Did the movements of the performers slow down the tempo of the show?  Was the production static in places because the performers seemed to lack a sense of place? 
7. Motivation – Was there a logical reason for all business and movement by the performers which was consistent and in keeping with the characters in the play? 
8. Concentration – Do the actors maintain character and mood?  Do they know cues, timing and appropriate focus?
9. Believability – Do the actors have motivation and understanding?  Do they interact to create a mood?

2. Directing and Stage Mechanics
1. Set – Within the limitations of contest rules, did the set satisfactorily represent the ideas of the play?  If uses, was the furniture incorporated in a way which assisted but did not hinder the action?  Does the traveling show adapt as intended?  Do the scenery and props work with in the need and style of the production?  Does the production effectively use scenery and prop with in its presentation. 
2. Lighting – Did the lighting effects blend harmoniously and un- obtrusively into the action of the play?  Were there effects which were so obvious that they called attention to themselves and took your attention away from the action of the play?  (The use of elaborate lighting effects will be disregarded by the judge:  however, the play must not be discounted because of lighting control or equipment were inadequate and resulted in faulty effects for which the director could not be responsible).  Does the production effectively use light within its presentation?  Does the traveling show adapt as intended?
3. Sound – Did the sound effects blend harmoniously and unobtrusively into the action of the play?  Were the effects which were so obvious that they called attention to themselves take your attention away from the action of the play?
4. Make-up – Was the make-up natural and in keeping with each character?  Does the make-up effectively communicate the character, period and style?
5. Costume – Were the costumes for each character correct as to color, style, and period (The use of elaborate costumes must not affect the final decision of the judge).  Do the costumes for the production effectively communicate character, periods and style, etc?
6. Stage Business – Were entrances and exits properly timed?  Did the performers frequently cover or block each other?  Was the business properly motivated?  Was the design adequate to bring out the idea of the play?  Did the production make effective use of stage?  Is movement throughout motivated, functional and artistic?  Does staging and blocking work within the context of the production?  Is blocking motivated?  Are stage pictures and groupings created?  Is the use of acting motivated by the script? 
7. Tempo – Did the play as a whole drag?  Was it too fast to follow intelligently?  Was the pace for the play in keeping with the general idea of the play?  If applicable, was the tempo fast enough for farce? If applicable, did the tempo tend to become slower for tragedy?  Were the sub-climax and the climax well built-up?  Does the production move/flow well from scene to scene?  Does the pace contribute to the dramatic effect of the play? 
8. Composition – Were the performers grouped to give proper emphasis to the right character at the right time?
9. Theme – Did the play strongly challenge the ability of the performers?  Was the main idea of the theme of the play brought out clearly? 
10. Script/Material/Cutting – Does the material provide an effective foundation for the production?  If adapted from a longer script, is the cutting cohesive to communicate a complete story?  Does the script use quality literature that enriches the educational experience?

3. Overall Effectiveness –

a. Presentation – Does the entire production effectively communicate the ideas, attitudes and emotions of the script to the audience?  What is the overall lasting impression of the production?  Do costumes, set, use of props, make-up, lighting and sound effects demonstrate technical effectiveness?   Is the theme of the play evident?  Is the mood established?  Do the tempo and pace lead to the climax of the performance?  Is there a sense of completeness and an emphatic response at the end of the play?  Is the play suitable for performance in this event?

Item B - Sample Group Interpretation Ballot – Draft Only

Standards for Excellence
These are the official standards for judging all IHSA Group Interps.

A.  Definition: Group Interpretation is an event in which groups of three (3) or more
students interpretively present literature. 

B.  Purpose: The purpose of Group Interpretation is to give students experience in
the group performance of literature. The interrelatedness of the narrator(s), the
movement of the literature and character voices control the performance.
Group Interp encourages the students to create a scripted ensemble performance which showcases their interpretive skills without the aid of costumes, make-up, set or props. Successful Group Interp performances should be based primarily on vocal interpretation and character development and may include a narrator(s).

C.  Selection:  Material may be, but is not limited to prose, verse, drama, speeches, diaries, letters, essays, or compilations.

D.  Standards for Excellence: These standards are to provide the basis for both

performance and judging.

1.  Interpretation
a. Voice, Clarity, Articulation, Projection, Inflection, Enunciation           
b. Tone, Balance, Timing, Cue pick ups, Flow, Pacing and handling
                  c. Involvement, Focus, Mood, Commitment
            d. Physical reactions, Body language, Gestures (Gesture and pantomime should be used as justified by interpretation of the text)
e. Uniformed dress is allowed. Individual character costuming and/or character    specific costuming is prohibited
f. Character makeup is prohibited
g. Props shall be prohibited; creative use of scripts shall not be interpreted as
                use of props
h. Sound effects may be used, but music may be used only as background or
                 to establish mood)

