Twitterspeak (1 year later)

(Popular Demand Repost)


"'You haven't a real appreciation of Newspeak, Winston,' he said almost sadly.  'Even when you write it you're still thinking in Oldspeak.  I've read some of those pieces that you write in the Times occasionally. They're good enough, but they're translations.  In your heart you would prefer to stick to Oldspeak with all its vagueness and its useless shades of meaning.  You don't grasp the beauty of the destruction of words.  Did you know that Newspeak is the only language in the world whose vocabulary gets smaller every year?....Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?...Every concept that can ever be needed will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meanings rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten...The Revolution will be complete when the language is perfect.'"
-Syme to Winston in Gorege Orwell's 1984.

"Brevity is the soul of wit"
-Lord Polonius in Shakespeare's Hamlet

"THANKS!!!!! N Y MY NAM HAD 2 B NEAR LAST MAURYA LML" (Translation: "Thanks! And why (did) my name had (have) to be near last Maurya? Laughing Mad Loud." )
-A student, my facebook wall.

The Economy of Language

Since I started using Twitter, I've become more connected to the world around me by following several major news organizations and individuals who tweet commentary about current events.  However, Twitter and other more modern forms of communication impose an economy of language on users such that each word becomes a good in the marketplace of ideas and complex issues are said in catch phrases that don't always explain full meanings. When I speak about the economy of language, I don't mean to limit my argument to just Twitter. I also mean the language used in text messaging, and to some extent Facebook.  I will refer to this new form of language as "Twitterspeak," because Twitter currently imposes the most strict character limit of these forms of communication.

My ambivalence towards these forms of communication comes from the economy of language they impose and what that means for human communication, particularly for young people still learning how to effectively communicate in a written format.

Brevity is the soul of wit, but the enemy of thoughtfulness. 

Some argue that forcing a writer to be more succinct produces better writing. Paul Krugman of the New York Times recently wrote this blog post on the subject.  He believes length constraints force him to be more concise and make each word more meaningful. Every paper returned to me in my first philosophy class said "Eliminate Needless Words" boldly in red on each page.  Over time, I learned the importance of being clear in my writing.  I am supposed to carefully select words to maximize meaning and precision.  Like an economy, I am striving to reach the appropriate intersection of cost and benefit.  I have fallen out of practice a bit since college, but I know it is always something to aspire to when writing.  Twitter, in the extreme, forces me to do this.
   
I believe in the immense networking power and the free exchange of ideas that is facilitated by Twitter and Facebook.  Recently it became clear that these mediums are so powerful that they are able to catalyze revolutions.  However, it remains unclear whether or not they will be effective in helping citizens form a plan of governance.  It's easy to write "Overthrow Mubarak" in under 140 characters, but it's much more difficult to exchange ideas on the formation of government in the same length. When Speaker Boehner tweets something like "House passed bill 2 keep govt running, cut spending; if Sen. Reid won't pass it, we'll pass shorter one 2 keep govt running, cut spending" there is very little complexity in the expression.  Twitterspeak is similar to politicians arguing in sound bites and catch phrases.  No one can give an in-depth reflection on fixing the economy in sixty seconds.  One might argue that tweets can contain links for further information, or that a compilation of tweets can give an idea about a trend that is occurring, but a tweet in itself rarely can convey a complex thought.  

Code Switching  and Neuropathways

Just because these modes of communication are short does not not make them inherently bad. Not everything that needs to be said needs to be complex.  The problem arises when people use these short statements as their primary mode of communication.

 My students use Facebook, Twitter, and text obsessively.  They write messages that make some sense in  Twitterspeak.  However, when they need to produce a piece of writing with fully formed sentences and thoughts, they are often unable to do so. In this case, the argument that being more concise produces better writing fails because it presupposes that the user knows how to use the English language properly in the first place.  Instead of writing "eliminate needless words," I find myself commenting "spell out complete words" on the tops of their essays.

Perhaps I am not being fair. I am making a value judgment on the importance of stringing a coherent sentence together. Maybe these values are elitist and antiquated, and maybe we are moving to a new form of communication.  Who am I to say that one form of communication is better than another?  Languages have shifted before, and they are bound to do so again.   

