Monash debaters handbook

The victim could explicitly ask the equity team to use a non-punitive remedy such as an explanation from the equity officer for why violation was hurtful to the victim and having that person to apologize. It is possible that an offence warrants both punitive and non-punitive measures. Its section on determining whether the action by a person says that the following factors must be taken into account: a the context b the factors referred to in subsection 3 ; c whether the discrimination reasonably and justifiably differentiates between persons according to objectively determinable criteria, intrinsic to the activity concerned.

Accessed 15 November , www. It sets out important questions to ask to determine what kind of punishment is appropriate because it reminds them of what factors should be taken into account when deciding between punitive and non-punitive resolutions to complaints. We believe that equity is under-utilized now particularly because people do not understand it as an educative tool. When equity is explicitly addressed from an educative perspective it is likely that people will be more willing to address issues of generalizations, misuse of language, etc.

By changing the very way we conceive of equity, the policy itself becomes an educative tool by raising awareness and starting conversations about mutual respect and inclusivity, even in the absence of any incidents or complaints. See further Shore et al. Of course, there is still a need for punitive aspects in an equity policy.

If offenders do not sincerely engage with equity officers about their conduct punitive action may need to be taken. For example, if they are flippant or disengaged when apologizing. For similar reasons, protection of complainants through a prohibition on victimisation is needed to ensure those who choose to report are not unfairly harmed for raising issues that they feel are important and to encourage reporting of issues.

Policies should be alive to this potential outcome, retaining serious punishments in order to handle the most serious of violations. The way equity provides remedies needs to be reconceptualised to include educative and non-punitive remedies.

This will allow equity to function proactively as a resource and catalyst for further respectful discussion of the diversity of the debate community. Individuals should direct equity processes and be empowered to handle situations on their own If the ultimate goal of equity is to ensure that there is a climate of respect and tolerance, then victims of equity violations need to feel valued and respected by the process that handles their concerns.

Best practice equity policy should be consultative with the victim. As a general rule equity officers should not take action without the assent of the victim. Since at the varsity level of debating almost all participants are legally considered adults with some exceptions , when people are comfortable doing so they should be able to ask for apologies.

Most people will apologize. Equity should come into the situation 1 if the person is not comfortable resolving it themselves or 2 if the perpetrator refused to apologize. Thus, equity does not always need to be the first port of call but it should be there for the instances when people are unable to act for themselves.

Therefore, equity can help to lift the burden from the shoulders of the person feeling pain and have a conversation with the perpetrator explaining that they misgendered a speaker in a debate and why that was painful for the victim.

If the victim wants an apology the equity team can help facilitate that. Equity officers should have clear responsibilities and powers Those who have been appointed as equity officers must understand what their responsibilities and powers are in order to create the safety needed for debaters to fully participate.

This is a reason why having a standardized equity policy discussed further below is beneficial: it allows for knowledge transfer between people and tournaments. Most equity policies unfortunately tend to be vague. The duties of the Complaints and Equity Officers include, but are not limited to: a Being aware of all resources of the security provisions of the institution at which the tournament is hosted; b Being visible and available for the duration of the tournament, including attendance at social events; c Acting in a responsible manner and be prepared to deal with any eventuality.

This can cause confusion for equity officers about how they are meant to respond, and further complicate the handling of sensitive complaints and the broader operation of equity. In part, the problems faced by the CUSID policy are minimised by the capacity for individual societies and unions to supplement with policies of their own.

However, the strategy of having a nationally standardized equity policy which leaves room to empower individual debating unions to supplement and innovate is somewhat dependent on unions taking that initiative. Unions that do not prioritize equity will only employ the nationally standardized and potentially vague policy thereby being vulnerable to confusion or lack of authority.

In contrast, the Solbridge Australs policy Appendix E provides a far more comprehensive example under section 7. This details the specific manner in which complaints may be processed, as well as the various roles that members of the Equity Team need to undertake.

