Yep, we agree entirely! And I think most other technical debaters would, too.
I don't talk to my friends at high speeds, my favorite speakers speak slowly, and I certainly wouldn't talk like a debater when I'm trying to be my most persistent.
The kind of debate McCordick is criticizing is, in my experience, indeed fringe.
There are more mainstream offerings: less technical debate formats such as Public Forum, Parliamentary, and Congress; Mock Trial; Model United Nations; Junior State of America; the Center for Civic Education's We the People competition; popular organized political debates; other oratory activities outside of civics.
To be fair, I've had the good luck to be involved in High Schools with the resources to offer a selection of these programs, which isn't always the case. I wish speech––the kind of slow, articulate expository speech that wins over non-debaters––was a bigger part of core curricula (in civics, but also in sciences).
I don't talk to my friends at high speeds, my favorite speakers speak slowly, and I certainly wouldn't talk like a debater when I'm trying to be my most persistent.
The kind of debate McCordick is criticizing is, in my experience, indeed fringe.
There are more mainstream offerings: less technical debate formats such as Public Forum, Parliamentary, and Congress; Mock Trial; Model United Nations; Junior State of America; the Center for Civic Education's We the People competition; popular organized political debates; other oratory activities outside of civics.
To be fair, I've had the good luck to be involved in High Schools with the resources to offer a selection of these programs, which isn't always the case. I wish speech––the kind of slow, articulate expository speech that wins over non-debaters––was a bigger part of core curricula (in civics, but also in sciences).