In graduate school, I learned that successful students are able to "code switch"--they have the ability to switch back in forth between one dialect or language to another when it is appropriate to do so.  For example, I can code switch between writing "hahaha's" and "LOLs" and ":)" in instant messenger, and more formal language when it is appropriate, such as in an academic paper or formal letter.  Students who are growing up in the generation behind me have been exposed to "Twitterspeak" at a much earlier age, so my norm and their norms of communication are different. If a student lacks experience or knowledge of more formal writing, he will be unable to code switch.  When I am reading a student's essay, I do not think I should be reading "LOL"s in place of "This is funny," "ur" in place of "your" or "you're," "IDK" in place of "I don't know" or "n" in place of the word "and."  Unfortunately, students that are growing up in an Internet generation without a lot of exposure to formal writing might understand "Twitterspeak" as the correct form because that is what they are used to reading.  

These mediums of communication are constantly reinforced.  Students instant message, text, and tweet more than they use the phone.  They no longer pen love letters, or even email that much for that matter.  Instead, they send an @tweet and cram as much into 140 characters as possible.  As John Stuart Mill said "The mental and moral, like the muscular powers, are improved only by being used." Moreover, the teachings of modern neuroscience help explain what I read in student essays.  With each repetition of Twitterspeak, the child's ability to Twitterspeak grows and improves.  Sadly, my students don't get nearly enough "reps" at writing actual sentences.  These behaviors all build mental pathways.  The longer form writing pathways are generally shoddy.  


The danger of this is that the absence of well executed expression leads to an absence of in-depth and analytical thought (see Orwell's quote and article linked below).  We should only teach our students how to be concise after they have learned to be long winded.  The problem, then, does not lie with Twitter, Facebook, or texting as modes of communication, but with parenting and education.  

It is possible to teach a student to read and write well, even in a society that has begun to function in an economy of words.  Teachers and parents are doing it everyday, and there are plenty of students who can code-switch between "Twitterspeak" and formal English.  This use of language is only a current manifestation of an age old problem, after all.  There have been several critiques on the use of colloquial languages throughout history.  I, for one, will not be giving up Twitter, or my Twitterspeak, but I will be making a more concerted effort to teach students how to write, and therefore think, clearly. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible. Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits one can think more clearly, and to think clearly is a necessary first step toward political regeneration: so that the fight against bad English is not frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of professional writers." 


-George Orwell, "Politics and the English Language" http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm

Two-Thirds Triathlon, One-Third Merde*

Shit.

My coworker has forwarded me an email about the Nations Triathlon, my second triathlon.  The race organizers and city officials have decided to cancel the swimming portion of the race due to flooding.  I had been so excited to compete in a triathlon again, and now I couldn't.  I began to seriously consider skipping the race and staying home instead of making the trip to DC.

The problem, though, is that the race is scheduled for September 11th.  Ground Zero is a block away from my apartment, and the last place I want to be for the 10th anniversary of the event is anywhere near where I live. The media is reporting that there have been threats from terrorists, and all of the streets surrounding my apartment would be closed for the majority of the weekend.  I want to leave.

Faced with two mediocre choices, I decide to stick to the original plan and head to Washington DC to compete in the Nation's Triathlon, or as I told my coworkers, the Nation's Duathlon.  I tell my friends that I might not compete once I arrive in DC.  My spirits are pretty low, and I'm feeling sad (which is a little bit silly I guess.  There are better things to get sad about).  The thing is, I have spent my entire summer waking up at 5:30 AM to train, and I have made a lot of sacrifices to be ready for this event.  Some days I would even make the long trek to 145th street in Harlem to swim at the crack of dawn.  Swimming is my strength, and I believe its absence will make me completely noncompetitive with the rest of the field (and I'm a competitive person). 

Early September 10th, Erik and I head to the Path Train to take us to New Jersey.  We are  picking up the rental car in Jersey City.

Shit.

I forgot my bike cleats.  If I don't have them, I can't compete (This isn't such a bad thing).  However, if I do decide to compete, it's going to cost me a lot of money to buy another pair. It takes me an hour to return to my apartment. I weave through the exponentially growing 9/11 crowd to retrieve them.  It is pretty clear that my ambivalence about racing has translated in to a lack of preparedness for the trip.

 I end up not eating all day because of the traveling.  I realize half way through the drive that I'd better go to the race registration rather than the hotel because I probably won't be able to register in time otherwise.  By six o'clock that evening, I'm registered for the event and checked into the hotel, and completely exhausted. I can't find the energy to go place my bike in the transition area, so I take a nap instead.  I wake up thirty minutes later and rack my bike just before the transition area begins to close for the evening.