This clarity allows Equity Officers to execute their roles with confidence, and provides assurances to all participants about the procedure with which complaints are dealt. Ultimately, breaches of equity need to be considered on a case-by-case basis and as argued above, with the input and involvement of the victim.

Just as comprehensive equity policies need to be translated into digestible blocks; equally it is important that the powers of the equity officers are effectively communicated to the participants of the tournament. See further Appendix H for the infographic distributed by Solbridge Equity team, which presents the information about the complaints process in a condensed form.

The empowering equity document should be comprehensive to provide guidance and structure to equity officers, but should also be communicated to all participants in a form that allows them to easily understand how to make an equity complaint and the investigation and resolution process. Equity officers should be independent from other positions at debating tournaments Equity officers may not be needed at all at a given tournament but when they are needed it is important that they not distracted from their responsibilities.

Moving equity forward Though equity policies are clearly important frameworks for action and educative tools for change a single equity policy alone will never suffice. Change towards respecting and valuing diversity is a collaborative project,48 and embedding principles of equity should be the long term endgame for intervarsity debate.

This section contains suggestions for additional issues to be considered going forward. However, the presence of a single, core policy, which perhaps acts as a template, would enhance the entrenchment of equity.

For starters, having a core policy to be adapted provides consistency, which in turn can embed norms about how diversity can and should be approached. A more standardised policy with clear details about protected attributes, acceptable conduct and complaint handling processes will foster a shared understanding of equity, akin to how the longstanding existence of equity policies has fostered a norm of receptiveness to the idea of equity.

Community engagement and accountability It is important that our communities have a say in the continual evolution of equity policies going forward because they are who equity is working for. Engaging through targeted consultations and forums are effective ways to canvas opinion and gain insight about what equity is doing well, and where it must to improve. Institutional governance bodies must help to further consolidate findings and chart coordinated future directions for equity in intervarsity debate.

Additionally, data collection and measurement systems should be in place to provide accountability for the operation of equity at major tournaments. Access to data about trends and recurring issues met by equity teams will allow for continual fine tuning of equity policies and their operation. Supporting Equity Officers Being an equity officer or on the equity team can be a rewarding experience. However, it can also be a heavy burden to deal with the ugliest of behaviour, without necessarily being able to discuss these issues outside of the team for confidentiality reasons.

Thus an important future consideration is how equity officers are supported when difficult and stressful issues come before them. Conclusion Equity policies can never perfectly capture every facets of diversity, nor pre-empt all potential scenarios. There are no guarantees, no silver bullets to the problems generated by historical and ongoing patterns of prejudice and the malicious conduct of individuals. Nevertheless, equity policies are an important feature of the intervarsity debating landscape as a statement of clear intent that debate is an inclusive and respectful space.

For too long it has been assumed that equity was easy enough to figure out. This paper has shown what needs to take the place of vague and primarily punitive equity policies are more comprehensive approaches that clearly articulate the scope and rationale of equity, empowering equity teams, more clearly protecting non-dominant cultures and creating the space for respectful discussion and discourse. She is enthusiastic about the use of debating for education, equality of outcome and learning from her peers.

Lucian Tan is from the University of Sydney Union. He brings both a personal and professional passion to issues surrounding equity, fairness and protection from discrimination and harassment. The purpose of this Article is to give effect to the principle that all participants at rounds of the Championships should have an opportunity equal with other individuals to have their needs accommodated, consistent with their duties and obligations as participants in the Championships, without being hindered in or prevented from doing so by discriminatory practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender, or disability, and to be free from harassment and intimidation in the performance of these duties and obligations.

Participants wishing to make a formal complaint alleging a breach of the Code of Conduct must do so: a in written form; and b submit the complaint to the designated Equity Officer of the Championship either in person; or c Complaints made in written form shall be submitted through any submission box at the Event marked for the express purpose of submitting Code of Conduct related complaints.

Officer under seal. These are the only copies that will be made by the Equity Officer, and the Equity Officer shall not disclose the terms of the document to anyone other than the members of the Appeals Committee and the party receiving discipline. Any and all legal actions concerning this Code of Conduct, or concerning any aspect of the Championships where the [insert name of Debating Society] including its executive members, general members, or designated agents or the [insert name of university] are named parties to the action shall be conducted exclusively and entirely in the [insert relevant jurisdiction].

