Diversity in NPDA 1
Running Head: DIVERSITY IN NPDA
Female and Minority Diversity Within NPDA: An Examination of the 2002 National
Tournament
Jennifer H. Parker
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Diversity in NPDA 2
Since the first National Parliamentary Debate Association (NPDA) national tournament
in 1994, the organization has grown to produce the largest national debate tournament in history.
NPDA as a collegiate debate organization is young but mighty. Unfortunately, little is known
about the participants in this organization. While substantial research exists about the CEDA
(Cross-Examination Debate Association) and NDT (National Debate Tournament) branches of
collegiate debate, little research exists regarding the NPDA community or its members. In
particular, NPDA has recently started struggling with issues of diversity within the organization.
Last fall, the President of the association created the special Ad Hoc Committee on Gender and
Diversity to begin to address some issues of concern regarding diversity within the organization.
The first step of this committee was to gather and compile information about the current
population of NPDA participants and the literature relevant to diversity within collegiate debate
associations. This paper is an attempt to synthesize the information that has been gathered thus
far. A brief rationale for study demonstrates that diversity is a problem facing every major
collegiate debate organization in the country, and the causes of this lack of diversity are
numerous. Additionally, the results of a questionnaire that was distributed by the gender and
diversity committee at the 2002 NPDA national tournament prove that lack of diversity is also a
significant problem in the NPDA community, specifically at the national tournament. With this
accurate demographic data, the gender and diversity committee will be able to make
recommendations for change in order to promote diversity within NPDA.
Rationale
The President of NPDA elected a special committee to study gender and diversity within
NPDA. He selected a committee to study gender and not sex, and this important distinction must
first be considered. Sex is a biological distinction whereas gender is a cognitive identification
Diversity in NPDA 3
(Wood, 2001). The gender and diversity committee set out to study gender and not sex for
several important reasons. First, some scholars have argued that female participation in debate is
low due to the masculine nature of the activity (Crenshaw, 1990; West, in press). The
foundation of debate is centered on a masculine style of communication as it requires its
participants to be more aggressive communicatively and use concise and pragmatic language
(Kirtley & Weaver, 1999). Moreover, it is important to study gender and not sex in this context
because the goal of the committee is to promote diversity. Diversity of thought and ideas occurs
best by studying participants’ viewpoints and not necessarily their personal appearance. This
justification of the study of gender is important, because some students were unwilling to answer
the questionnaires distributed by the committee at NPDA, because they felt that the committee
was entrenching gender definitions or somehow confusing the concepts of gender and sex. On
the contrary, the committee simply wishes to gather as much information as possible about the
views that comprise NPDA so that it may best decide how to promote diversity within the
organization.
Collegiate Debate and Diversity
Much research in the collegiate debate community has centered on investigating sex as it
compares to win/loss records or speaker points (Hensley & Strother, 1968; Bruschke & Johnson,
1994; Hayes & McAdoo, 1972; Rosen, Dean, & Willis, 1978). These studies generally indicate
that female participation is lower than male participation overall, and female participation in
outrounds is not representative of overall female participation. Less females compete than
males, and even less women than men break into national outrounds. In fact, some studies
(Logue, 1986; Friedley & Manchester, 1985) have found female participation in NDT and
CEDA to be as low as 20% and 30% respectively. Stepp and Gardner (2001) collected ten
Diversity in NPDA 4
years of demographic data from CEDA national tournaments. They found that over the ten years
female and minority participation was increasingly slightly. However, the rate of success for
female and minority groups stayed the same, and this rate is much lower than the rate of white
males.
A study by Williams, McGee, and McGee (1999) surveyed 285 participants in various
forms of collegiate debate (CEDA, NPDA, NDT, NFA-LD, ADA, IPDA, NEDA, and APDA).
The researchers found that 57.2% of the entire collegiate debate population was male as
compared to 42.8% of the population identifying themselves as female. This study also
discovered that females tended to have less experience with high school debate than males did.
As most collegiate debaters also debated in high school, it is clear that one of the reasons female
participation in debate is low in college is because it is low in high school.
Additionally, Stepp (1994) has conducted research on female and minority retention in
CEDA debate. After discovering that the novice CEDA debate population was representative of
demographics on college campuses but junior-varsity and varsity divisions were overwhelmingly
white and male, she asked female debaters why they quit the activity. The most prevalent
reasons included other activities, an emphasis on the game of debate, too much research,
competitiveness, excessive time spent coaching, and a lack of fun or other rewards doing debate.