That night, Erik and I go out to eat with my friend Christine.  Thinking of my race, Christine suggests we eat Italian food for carbo-loading purposes. I'm ready to eat just about anything, and am not thinking too much about how I will fuel my body, so I agree and ask that we go as soon as possible.  I get back to the hotel at 10:00 PM. Unlike my first triathlon, I'm not nervous, I'm just exhausted, and I am able to fall asleep immediately.

5:45 AM, the alarm goes off.  I put on my tri-suit and get ready to go. 

Shit.

I don't have any food.  I forgot to bring energy bars and sports drinks with me.  I have to be in and out of the transition area and ready to race within the next hour.  The transition area is a half an hour walk away.  Washington DC is a big city though, and I should be able to find somewhere to buy food on the way.

But we don't.  The city is silent.  We discover that nothing is open early on Sunday mornings in DC, or at least not this Sunday morning.  I'm spoiled by New York City.  Everything is open all the time.  Once we realize our dilemma, Erik sets off in a different direction in search of food, and I rush to the race start.  By the time I arrive, I only have 10 minutes to set up my stuff and get out of the transition area.  This proves to be very difficult--5000 athletes are walking in the opposite direction of me, out of the transition area and into their starting corrals. I'm filled with anxiety.  Maybe I should have stayed in New York after all.

By 7:00 AM I'm out of the transition area, and the race has started.  My age group is not starting until after 8:00 AM, so I hope that Erik will arrive with food, and will be able to hold my phone so I don't have to carry it while he competes.  He calls me and reports that he has had no luck, and has walked nearly three miles. I'm starving.

Around 7:20 AM I notice that a food cart has opened and is selling danishes, muffins and coffee.  Luckily, I had stuffed some extra cash in my spi belt and so I buy a humongous muffin and a coffee.  This is NOT the ideal pre-race meal, but I'm out of options. I call Erik to let him know that I have found food.  He begins to rush back.

I wait, and wait, and wait for Erik to arrive. At 7:45 he calls to tell me he is at the starting line, and wants to know where I am.

Shit.

The roads have been blocked off, and he can't get around to where I'm waiting.  Still with a muffin for him and my phone, I begin to worry that I'll miss the competition all together.  I can't compete carrying this stuff.

Somehow, Erik finds a way to get to me by 8:00. I hand him my phone and the muffin and he hurries away. Up until this point, competing is the last thing on my mind.  For the next five minutes I can finally focus on the race.  My race wave is started, and all of the other woman sprint ahead of me to their bikes.  I wonder why they are going so fast.  Maybe it's just because I feel sluggish from my muffin. I run at a slow jog through

Shit.

The ground is so wet and muddy that most people have difficulty getting their bikes out of the transition area.  I have to run carrying my bike over my head through tons of mud before I can get to the road.

What happens next is totally unexpected: I absolutely kill the biking portion of the race, becoming one of the top cyclists in my age group (and for women in general, for that matter).  After that, I run a 10k in 49 minutes (the equivalent of running 6.2 miles at an 8 minute pace).  I'm completely confused with my time at the end of the race, but also euphoric.  I can't stop smiling.  I wait in line to receive my splits, and I discover that I have improved my time by 18 minutes in the biking portion, and by 6 minutes in the running portion.  I think to myself:

Shit.

 I have what it takes to be a triathlete, and not just a one sport athlete, after all.  Time to get serious.

*Pardon my French

My First Triathlon

Before I begin, I must first apologize to my readers for never completing my mock trial series.  To make a long story short, the WIHS mock trial team advanced to the fifth round of competition and lost.  This earned them the status of top 16  in New York City.  This was a pretty fascinating story filled with all sorts of drama.  I'm sorry I didn't finish the series. Maybe I will later this summer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
About 40 minutes into the biking portion of my first triathlon ever, I was passed by an overweight middle-aged lady on a not-so-great bike.  She passed me pretty quickly, too, and I was trying really, really hard to go fast. I was passed by a lot of people the entire time I was riding.

At the beginning of the biking leg of the triathlon, I thought I had over-exerted myself earlier swimming through the Potomac. I'm a good swimmer and had been told by several people that I didn't need to train for it, so I didn't.  I thought that maybe that was my mistake, and the cause for my exhaustion on the bike.