The purpose of this By-Law is to give effect to the principle that all participants at events organized by CUSID members should have an opportunity equal with other individuals to have their needs accommodated, consistent with their duties and obligations as participants in events organized by CUSID members, without being hindered in or prevented from doing so by discriminatory practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender, or disability, and to be free from harassment and intimidation in the performance of these duties and obligations.

Prohibited grounds of discrimination or harassment 2. All participants at a tournament hosted by a CUSID member will not engage in any behaviour that will undermine or attack the goals and purposes of CUSID including, but not limited to: a.

Complaints and equity officer 3. All intervarsity tournaments hosted by CUSID members shall appoint a Complaints and Equity Officer to investigate any complaints, including those under section 2. The procedure for investigating and resolving complaints must be publicized prior to the commencement of the tournament. The duties of the Complaints and Equity Officers include, but are not limited to: a Being aware of all resources of the security provisions of the institution at which the tournament is hosted; b Being visible and available for the duration of the tournament, including attendance at social events; c Acting in a responsible manner and be prepared to deal with any eventuality at all times; d Investigating all complaints; and e Issuing a report at the close of the tournament.

Procedure for review on request of the complaints and equity officer 8. Upon a two-thirds majority vote, the membership of CUSID may make an order against the person found to have engaged in the prohibited practice and include in the order any one or more of the following terms that the membership considers appropriate: a written order reprimanding the person for their conduct; b an oral order reprimanding the person for their conduct; c an order that the person apologize to the complainant for their conduct; or d an order prohibiting the person from participating in CUSID-sanctioned events for a period no less than three months and no more than five years.

Harassment is defined as engaging in a course of vexatious comment or conduct that is known or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome. Participant is defined as a debater, adjudicator, observer, or individual involved in the organization of the tournament. Preamble 1. This policy explains what conduct is prohibited and outlines the procedures for raising complaints when participants feel that their equity has been breached.

It has long been recognized that intervarsity debate should be about the respectful exchange of ideas, in a forum where all participants are able to feel welcome and are treated with dignity. Understanding that we want debate to be both a competitive and a learning environment, and that debate frequently throws together disparate opinions, we also think equity should be more than just a punitive tool and as such, equity will not be exclusively punitive.

We encourage the development of equity as a positive tool for education in cases where remarks or actions were inappropriate but not intended to be malicious, rather coming from a place of ignorance or the lack of familiarity with certain issues or vocabulary. No debater is perfectly knowledgeable about all issues that they will end up debating, and in the event that such rounds are frustrating or disappointing, we want to help all the debaters feel comfortable debating similar rounds in the future.

Equity is also a tool for participants to anonymously or non-anonymously take respite from the charged environment of competition and seriously discuss the proper and respectful way to speak about certain actors, issues, or events.

The Equity Team is willing to mediate discussion over the issues that arise during the tournament. We welcome individuals to bring incidents to the attention of the Equity Team even if they do not necessarily wish for an apology from or the removal of the offending party.

This policy is a crystallization of those principles, and it seeks to protect all participants of Australs from conduct that would make them feel uncomfortable or unsafe, to encourage and facilitate discussion and education, and ultimately to make debate a more inclusive space for all. Scope This policy applies to all participants at Australs , including but not limited to: a Debaters b Adjudicators c Members of the Organizing Committee d Coaches e Observers This policy applies for the entire duration of the tournament, which includes, but is not limited to: a During debates b Time between debates, including meals organized as part of the tournament c During any formal event organized as part of the tournament d During any social event organized as part of the tournament e On transportation organized as part of the tournament f In accommodation organized as part of the tournament This policy applies both to in person conduct and conduct over social media.

Definitions Bullying Bullying is the repeated, unreasonable behaviour by an individual or group, directed towards another individual or group, either physical or psychological in nature, that intimidates, offends, degrades humiliates, undermines or threatens.