These reasons are interesting given the fact that out of 286 participants across all forms of
collegiate debate in a study conducted by Williams (2001), only 2% of participants said that
workload was a major disadvantage to debate competition. 3% of the participants said that the
competitiveness of the activity was a disadvantage, and 3.2% said that lost time for other
activities was a drawback of collegiate debate. Thus, it may be difficult to pinpoint why
Diversity in NPDA 5
retention rates are so low for women, and the rationalizations that quitting women give may be
thought of after the fact.
Racial diversity research is much less common in debate scholarship than research
regarding sex and gender. The studies that do exist concerning racial and ethnic diversity (e.g.
Wade, 1998) indicate that participation by minority groups is low and the activity is dominated
primarily by white middle and upper class Americans. Williams, McGee, and McGee (1999)
found that approximately 77% of the debate population is white, and they discovered that NPDA
was actually more diverse racially compared with NDT. Their study also demonstrated that
minority debaters were more likely than non-minority debaters to participate for reasons of
professional development.
NPDA and Diversity
No published research regarding NPDA and diversity within its participants exists. Some
research has explored the sex diversity and gender differences of NPDA judges as it relates to
their in-round decision making process (Hellbusch & Parker, 2002), however, little research has
even been conducted that explores the NPDA student population.
Shipley (2002) has done some informal research with regards to the sex of NPDA
participants at the national tournament. This research was done simply by coding participants as
male or female based on their name only, and thus, it may not be completely accurate. Shipley
found that from 1995 to 2002, female participation in NPDA has hovered around 35%. Female
participation also decreases as outrounds get more difficult. In fact, 87.5% of all final round
participants at the NPDA national tournament have been male, and male participation in semifinals, quarter-finals, and octo-finals ranges from 72 to 74%. Perhaps even more disturbing,
females are very underrepresented in terms of speaker awards. When Shipley analyzed the top
Diversity in NPDA 6
twenty speakers at NPDA, he concluded that females are getting less speaker awards as the years
go by. Three of the top twenty speakers were women in 2001 with five in 2000, and three in
1999.
Research Questions
It is clear that more research needs to be done on diversity within NPDA. The bigger
questions guiding this study deal with why females and minorities are underrepresented in
outrounds at the national tournament and what can be done to foster diversity within NPDA.
However, this study is simply a stepping stone in a much larger process, and thus, the
overarching research question guiding this study deals with exploring the population of NPDA
national tournament participants:
RQ1: How diverse is the NPDA student population at the national tournament?
The next question aims to see if female and minority debaters have the same rate of success as
white male debaters.
RQ2: How successful are female and minority debaters at the NPDA national
tournament compared to white male debaters?
In addition to this question, several other issues must be addressed that start to pinpoint some of
the problems that may exist within the organization:
RQ3: How experienced are the debaters who achieve success at NPDA compared to the
experience levels of female and minority debaters?
RQ4: Which, if any, regions of the country are most diverse?
Diversity in NPDA 7
Method
Data Collection
Data was collected using two waves of questionnaires. First, questionnaires were
distributed during a preliminary round at the 2002 NPDA national tournament. Five
questionnaires were given to each judge who was responsible for distributing them to the four
students in the round and keeping one for themselves. Students and judges were asked to fill out
the questionnaires and then return them to a box in the warm room. The questionnaire asked if
the participant was a coach, judge, or student and how many years they had been involved in
NPDA. The questionnaire also asked for the participants’ name, age, undergraduate class,
gender, race, and school state. 180 student questionnaires were gathered in this manner.
After the NPDA national tournament was finished, I compared the questionnaires with
outround and speaker award success. I indicated on each questionnaire the latest outround the
student had broken to and if they had won a varsity speaker award (top 20). I then attempted to
contact each coach of students who had broken at the tournament but who had not completed a
questionnaire. I received back an additional 30 surveys in this manner. The final data set
accounts for roughly half the field of total participants and half the field of those who broke to an
elimination round at the tournament.
Data Analysis
As I thought the coaches’ and judges’ information would make for an entirely different
study, I sorted them out, and I just tabulated the student questionnaires. Once all information
from the students was entered, I analyzed it in several different ways. I ran statistics on the
overall population for the categories mentioned above. Then, I compared data across categories
Diversity in NPDA 8
in order to evaluate how gender and race matched up with years of experience in NPDA, success
at the national tournament, and school state.