Competitors started the race in waves of eight people.  Eight people would jump in the water, and 10 seconds later, another eight people would jump in.  Even though female competitors did not begin swimming until after all of the men had started, I ended up finishing the swimming leg surrounded by men.  So in the beginning of the biking section, I was only being passed by a lot of men, which I didn't think was particularly surprising.  But then I started getting passed by a lot of women, too, and my confidence in my athletic ability took a beating. When this woman in particular passed me, I decided to stop and check to see if I had a flat tire.

I didn't. Relieved but still perplexed, I tried spinning my wheels.  The front wheel barely moved.  I then realized that for the past 15 kilometers I had been riding with my breaks pinched against my front tire. I had my bike"repaired" the night before by a bike mechanic, and I thought my my ride was in good shape.  Frustrated at my novice mistake of not checking my breaks before the start of the race, I quickly fixed them and hopped back on my bike. To the relief of my legs and my sanity, I started passing people (including that lady).

I finished the biking section and started the running section with very sore legs.  Despite my setback, I finished the race and didn't do too badly-- I came in 9th out of 70 women competing in the event for the first time, and I was only 10 minutes away from the first place "newbie." My total time for the 1.5k (1mile) swim --40k (26mile) bike-10k(6 mile) run was 2 hours and 52 minutes.

The physical stress of the biking mishap, however, was no where near as stressful as the logistical preparation for the triathlon.  I was a basket-case the day before the race, stressing over the minutia of my equipment, the transition area, and making sure everything was set up correctly so that I could easily switch between events.

Preparing for a triathlon is an organizational feat.   Triathletes must get together all of the equipment they'll need to compete in three different sports, and then figuring out a way to get all of it to wherever they're going. This is especially difficult if you're an urbanite without a car.

Competitors vary in the equipment they'll use for the event.  I am more of a minimalist.  I used a swim cap, reflective swim goggles, a "triathlon suit" (an outfit that you can swim, bike and run in), biking cleats, a bike computer, my bike, socks, a helmet, sunglasses, a 'chest strap' (a strap that goes around your body to make it easier to put on your racing number after the swim), and my running shoes. I also had a lot of Clif bars and Powerade with me.  On top of that, was given a lot of numbers to put in various places-- one for my helmet, one for my bike, one for my gear bag, one on my swim cap, and one I had to put on between swimming and biking. I also had to have my racing number written on both arms and above both of my knees, and my age written on the back of my right calf.  I had to wear an anklet with a timing chip and a wrist band that signified I was a competitor in the race.  So much stuff!  Some racers had even more equipment: wetsuits for swimming, zip laces to save seconds on tying their shoe laces, areobars for their bicycles---the list goes on and on.

That's me! (in the black)

As you might gather from my list above, not only is this a logistical headache, it's also a very expensive endeavor to be involved in a triathlon.  I had no idea how much money I would end up spending in order to compete when I signed up for the race in January.  I thought I would be all set after dropping nearly $800 to a "decent" bike and $190 on a registration fee.  What I didn't realize is that I would have to buy so many more things than that (like special pedals for my bike, special biking shoes, and everything else listed above), along with a gym membership so I could swim (which I didn't use much), a car rental for the weekend, and a night in a hotel.  I can also safely say even though I spent a lot of money, I did things on the cheap compared to many triathletes.  Most competitors were sporting bikes in the $2000 range, and some were upwards of $6000.  I was astounded by how many people  had so many expensive pieces of equipment.  There is definitely a huge barrier to access in this type of competition-- it is not for the unemployed or underpaid.  It turns out that the money spent on equipment has very little to do with how fast someone finishes, though.  It doesn't matter how expensive your gear is if you're out of shape.  It was funny to watch the professional triathletes speed away on bikes less expensive than the ones used by men with beer bellies.

The money I spent to participate is what motivated me to still compete even after I injured my foot 12 days prior to the race.  Against nearly everyone's (and the doctor's) advice, I figured that I had put too much into it financially to back out. The good news is that my foot was fine, and if I won't need to pay the 'start-up' costs for my next triathlon.