This includes pressuring another individual or group to do something that they are uncomfortable with. Direct Discrimination Direct discrimination is treating another individual or group less favourably on the basis of a protected attribute than someone without that attribute in the same circumstances or circumstances not materially different.

Harassment Harassment is any unwelcome, offensive, abusive, belittling or threatening behaviour that humiliates, offends or intimidates an individual or group on the basis of a protected attribute. Note that sexual harassment has a specific meaning as any unwelcome sexual advance, request for sexual favours or any other unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature that humiliates, offends or intimidates a person and which a reasonable person, having regard to all the circumstances, would anticipate making the person humiliated, offended or intimidated.

Indirect Discrimination Indirect discrimination is imposing, or proposing to impose, a requirement, condition or practice that has, or is likely to have the effect of disadvantaging an individual or group with a particular protected attribute, and which is not reasonable in the circumstances.

Victimisation Victimisation is to cause detriment to a person because that person has made a complaint or taken part in complaints proceedings. Vilification Vilification is the public incitement of hatred, contempt or severe ridicule of another individual or group on the basis of a protected attribute. This policy also prohibits any participant or group of participants from bullying another participant or group of participants. Victimization of those who initiate complaints or take part in complaints proceedings is also prohibited under this policy.

Participants are required to seek positive consent when engaging in any conduct of a sexual or potentially sexual nature, including but not limited to sexual intercourse, physical intimacy, flirting, making sexual jokes, or suggestive bodily contact e. A failure to acquire positive consent will be a breach of this policy and may constitute sexual harassment. Positive consent requires a person to actively affirm that other parties in any sexual or romantic interaction are freely and voluntarily agreeing to what is occurring.

All parties should enquire as to what other people are feeling e. If you cannot determine the consent of the parties involved, you should end the sexual or romantic interaction. You have not obtained positive consent if: a Someone is too drunk to understand what they are doing b You are using social status or a position of authority to pressure someone into commencing or continuing a sexual interaction.

Conduct and Matters Regarding Debates 6. This includes: a Respecting the rules of the competition b Refraining from disrupting or distracting other debaters or adjudicators, whether through words, sounds or conduct c Accepting the decision of the adjudicator s Adjudicators are also required to treat debaters and other adjudicators with respect by: a Respecting the rules of the competition b Refraining from disrupting or distracting other debaters or adjudicators, whether through words, sounds or conduct c Refraining from insulting or non-constructive commentary on speeches or speakers Additionally, the language used within debates can often unintentionally lead to equity violations.

All participants must also ensure that they try to avoid making generalisations about any group on the basis of any protected attribute. Australs requires the chair judge to introduce themselves to the entire room with their correct pronoun, to give a chance to any wing judges present to do the same, and to introduce the correct pronoun of each debater.

This process is explained further in accompanying documentation. It is also expected that participants respect both the pronoun introduction process and the pronouns of each speaker, and refer to speakers by their correct pronoun or with gender-neutral language. Failure to do so may breach this policy. As such, adjustments may need to be made for participants with a disability, such as allocation of debating rooms close to the briefing hall, or use of assistive technology.

If a participant with a disability requires an adjustment, they should contact the Equity Team as soon as practicably possible. The Equity Team will make an assessment and provide recommendations to the Adjudication Core and the Organising Committee, who will make any adjustments deemed reasonably necessary. Complaints Procedures and Handling 7.

All complaints raised are treated as confidential, and the complainant will determine whether or not a complaint is investigated further. Complaints may also be made anonymously. The Equity Team feels that all people should feel comfortable to raise concerns they may have as freely and easily as possible. However, for due process reasons, the Equity Team cannot investigate anonymous complaints or provide remedies for anonymous complaints.

Participants are also encouraged to contact the Equity Team to raise general equity related concerns, even if they do not feel an incident has occurred. Complaints may be made informally or formally. An informal complaint is one that raises concerns, but does not require formal responses such as mediation or disciplinary action. These may be made in person or in writing.

