Coaching Critically: Engaging Critical Pedagogy in the Forensics Squad Room
National Forensic Journal, Vol: 26, Page: 99-112
2008
- 294Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage294
- Downloads258
- Abstract Views36
Article Description
During my first few years as a high school speech coach, I worked with an oratory student who was also a policy debater. During one particular coaching session, she mentioned that she and her partner were "running Foucault" as a case in policy. "What do you mean you are 'running' Foucault,'' I asked? She then informed me how the work of Foucault and other critical and cultural theorists was being employed in the competitive policy debate world as "kritiks." My student explained that she and her partner were using Foucault because it was "the way" to win rounds: "all of the good teams are running kritiks." No real explanations of Foucauldian concepts e.g.; the development of technologies as methods of power and oppression, the using of discourse as systems of cultural control, histories as exemplars and expressions of hegemony - were presented or taught by her coaches in practice or detailed by her competitors in rounds. None of these formative and revolutionary ideas were actually engaged, employed in detail or explained, or taught to the debaters. Debaters simply stated "as Foucault points out ... " in their 1AC and that was it.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know