ADVISORY MEETING MINUTES-2016

Minutes of the MSCA Advisory Committee
May 4, 2016

Meeting called to order by MSCA President Jason Olson at 10:00.
Members Present: Jason Olson, Travis Rother, Kasey Wacker, Cal Vandehoef, and Zach Prax.  Also Present were Chris Franson and Cliff Janke.

1. Reviewing the New State Judging Procedures
   1. Feedback is mixed.  Many like it, some are more in favor of three.  Still the general feedback was to keep the five judging panels at state.  Logistics and time frames between rounds may be adjusted.  Some want 3 judges in prelims, but the benefit of just using this change is no budgetary concerns.  The State Tournament already cost $25,000.
   2. Scoring at State.  Currently a couple of ideas have been thrown around and one is dropping high/low scores.  The problem is that instead of 5 judges then, you are back to 3 judges counting.  As such, the favor is thrown to the idea of final judges ranking out to 8, but in the tab software only putting out to 6.  The 7 and 8 would be used to break ties, so similar to tournaments that only rank out to 5.  A proposal as such will be submitted to the MSHSL Board to secure our place for consideration, but would be pulled if support isn’t sufficient at CTAM.
   3. Further consideration was over tiebreakers and should three-way judging preference be used if possible.  This isn’t allowed under the current rules.  Opinion of the Advisory Committee is unquestionably yes, this should be an option.  It will be submitted for change, under the same caveat as the previous proposal.
2. MSCA Procedural Proposals Moving Forward
   1. Concern of avoiding the advisory committee.  Perhaps advisory committee should have a meeting after CTAM, to allow for more consideration on a timely manner.  This should allow us to be more responsive.
   2. Terms ending.  President’s terms should end after the Spring Advisory Committee.  The President Elect in the second year of their term will be a non-voting observer on the Advisory Committee to be in on what is being decided.
3. Long-Term Future of Various Categories
   1. Many want to add POI and then combine Drama and Prose.  Not a consensus on this either way and instead deserves mention at the Advisory sessions and the academic purpose of all categories may need to be examined.  POI will receive its own educational session.
   2. Impromptu.  Should we look at adding in the future.  Again, not a consensus on this, especially if it would come at the expense of other categories.
4. Great Speeches
   1. Clarification of the word great will be added to the category description.  Great is termed to be worthy of consideration or study, rather than world changing.
   2. “Judges are cautioned that Great is not used in the sense of ‘world changing,’ but rather worthy of consideration or study.”
5. Publication Rules for Interp Events
   1. Some publications rules are getting abused.  For example, creative writing being then presented in categories outside Creative.  Others are taking videos and transcribing to blogs to consider published.  What about Caringbridge?  Is this okay?
   2. Publication will be a CTAM session.  Transitions and what is allowed will also be discussed.
6. Electronic Rules in Extemp Speaking and Discussion
   1. Some tournaments tried it and data will be presented at a later date.  Perhaps it could be a permanent thing in the future.  Concerns exist such as outside communication for help and equity should WiFi not be provided by a school, but a student has hotspot capabilities over others.  
   2. Should Discussion tasks be released in advance and as a result perhaps is more true to life.  Positive feedback was universal on this idea.  Basic thought is that this will improve research possibility, reflect more accurately the need for preparation in meetings, and take care of the equity issue presented above.
7. Section Autonomy - Is Less Needed?
   1. Should there be a number of entries limit the same in all Sections?  Should the same tiebreakers be used?  Consensus was that tiebreakers, especially in finals, should be the same regardless of section or subsection.  Same on the entry limit numbers and how many per category..  Proposal for consideration will be presented at CTAM.
   2. Juries/Rules Enforcement - Do we need impartial juries?  Some concerns of unequal enforcement from around the state.  Tournament Managers and Juries should receive education.  
8. Playoff Rules Being In Post-season
   1. Ongoing Discussion
   2. Strong encouragement though to enforce the rules, so violations can be found much earlier than subsections, sections, and state.
9. Storytelling Change
   1. Should the number of stories be reduced.  No is the consensus because of the number needed for a clean draw and also to keep it extemporaneous or limited prep.  If anything, number could be increased
10. Other Concerns
    1. Several coaches want a new Extemp Reading book besides The Book Thief for next year.  Main reason is that it leaves those new to the category next year at a disadvantage.  Advisory committee was in agreement that it should change for next year.
    2. More than two classes - No interest because of logistics at this time.
    3. Alternates - Not being able to move forward at this time and less of an issue.
    4. Team trophies are great.
    5. New judging voting positive and easier.
    6. Love the new tournament workers contract system at state.
       1. Where do I work was also fantastic.
    7. Room Managers at state were fantastic and so valuable.  They do a great job.
    8. Discussion on the value of visual aids in Informative needing citations.  Both viewpoints were presented.  Ongoing discussion for future as half thought citations unneeded and distract and half though vital to academic process.
    9. MSCA doing more to celebrate achievements of students in future.  Perhaps All-State?  Scholarships?

Meeting Adjourned at 1:45.