When I crossed the finish line in front of the Capitol building in Washington DC, there was no doubt in my mind that everything was worth it.  I have competed in hundreds of athletic events in my life, and I have never had so much fun, and I felt so happy.  The finish line was crowded withe friends and family members celebrating everyone's achievement.  I cannot wait to compete in another triathlon.

The Kiddos

This is the sixth post in a series about the Washington Irving High School Mock Trial team.  Please click for posts one, two, three, four, and five.

There were eight students who performed this case: Sobeida, Alexis, Geannie, Breanna, Anothonia, Jennifer, Sasha and Robbie.  Kimberly was our backup student--she was on the team last year, but recently started a new job and was no longer able to attend practices.  She ended up saving the team from elimination in pretty extreme situation later in the competition...

Sobeida is the only senior on the team, and she played a lawyer on both the plaintiff and defense side.  She is truly a remarkable girl.  She moved to the United States only five years ago and did not speak a word of English when she arrived. Five years later, she is graduating as the Valedictorian of her class.  She recently received the Gates Scholarship, and is planning on attending Northwestern University in the Fall (unless she gets into Harvard off of their waitlist).  Sobeida has the ability to spin witnesses into a confused mess when she cross examines them.  Her thick Dominican accent put other teams at ease; Their surprised looks were always entertaining when she calmly and brilliantly explained away objections thrown in her direction.  For such a new speaker of English, her command of the language is unreal.

The rest of the team is made up of sophomores.  Alexis, a petite, studious, driven and well spoken young woman.  It is clear that she strives to be excellent in everything she takes on.  She also has earned several nicknames throughout her two years on the mock trial team because of her constantly varying hairstyles.  On the Plaintiff side, she played the role of Chris Crangle.  On the defense side, Alexis played a lawyer, and delivered the opening statement for the case.

Breanna played an attorney on both plaintiff and defense sides. Everything Breanna says when she is performing has gravitas.  Her lines are always delivered like a seasoned pastor.  She speaks naturally, but deliberately and could easily walk into any public speaking situation and hypnotize her audience by her presence.  Her demeanor during practice was a different story, though.  Her habit of speaking to herself when she trying to remember her next question caused a lot of breakout of giggling among both the coaches and students.

Geannie aka "Jenny from the block" is the team's newest player. Geannie came to the team this year with a no nonsense at-ti-tude.  In fact, the girl had so much attitude that the judge in the first round of the competition accused of badgering the witnesses during her cross examinations.  The coaches seriously considered getting her a neck brace to stop her from cocking her head from side to side when she spoke.  Geannie played the role of an attorney on the Plaintiff side, and Alex Allen's role on the defense side. 

Robbie, the only male on the team, played the role of Pat Parker on the plaintiff's side.  Like Sobeida, Robbie is extremely good at thinking on his feet.  He was consistently able to deflect the most difficult questions from crossing attorneys.  

Sasha played the role of Cameron Curtis on the plaintiff's side.  Sasha's long curly hair and big smile match  her personality.  She is a deeply loyal friend to her teammates, and is always interested in what is going on in everyone else's life.

Anthonia and Jennifer-- I will explain these two together because they are two peas in a pod.  They are absolute best friends, always together, and both play witnesses on the defense side.  Anthonia played the role of Ryan Ryder, and Jennifer played the role of IM Feddup.  They are both the quietest players on the team, but they are reliable.  They have made a lot of progress since their freshman years.

This is the little team we had, held strongly together by their friendships with one another. With these eight players, Washington Irving High School prepared to get ready for the first round of competition against Essex Street Academy throughout January. . .

The Case

This is Part 5 in a series about the Washington Irving High School Mock Trial Team.  Please click for Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4

This year's case was about a parking ban.  On the morning of March 15^th 2010, the seniors at Excelsior High School drove to school and found “No Parking” signs posted on the four streets surrounding the school.  The students had purchased permits to park on those streets, and so they had no where to park that morning.

Chaos ensued.  Students were late to school, angry parents made phone calls, and students who decided to park despite the signs received parking tickets. 

 Alex Allen, the Mayor of Empireville, and the town’s Board of Trustees had imposed the ban at the Village Board meeting only a few days earlier.  The local newspaper reported the change, but most students did not read the paper, and did not know that they would be unable to park.   

Pat Parker, the school’s valedictorian, mock trial team captain and newspaper editor, believes that his Constitutional right to due process was violated with the enactment of the parking ban.  He had a property interest in the parking permit that he purchased, and due process was not followed in removing his right to that property interest.  Pat Parker is the plaintiff in this case. 