2.   Blocking
a. Accessibility, Grouping, Script use (At the discretion of the performing group, the script may be used)
b. Focus - Off-stage or mixed focus (a combination of off-stage and on-stage focus) is permitted. Focus should be primarily off-stage, although mixed focus (a combination of off-stage and on-stage focus is allowed) is allowed
- For the 2008-09 competition season only, participating schools will provide their   own stools and chairs, risers, platforms, boxes and other pieces on which performers can create a level. Explicit set and set design is strictly prohibited

         3.  Overall Impression
a. Undue emphasis should not be placed on technical elements or judges’    preferences, likes or dislikes of literature
b. Selection – Appropriateness, Audience engagement, Interest and Effectiveness

TERMS AND CONDITIONS RECOMMENDATIONS
Individual Events: 

                        1.  Item II- c.  Dates and Site
Recommendation:  The State Final will be held at Belleville West High School in Belleville.

Rationale:  Belleville West is the final school in the long term rotation agreement. The state final site will be centrally located in 2010.  

 approved

            2.  Item VIII -a. Tournament Rules 

 Recommendation:  Prose Reading – Material:  Material must be prose literature.  Sources of material includes cuttings from…..

Rationale:  This will help distinguish the variation between prose literature and dramatic plays and monologues which should be used in Dramatic Interpretation and not Prose Reading.

approved

            3.  Item VIII –a. Tournament Rules

             Recommendation:  Delete Verse Reading and Change to Poetry Reading. 

Rationale:  Poetry better define what the event is and the type of literature used for performances.  

approved

            4.  Item VIII- a. Tournament Rules

             Recommendation:  Beginning in the 2009-2010 Season Add Informative Speaking 

 Rationale:  Informative Speaking is one of the original formats of public address.  Expository speaking is used in most classrooms and would easily transition to a competition event.  By beginning in 2009-20010 coaches can have two years to prepare for this new event.  

            (See Item C.)  

approved

            5. Item VI- F -State Final Time Schedule 

             Recommendation:  1:30 FINALS:  DDA, HI, IS, OD, OO, PROSE, OC

                                                3:00 FINALS:  HDA, DI, EX, SOS, POETRY, RADIO  

Rationale:  This change would divide Prose and Poetry which most often students are double entered in the state finals and balance seven events in the 1:30 flight. 

approved

            6.  Item VI- B- 4.-C- Tournament Structure and Time Schedule 

Recommendation:  Contest Committee shall not have authority to screen or edit radio scripts, extemp. topics or impromptu topics.  These materials must be used as provided by the IHSA Office.  Any direction to update extemp topics must come solely from the IHSA office.   

Rationale:  With recent current events changing after Extemp topics have been sent out we need a clear plan as to the handling of outdated topics.  The IHSA will contact the managers directly and the appropriate adjustments to topics shall be made.

approved

            7.  Item VIII-a. Tournament Rules 

  Recommendation:  Impromptu Speaking
Presentation: Five minutes before the round is to begin, the first speaker shall draw      three  topics from the prep room proctor, the speaker shall choose one, and return the other two.       The other speakers shall draw in like manner, in the order of speaking, at intervals of five minutes. The same three topics shall be used for the drawing by each section. A different subject area will be used for each round. 

As soon as a topic is chosen, the student shall have five minutes to prepare a speech without consultation and without references to prepared notes in the Impromptu prep room. After receiving the topic the student may not leave the room until scheduled to speak.  Preparation materials are limited to a writing implement and one (1) note card which may be used during delivery.  No other material shall be allowed in the Impromptu prep room other than stated above. Students may not consult published books, magazines, newspapers, journals or articles.  Speeches, handbooks, briefs, and outlines shall be barred from the Impromptu prep room. No electronic retrieval device may be used. 
Students may not leave the Impromptu prep room without permission of the room proctor.  Students may not enter the performance room until their scheduled speaking times and must remain after they have finished speaking unless they are double entered and must leave to perform in another round.  Spectators’ must remain in the room until all contestants have finished speaking. 

Rationale:  This format would be speaker friendly and allow students topic choices and allow them to prep with out the judge and audience viewing. The student could collect their thoughts and then enter the speaking room ready to perform their impromptu speech. 

 approved

            8.  Item VIII a. Tournament Rules

             Recommendation:  Impromptu Speaking

            Time Limit:  5 minutes preparation and 5 minutes speaking 

Rationale:  With the new recommended prep format for impromptu speaking, this would clarify the required prep and speaking times.

 approved

INDIVIDUAL EVENTS ADMINISTRATIVE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  Performance in the Round (PIR) – Discussed an interpretation to the intent of the specific rule and guideline for use of music.  Except for music, all performance elements including off stage dialogue, must be within the 16-foot circle.  Later under (f.) the terms and conditions state – Solo or ensemble singing initiated while outside of the circle should support contextual mood and not represent a specific character or characters intensions and must resolve itself upon entering the performance circle.  These two statements may appear to contradict, however the intent is that individual and group singing should only begin upon crossing over into the performance circle.  Judges can adjudicate accordingly. 