Results
The statistics on gender at the 2002 NPDA national tournament were consistent with
what Shipley had found in past years of NPDA. 36% of the participants identified themselves as
female, and 63.8% of the participants identified themselves as male. 81.4% of the participants
were Caucasian. Table 1 shows the complete breakdown of racial/ethnic identity as reported by
the participants. 79.9% of the NPDA population is Caucasian, and 18.4% of the NPDA student
body is from a minority group. Table 2 shows the average age, experience, and years of
undergraduate education of NPDA students attending the national tournament.
Table 1: Breakdown of Race and Ethnicity
Valid
Mis sing
Total
Caucas ion
African American
Latin/Hispanic American
As ian American
Arab American
Native American
Other/mix
Total
System
Frequency
175
8
14
7
1
1
9
215
4
219
Percent
79.9
3.7
6.4
3.2
.5
.5
4.1
98.2
1.8
100.0
Valid Percent
81.4
3.7
6.5
3.3
.5
.5
4.2
100.0
Cumulative
Percent
81.4
85.1
91.6
94.9
95.3
95.8
100.0
Ta ble 2: Descripti ve Statistics
N
Years of Experienc e
in NPDA
Age
Undergrad Education
Valid N (lis twis e)
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
St d. Deviat ion
213
.42
4.00
1.9910
.9951
209
218
202
4
.42
47
6.00
20.32
2.6120
3.19
1.1527
Diversity in NPDA 9
Competitive Success and Minority/Female Debaters
Female debaters were vastly underrepresented in outrounds at the national tournament,
and their rate of success is substantially lower than the men’s. 27.8% of females broke to at least
one elimination round; whereas, 55% of all men broke to an outround. Female participation is
the quad-octo final round is consistent with overall female participation at the national
tournament as 39% of the round is female. However, and most shocking, female participation
drops dramatically in later outrounds. By the double-octo final round, females only accounted
for 16% of the participants. By quarter-finals only 3 out of 16 debaters were women. Clearly,
women are not advancing at far as, or at the rate that, men are. Furthermore, consistent with
what Shipley has found, at the 2002 national tournament only 4 out of 20 speaker awards were
given to women. Again, 20% of the speaker awards given to women pales in comparison to their
36% overall rate of participation.
The statistics on minorities are not any better. 47.4% of Caucasian participants advance
to at least one outround, but only 35% of minority students advance. 85.6% of all quad-octo
final round participants (including those that advanced) are Caucasian. However, 3 of the top 20
speakers are minorities, which is actually consistent with the percentage of minorities in the
larger NPDA student body. So while minority students may get speaker awards, for some
reason, they are not advancing at a rate into outrounds that is even close to the rate of Caucasian
students.
Experience at NPDA
On average participants at the NPDA national tournament have two years of experience
debating in the organization and 2.6 years of undergraduate education. Those who break to
outrounds tend to have more than two years of experience in NPDA. Table 3 breaks down years
Diversity in NPDA 10
of experience at NPDA for the participants of each outround. The outround is the highest round
a student advanced to. For example, if a student made it to the final round, their statistics would
be reflected only there and not in every previous outround category. Those top twenty students
who earned speaker awards averaged 2.86 years of experienced compared with 1.93 years of
experience that those who did not get an award had.
Ta ble 3: Highest Outround Adva nce d
Years of Experienc e in NPDA
Highes t Outround
Mean
Advanc
ed
Didn't Advance
1.6516
Quad-Octofinals
2.3913
Triple-Octofinals
2.0000
Double-Oc tofinals
2.7400
Oc tofinals
2.1667
Quarters
3.0000
Semifinals
3.3750
Final
2.5000
Total
1.9910
N
116
23
31
25
9
3
4
2
213
St d. Deviation
.8728
.9409
.8660
.9478
1.1726
1.0000
.9465
.7071
.9951
It is evident that the more experienced debaters tend to do better at the national
tournament than those who are less experienced. Unfortunately, female debaters do not tend to
have as much experience as male debaters do. However, minority debaters actually have more
experience on average than Caucasian debaters. Tables 3 and 4 demonstrate the average level of
experience, amount of undergraduate education, and age of minority, Caucasian, female, and
male debaters.