It is unclear whether Mayor Allen imposed the ban for political reasons or for safety reasons.  On one hand, there were several reasons that the parked cars around the high school could cause an unsafe environment.  The cars made snow removal difficult, and their weight had put pressure on the pipes underneath the streets for years and could have burst at anytime.  Further, students loitering around the cars and acting recklessly caused neighbors to become concerned for their own safety.

Testifying to the defense’s behalf was Mayor Allen, Ryan Ryder, the commissioner of Public Works, and I.M. Feddup, an Empireville citizen.  Ryder testifies about his experience with the infrastructural problems of Empireville and the eroding streets around the high school.  I.M. Feddup has lived across the street from school since the time it was built, and she is ‘feddup’ with the students parking on her street.  The parking has caused her property value to decline, and has made it unsafe for her grandkids to play outside when they visit.

Then again, the parking ban might have been enacted for political purposes.  A few months before the ban was imposed, Mayor Allen proposed a Capital Improvement Project that targeted the high school.  The project involved hiring school resources officers and replacing the pipes underneath the streets surrounding the high school.  Mayor Allen believed that the school district should have to pay for a substantial portion of both of these initiatives.  In Allen's opinion, it was the students that caused the problems and the schools should be responsible for paying for these initiatives.  He did not consult the school district about this proposal.

The Superintendent of the Excelsior Central School district, Chris Crangle, found out about the plan in the newspaper and was furious.  He wrote a very strongly worded Letter to the Editor in response accusing Mayor Allen of coming “perilously close to extortion” for his demanding that the school district pay for these new initiatives.  The school district had a very tight budget, and the students were not half as bad as the Mayor had painted them in his remarks.  

 In response, Mayor Allen invited Superintendent Crangle to a lunch meeting to discuss these issues.  This meeting ended poorly, and at the next Board of Trustees meeting the parking ban was enacted. The meeting minutes reported that Ryan Ryder stated that the ordinance to ban parking was needed to put pressure on the school district and the superintendent.  Additionally, Pat Parker reported that Mayor Allen told him the parking ban was enacted to get back at Superintendent Crangle.

Testifying on the plaintiff’s side is Pat Parker, Superintendent Crangle and Village Board of Trustee member Cameron Curtis.  Cameron Curtis was the only trustee who voted against the parking ban.  She is also the only trustee who is not part of Mayor Allen’s political party. She made several objections to the parking ban during the meeting but was outvoted by the rest of the trustees despite her complaints.

 -----------------------------------------------------------

As the reader has probably surmised, this case is not that exciting.  City kids don't identify easily with issues surrounding student parking. Still, the Washington Irving Mock Trial team became obsessed with the fact pattern of this case over the months of preparation, and learned how to spin each side of the story to their advantage in competition. 

To read the full case, click here:  http://www.nysba.org/Content/NavigationMenu/PublicResources/LawYouthCitizenshipProgram/MockTrialTournament/2011CASEFINALVERSION11811.pdf

Plans? What Plans?

This is part four in a series about the WIHS Mock Trial team. Please click here for part 1, part 2, and part 3. 

So it turns out that our plans went out the window pretty rapidly, as usual, this year. 

Throughout the preseason, students slowly started dropping off the team, one by one.  Absenteeism meant that we had to repeat lessons many times and our neatly laid out plans were soon left in shambles.  By the start of 2010, we were back down to our minimum of eight students once again with one backup player who couldn’t attend practices because she recently started a new a job.  We had barely covered the material we wanted to cover.

 Although the team of eight was committed and determined, it was rare that the entire team was ever at practice together at the same time.  Train delays, family obligations, sicknesses, and a host of other problems prevented the the team from having a practice where the all the players were in attendance until a few days before the first competition. Often times, students would not call to say they weren't coming to practice, which infuriated all the coaches. I had to constantly remind myself that even with all their real world experience and problems, the students are children.  They are still learning what it means to be responsible. 

The dwindling numbers and absenteeism sparked many conversations among the coaches about disbanding the team.  We all had a lot on our plates, and we were unsure if the time would be worth it.  We didn’t want another season of logging hundreds of combined hours to the program without seeing the students progress past round two. 