2.  Discussed to consider leaving the school name off of the ballot for judges.  School names will remain in the beginning of the program and Susie will investigate if school names can be left off the performance order per event.

3.  Susie will work on creating specific guidelines regard what judges can and can not do while adjudicating.  This will address issues such as stopping a round and rankings regarding inappropriateness of material.

4.  The IHSA will investigate a process that will allow judges to enter a database through the IHSA school center to register and provide contact information for invitational and state series tournaments. 

5.  The committee discussed regional and sectional assignments.  Susie always welcomes suggestions; however the IHSA does follow the geographical principal for alignment.  This year out of the 18 IHSA Regionals four ran full preliminary rounds. 

6.  The advisory committee reviewed the definitions of Verse, Prose, DI and DEC.  There is concern that many of these events are blurring together and that clear language or event identification is needed to be more specific.  It was recommended that a summer committee could review the event descriptions in more detail. 

7.  Discussion of IHSA creating a database and assigning judges was presented.  There is growing concern that we need to recruit and retain qualified judges and continue to offer judges training opportunities.  ISTA and SCOTIE could be good resources to assist with this project.

8.  The appropriateness rules were discussed and its enforcement was reviewed.  Coaches are reminded to select literature that does not offend or be in bad taste.  It is recommended to eliminate cursing, profanity and suggestive statements.  The mission of interscholastic speech is to enrich the education experience.  Coaches have an ethical responsibility to support this mission and judges have the ability to rank down or DQ misconduct.

9.  The IHSA will continue to work with Ben Stewart and Speechwire.  An additional goal is to continue to improve the judge database and keep track of state series judges from each competition year.

10.  It was discussed to pilot Duo Interp for the 2009 school year at invitational tournaments and then investigate if a 2009-10 recommendation would be supported to eliminate HDA and DDA and add Duo Interp.  (No more tables and chairs needed)

11.  Declamation was discussed with the concern that the original intent of the event is shifting.  Some considered eliminating the event with the addition of Informative. 

12.  The final round time was discussed to allow for PIR – The IHSA reserves the right at the state final to make those needed time adjustments in regards to events running late.  The PIR state final performance will always be presented at the awards venue.

13.  The order of events was discussed – for both state final schedule and state final awards performance.  The schedule below was presented as a rule change recommendation.  The awards performance order will be left up to the discretion of the venue manager.

Tentatively Recommended:  1:30 FINALS:  DDA, HI, IS, OD, OO, PROSE, OC

                                             3:00 FINALS:  HDA, DI, EX, SOS, POETRY, RADIO

14.  The committee reviewed the IHSA policy regarding multiple classes.  An IHSA sport/activity needs over 300 participating school before multiple classes can be investigated.  This year the IHSA had 229 schools entered in Individual Events. There are certain parts of the state that have schools that could offer programs.  Coach mentoring programs could be established.  

15.  Susie will work with Scott Johnson to post past year publication on the speech menu page.  

16.  The committee reviewed what is allowed and what is not allowed in Extemp files.  Past speeches can be in Extemp files.  The committee discussed the use of electronic retrieval devises in Extemp. 

17.  The committee discussed sectional travel concerns.  As long as there are gaps in the state when speech programs are non-existent there will always be the need to travel. 

Item C.  DRAFT For Review Only - - - Information Speaking

Definition:  Expository is the original oral presentation of the student and is designed to inform. 

Purpose:  The purpose of Informative Speaking is to guide students in research, organization and the development of a sense of literary style in speech designed to express their own interests.

Material:  The content, format, style and thought of the material must be the original product of the student.  No more than 150 words in the speech may be direct quotation.  

Appropriateness of Material:  See Art, VIII-A-1-2 of the Individual Events Terms and Conditions.

Time Limit:  8 minutes

Time Limit Penalty:  For each full thirty (30) seconds of overtime (8:30.01, 9:00.01, etc. or 1 tic past 8:30, 9:00, etc. on a sweep hand) the contestant’s ranking from each judge will be lowered by one (1) place.  This reduction is mandatory and will be administered by the contest management.  The other contestants’ ranks will not be affected.  There is no penalty for speaking less than five (5) minutes.  

Use of Script, Propos and Visual Aids during Performance:  Notes or manuscript may be used.  Visual aids may not be included in the presentation.   

Presentation:  Students may use notes, manuscripts or speak form memory.  An introduction, if used, will be included in presentation time.  

Standards for Excellence:  The student should describe, clarify, illustrate or define an object, idea, concept, or process. A fabricated topic/subject may not be used. A student may not use any portion of his/her original oration entered at any IHSA state series. The topic of the speech should be of current interest and have a purpose.  The material should show preparation, knowledge and clear thought.  The organization should demonstrate clear, logical development of idea.  The style should demonstrate an effective choice of words and phrases.  The delivery should be clear, sincere and interesting and the speaker’s appearance should be effective without being distracting.