Diversity in NPDA 11
Table 4: Experience, Education, and Age of Female and Male Debaters
Gender
Not Selected
Selected
Total
Mean
N
Std. Deviation
Mean
N
Std. Deviation
Mean
N
Std. Deviation
Years of
Experience
in NPDA
2.0485
103
1.0134
1.6914
71
.8757
1.9028
174
.9730
Undergrad
Education
2.6636
107
1.2224
2.4364
72
1.0194
2.5722
179
1.1475
Age
20.45
107
3.00
20.29
73
3.40
20.39
180
3.16
Ta ble 5: Expe rience, Educati on, and Age of Caucasi on a nd Minority
De baters
Race:
W hite
Minorit y
Group
Total
Mean
N
St d. Deviat ion
Mean
N
St d. Deviat ion
Mean
N
St d. Deviat ion
Years of
Ex perience
in NPDA
1.9952
174
.9830
2.0263
35
1.0944
2.0004
209
.9998
Undergrad
Education
2.6006
174
1.1417
2.6980
40
1.2117
2.6188
214
1.1528
Age
20.37
167
3.14
20.09
38
3.58
20.31
205
3.21
Female debaters also have a lower rate of retention in the activity. For instance, 42.9% of
all women who compete are in their first year of competition, but only 32.4% of men are
novices. Additionally, 23.4% of women and 35.3% of men have competed in NPDA for three
years or more. Most shockingly, 16 men reported that this was their fourth year of competition,
but only one woman was in her fourth year of competition. 12 out of the 17 people who were in
their fourth year of competition broke to at least one outround at the national tournament.
Diversity in NPDA 12
Diversity by State
Some states are more diverse than others, both in terms of female and minority
participation. While some states are consistent with the rate of female and minority participation
at NPDA (i.e. California), no state is consistent with rates of collegiate demographics overall.
Tables 6 and 7 show the breakdowns of minority and female participation by state.
Table 6: School State * MINORITY Crosstabulation
Count
School
State
Total
Alaska
Arizona
Arkans as
California
Colorado
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Michigan
Minnes ota
Mis souri
Montana
Nebras ka
North Dakota
Oklahoma
Oregon
Texas
Utah
Washington
Wyoming
Tennes see
Race
Nonminority
Minority
2
8
1
45
20
13
2
2
1
1
5
1
8
1
3
7
9
2
2
21
2
1
1
1
16
3
6
1
6
7
2
7
4
2
174
40
Total
2
8
1
65
13
4
1
1
5
1
9
3
7
11
2
23
1
2
19
7
6
9
7
6
214
Diversity in NPDA 13
Table 7: School State * Gender Crosstabulation
Count
School
State
Total
Alaska
Arizona
Arkans as
California
Colorado
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Michigan
Minnes ota
Mis souri
Montana
Nebras ka
North Dakota
Oklahoma
Oregon
Texas
Utah
Washington
Wyoming
Tennes see
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Female
1
1
3
5
1
37
28
12
1
4
1
1
4
1
1
7
2
3
5
2
8
3
2
15
8
1
2
12
7
4
3
3
4
5
5
5
2
2
4
2
139
79
Total
2
8
1
65
13
4
1
1
5
1
9
3
7
11
2
23
1
2
19
7
7
10
7
6
2
218
Discussion
The data from this analysis indicates that NPDA has a lack of diversity within the
organization. First, overall participation in the organization is not representative of typical
college campuses. NPDA first and foremost needs to develop ways to encourage more female
and minority participation. Second, those females and minorities that do compete in NPDA do
not experience the same rate of success that non-minority and male debaters enjoy. In particular,
late outrounds at the national tournament are heavily saturated with men and/or Caucasian
Diversity in NPDA 14
debaters. These problems are troubling, because NPDA lacks diverse viewpoints and seemingly
does not reward diversity in competition at the national tournament. The primary goal of NPDA
is education; however, varied and multiple perspectives and views are not being heard often
enough or in late outrounds.
While the previous section has answered the research questions of this project in full
detail, the third question regarding experience in NPDA needs some further discussion and
explanation. The data clearly indicates that more experienced debaters tend to break into
outrounds, and the rate of success in those outrounds is also partly due to debater experience.
The experience/success correlation is consistent with the philosophies of many coaches and
directors who prod their novice and junior-varsity students with promises of future success.
Unfortunately, female debaters not only have less experience on average, they also are more
likely to be novice or junior-varsity debaters. A disproportionate amount of females have less
than two years of experience in NPDA, and only one female reported that this was her fourth
year of competition. Clearly, NPDA as an organization is unable to retain female debaters.