It wasn't just the students though--the coaches also had a lot of problems getting to the practices.  The demands of being an attorney at a top law firm are substantial.  It requires long and unpredictable hours.  This hindered all of the coaches’ abilities to come to practice on time (or at all).  Personally, I also had a lot of trouble attending all of the practices. I was in the middle of making arrangements for my dad to move out of a nursing home and back into the community, so I had to do a lot of running back and forth between New York City and Hartford.  Every Wednesday and Friday emails circulated between the coaches to piece together our schedules and to make sure at least one adult would be in the room at all times. 

 In this way, the students and coaches are similar.  Both groups have chaotic and unpredictable lives.  As much both sides would hate to admit it, I think this dynamic created some understanding between both sides about demands on time and the priority that Mock Trial plays in a student and coach’s life.  It was a huge priority, but many things took precedence over practice.

Still, most students on the team had at least a year of experience to help them through the season.  This experience would prove to be invaluable to them in first few months of 2011.

Recruiting

This is part 3 in a series about the WIHS Mock Trial Team. Please click for Part 1 and Part 2

Of course, all of our planning at the beginning of the season would be for naught without a team.  Therefore, the coaches also spend time recruiting students to participate in Mock Trial.  Some coaches go to WIHS and speak to classes about the club. I speak to teachers about recruiting their most dedicated students. I also set up a table for Mock Trial at the afterschool activities fair.  We encourage returning students to recruit their friends.  We try to think of every avenue possible to get more students involved.

According to the rules of the New York State Bar Association, there needs to be at least eight students to field a team.  Ideally, a team should have twelve to fifteen players.  There are a total of twelve parts that can be played: there are three lawyers and three witnesses on both the plaintiff and defense side ((3+3)*2=12).  If there are twelve players on a team, each person has only one role to play.  Any additional students serve as backup players.  On a competition day, six students are needed to play--only one side performs at a time.

We were all relieved when fifteen students showed up the first day of practice.  We have trouble retaining students from season to season, and there is usually a large dropout rate throughout the course of the season.  Last year, we had a student drop off the team only days before the first round of competition (via Facebook message, no less), reducing our number to seven.  We scrambled to find a warm body to fill his role so that the months of practice would not go to waste for the rest of the team.  The coaches ended up practicing with the new student the entire weekend before the competition, staying with her until almost midnight on a Sunday night to prepare her.  We did not want any repeats of that this season. The fifteen faces in the room made everyone optimistic. 

Students are not the only people we need to run a mock trial program, though.  We always need coaches, and they are not easy to find.  With every year attorneys stay at the firm, they are saddled with more work and have less time for volunteering.  I have seen this happen time and time again with my volunteers.  People volunteer a lot during their first year, and less during their second and third years.  I rarely have anyone beyond a fourth year turn up for my programs. 

This year, we got lucky.  We got a new coach.  Yana and Manoj were on their way home from Cleary one night and discussing Mock Trial during their car ride.  The students had just completed a homework assignment. Yana wanted to talk about it, Manoj didn’t.  This was pretty typical of interactions between Yana and Manoj.  Luckily for them, they were sharing the car with a first year associate named Leza.  When Leza heard Yana and Manoj talking about Mock Trial, she mentioned that she had participated in mock trial in high school.  Attacking her from both sides, Yana and Manoj pitched the nearly impossible sell of volunteering for Mock Trial to Leza.  By the end of the car ride, Leza was the newest coach of the Mock Trial team. 

Leza certainly didn’t know what she was getting into when she agreed to be a coach.  If she did, she would not have agreed to take on the responsibility.  Luckily for us, she did, and I’m fairly certain she is happy about that decision now.   It’s nearly impossible for me to sell mock trial to my volunteers.  Telling most attorneys at Cleary that they’ll have to commit to volunteering about 10-15 hours a week and they’ll run as fast as they can in the other direction. The attorneys at Cleary already have a ridiculous amount of work on their plates.  Mock Trial is by far the largest time commitment a volunteer can take on in any of the programs that I run at Cleary.  But—once you’re hooked, it’s hard to back out of the commitment.  The coaches of the Mock Trial team become attached to the students.  It turns out to be an extremely rewarding experience, but at a high cost.

With all of this in order, the coaches were optimistic about the year.  We had our students, we had our coaches, and we had a plan.  It was just a matter of holding it all together—and maybe we could actually do it this time.