A formal complaint is where the complainant would like a formal response such as mediation or disciplinary action. Formal complaints must be made in writing. Members of the Equity Team will excuse themselves from investigating and handling complaints that are made against them personally, or where a conflict of interest arises e.

The Equity Team recognizes that some contingents appoint institutional equity officers. Contingent leaders and contingent equity officers may also refer matters reported to them to the Equity Team with the consent of the person who made the report. However, it is important to note that institutional processes cannot replace this policy or the procedures outlined here.

Two members of the Equity Team as a minimum shall undertake investigations, although additional members may also be involved, as required. At any point during this process prior to resolution, a complainant may withdraw their complaint. At such a point, any investigation automatically ceases, and the initial complaint is treated as null and void. Equity, Discrimination and Harassment Policy 7. Complainants also have a right to appeal under the same conditions. The Equity Team would also like to acknowledge the invaluable advice and input of Patricia Johnson-Castle in the creation of this policy.

This is because participants have diverse gender identities that should be respected. Misgendering someone or failing to use their correct pronoun can be alienating and is disrespectful. It is the responsibility of the chair judge to introduce themselves to the entire room with their correct gender pronoun, and to give a chance to any wing judges present to do the same.

Debaters, in filling out the team ballot, will have the opportunity to state their correct gender pronouns. If a speaker does not wish to identify a pronoun, they are not required to do so. When the chair judge calls each debater to speak, they will also announce their correct gender pronouns.

If a speaker has decided not to state their pronoun, the chair should state that the speaker has expressed no preference. The process should be explicit and deliberate, and is the responsibility of the chair, though others may call for it if the chair forgets.

All participants should treat pronoun introductions seriously. Even if the number of transgendered people in the circuit is relatively low, participants should listen intently during introductions with a mind towards the necessary amount of nuance that can potentially present itself. Some may have no strong preference for any pronoun. If mistakes are made, it falls to the chair to politely correct the error in a way least obtrusive to the round. When speaking, it is also an option for people to structure their sentences in a way that avoids referring to someone through gender pronoun at all.

Appendix E Solbridge Australs Language Guidelines The goal of equity at Australs is for the event to be as inclusive as possible for every potential participant, and the burden of that is on each and every participant to be sensitive and considerate in how they interact with others. This can sometimes be a challenge when, for example, finding appropriate language while debating about sensitive topics.

Not everyone can be expected to know everything about a sensitive topic. We on the equity team realize that making this inclusiveness a reality entails not just good will, but a fair amount of learning as well.

No full or comprehensive guide for this exists. While we definitely encourage participants to work towards this end and to learn on their own and from each other, we hav ealso come up with our own set of suggestions about the appropriate use of language that we hope can serve as a starting point. It discounts the possibility and existence of exceptions, and offends in that way.

Recognize that many conditions are externally imposed. If you feel what you say might offend them, then adjust it. If what you seek to say is indeed true, this should be possible. If after several adjustments you can not make it inoffensive, then simply drop it. Please also be aware on slang terminology, which is often highly contextual.

Where possible, try to avoid using slang terminology, or if you do need to refer to such terms please ensure that you explain their meaning and context. There will be an opportunity for each participant to state their correct gender pronoun, and it is important to be aware of this and respect the pronouns of others. These words can still be loaded with cultural baggage in ways someone not LGBTQIA might not understand, and this can be very hurtful to someone still struggling with that reality.

Realize that this reflects on our unconscious habits in its use. The notes above about generalization are particularly relevant when characterizing people through their sex or their gender, since the associated problems with generalization are very commonplace in regular language.

For example, instead of hearing that women are raised to be submissive and men are raised to suppress their emotions, we are instead more likely to hear that women are simply submissive, and that men are simply out of touch with their emotions. Ultimately, support the right of people to identify themselves as they choose.

These words are still inappropriate for use by others. It is important here to note both that it is inappropriate for others to make these jokes, and to remember as well the above comments about generalization when speaking about this more seriously.