NPDA needs to discuss why female debaters are leaving the activity in such great numbers.
Recruitment does not seem to be the problem. In fact, if the same amount of female novice
debaters who competed this year stayed on for four years of competition, then the demographics
of NPDA would be nearly equivalent. Thus, individual debate programs need to be mindful of
not only reaching out to local high schools to recruit females but also focusing on retaining the
females that they already have. Furthermore, the primary concern for the diversity and gender
committee should be female retention within NPDA. Various initiatives like mentoring and
sexual harassment policies are clearly needed and warranted.
Diversity in NPDA 15
Unfortunately, the answers and problems concerning lack of minority success in
outrounds is not as evident. It is clear that NPDA is overwhelmingly Caucasian, and individual
programs and coaches do need to do a better job recruiting minority students in order to promote
racial and ethnic diversity within NPDA. However, it is not clear why minority students do not
advance at the same rate as non-minority students in outrounds at the national tournament. Since
minority students tend to have the same or more experience on average than non-minority
students, minority students may not be advancing because of discrimination within the
organization. The gender and diversity committee needs to look at what can specifically be done
in order to stop any sort of judge discrimination towards competitors.
Future studies should examine what the coaching population of NPDA looks like
demographically. It is likely that less female debaters are compelled to stay in the activity
because there are less female coaches for them to bond with and to go to for support. Moreover,
minority students may be reluctant to join a debate program altogether if its students and
coaching staff are all Caucasian. Also, the coaching population is where the judge pool is
heavily drawn from. If the judging pool is not diverse, it may not be rewarding diverse
individuals or thought. Additionally, future researchers need to examine the female and minority
populations more closely. A qualitative study that exposes what the female and minority debate
world is like would be very helpful in determining how to create an organization that welcomes
diversity of thought and appearance. Ultimately, students, coaches, and judges involved with
NPDA need to communicate more openly about what can be done to create a more diverse
organization.
Diversity in NPDA 16
References
Bruschke, J., & Johnson, A. (1994). An analysis of differences in success rates of male and
female debaters. Argumentation and Advocacy, 30, 162-173.
Crenshaw, A. C. (1990). Dodging the oppositional dynamic: A feminist perspective on debate
practice. Unpublished manuscript.
Friedley, S. A., & Manchester, B. B. (1985). An analysis of male/female participation at select
national championships. National Forensic Journal, 3, 1-11.
Hayes, M. T., & McAdoo, J. (1972). Debate performance: Differences between male and female
rankings. Journal of the American Forensics Association, 8, 127-131.
Hellbusch, S., & Parker, J. (2002). I like your suit but you’re too confrontational. The Journal of
the National Parliamentary Debate Association, 3, 1-10.
Hensley, W. E., & Strother, D. B. (1968). Success in debate. Speech Teacher, 17, 235-237.
Kirtley, M. D., & Weaver, J. B. (1999). Exploring the impact of gender role self-perception on
communication style. Women’s Studies in Communication, 22, 190-209.
Logue, B. J. (1986). CEDA: Male/female participation levels: A research report. CEDA
Yearbook, pp. 64-75.
Rosen, N., Dean, L., & Willis, F. (1978). The outcome of debate in relation to gender, side, and
position. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 15, 17-21.
Stepp, P. (1994). Preliminary report: Survey novice programs in CEDA debate. Paper presented
at the meeting of the Speech Communication Association, New Orleans, LA.
Stepp, P. L., & Gardner, B. (2001). Ten years of demographics: Who debates in America.
Argumentation and Advocacy, 38.
Diversity in NPDA 17
Wade, M. M. (1998). The case for urban debate leagues. Contemporary Argumentation and
Debate, 19, 60-65.
West, M. (in press). Performing the role of “philosopher king”: A feminist critique of
competition in college debate. In J. Hanson (Ed.). Articles of the decade. pp. 60-66. West
Coast Publishing.
Williams, D. E. (2001). University student perceptions of the efficacy of debate participation: An
empirical investigation. Argumentation and Advocacy, 37, 198-209.
Williams, D. E., McGee, D. S., McGee, B. R. (1999). An empirical investigation of race, sex,
and class differences in U.S. intercollegiate debate. The International Journal of
Forensics, 2, 52-62.
Wood, J. T. (2001). Gendered Lives. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.