Corrections in-round We believe it appropriate for chairs to comment on the use of language in a round in between speeches in the same way that they might comment to enforce order. Introduction The demographics of university debating are changing. It is important to note that the impact of debaters continuing later can be viewed through a variety of lenses including but not limited to: ability, class, financial means, race, sexual orientation. In this article, we will be focusing on the impact of highly experienced male speakers on female speakers.

Bachelor of Laws Honours and Bachelor of Commerce pdf, kb. Bachelor of Design and Bachelor of Information Technology pdf, kb. Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Music pdf, kb. Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Computer Science pdf, kb. Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Biomedical Science pdf, kb. Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Global Studies pdf, kb. Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Arts pdf, kb.

Bachelor of Design and Bachelor of Media Communication pdf, kb. Bachelor of Fine Art and Bachelor of Business pdf, kb. Bachelor of Design and Bachelor of Business pdf, kb. Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Criminology pdf, kb. Bachelor of Criminology and Bachelor of Information Technology pdf, kb. Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Music pdf, kb. Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Fine Art pdf, kb.

Bachelor of Marketing and Bachelor of Media Communication pdf, kb. Bachelor of Marketing and Bachelor of Arts pdf, kb. Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Global Studies pdf, kb.

Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Computer Science pdf, kb. Bachelor of Business and Bachelor of Information Technology pdf, kb. Bachelor of Business and Bachelor of Arts pdf, kb. Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Arts pdf, kb. Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Biomedical Science pdf, kb.

Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Science pdf, kb. Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Information Technology pdf, kb. Bachelor of Business and Bachelor of Media Communication pdf, kb. Bachelor of Business Administration and Bachelor of Arts pdf, kb. Bachelor of International Business and Bachelor of Arts pdf, kb.

Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Actuarial Science pdf, kb. Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Economics pdf, kb. Bachelor of Business and Bachelor of Banking and Finance pdf, kb. Bachelor of Business and Bachelor of Marketing pdf, kb.

Bachelor of Business and Bachelor of Accounting pdf, kb. Bachelor of Business and Bachelor of International Business pdf, kb. Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Finance pdf, kb.

Global Executive Master of Business Administration pdf, kb. Graduate Certificate of Project Leadership pdf, kb. Bachelor of International Business pdf, kb. Master of Analytics pdf, kb. Graduate Certificate of Analytics pdf, kb. Bachelor of Laws Honours and Bachelor of Arts pdf, kb. Master of International Relations and Master of Journalism pdf, kb.

Master of Social Work for part time students pdf, kb. Graduate Certificate of Project Management pdf, kb. Master of Dietetics pdf, kb. Master of Biomedical and Health Science pdf, kb. Bachelor of Physiotherapy Honours pdf, kb. Master of International Development Practice pdf, kb. Graduate Diploma of Economic Analytics pdf, kb.

Master of Business Administration Digital pdf, kb. Graduate Certificate of Business Administration Digital pdf, kb.

Master of Indigenous Business Leadership pdf, kb. Master of Wound Care pdf, kb. Graduate Diploma of Legal Studies pdf, kb.

Master of Communications and Media Studies - one year intensive pdf, kb. Master of International Sustainable Tourism Management - one year intensive pdf, kb. Master of Applied Linguistics - one year intensive pdf, kb. Master of International Relations - one year intensive pdf, kb. Master of Journalism - one year intensive pdf, kb. Master of Strategic Communications Management - one year intensive pdf, kb.

Master of International Development Practice - one year intensive pdf, kb. Master of Interpreting and Translation Studies - one year intensive pdf, kb. Graduate Certificate of Epidemiology pdf, kb. In August Monash University announced it had entered a partnership that will enable its South African presence to Monash Find out when to start and how much it costs. Buy textbooks. Advanced search. University Handbook Perusahaan Gas Negara.

Faculty Education. Notes This unit is offered in alternate odd-numbered years only. Upon successful completion of this unit students should be able to: understand critical educational debates in Australia and internationally identify how research conversations are structured critically evaluate different contributions to educational debates develop the capacity to contribute to educational debates using a variety of approaches develop identities as knowledgeable commentators in education.