McMinnville Invitational
2024
—
McMinnville,
OR/US
Judges Paradigm List
All Paradigms:
Show
Hide
Carissa Albin
Nestucca High Speech Team
None
Jesse Albright
Lakeridge High School
None
Ameena Amdahl-Mason
Clackamas High School
Last changed on
Wed February 21, 2024 at 8:08 AM PDT
I competed in policy debate in high school, parliamentary debate in college, and I have been coaching since 2001. I would consider myself a tabula rasa judge, as much as that is possible. I feel comfortable with any line of argumentation, but expect clear articulation of said argumentation. I want you to provide me with compelling reasons why you should win the debate. Generic argumentation, weak links, and time sucks are not appreciated. I don't judge a ton (in my local circuit I am in tab a lot), but I did judge at NSDA Nationals in 2020 including some late Elim rounds. I keep a detailed flow so staying organized is key to winning my ballot. Pronouns: she/her/hers. If you have questions, feel free to ask before the round starts. Email for the chain: amdahl-masona@nclack.k12.or.us.
Emmanuel Aquino
Canby High School
None
David Barringer
Oregon City High School
None
Keaton Belbas
Battle Ground High School
None
Matthew Bell
West Linn High School
None
Liz Bernal
Sam Barlow HS
None
A. Jane Berry-Eddings
Sprague High School
None
David Blommendahl
Douglas McKay High School
Last changed on
Tue January 2, 2024 at 6:37 AM PDT
DAVID BLOMMENDAHL
I am the Speech and Debate advisor at Douglas McKay High School in Salem. This is my second year in that role.
I consider it a privilege to judge and have a deep respect for the preparation and commitment that participating and competing in these events entails.
When judging, I will always ask for your name with correct spelling, your assigned code, the school you represent, and the topic of your presentation. I use this information for my own notes which I usually take on a Google Doc.
The nature of each event is different, but invariably I focus on your "hook," evidence of organization, clarity, annunciation, correct grammar, emphasis and dramatic pause for key points, and voice. I want to see YOU come through in what you present.
I will give all competitors feedback, usually in bullet point form, on the strengths of their presentation as well as areas for improvement. I will always try to be constructive.
I am newish to judging debate, but I focus on the clarity of your arguments and the respect you show your opponent(s). If there is a disparity between your argument and that of your opponent, clearly engage with that disparity and use facts and logic to make your own case. I am not impressed with emotional arguments. Facts weigh heavier than beliefs.
I value and respect what you are doing and how you show who you are and what you are capable of in these events.
Best of luck to all!
Last changed on
Sat March 2, 2024 at 6:15 AM EDT
Bonus speaker points for puns.
Larry Burke
Adrienne C. Nelson
Last changed on
Sat February 24, 2024 at 11:55 AM EDT
I want a civil debate with clash and clear arguments. I don't like speed if you don't have clear organization and appropriate emphasis.
Terese Bushnell
Ida B. Wells HS
Last changed on
Fri January 12, 2024 at 7:15 AM PDT
I’m a first year head coach. With my team, I’m largely focused on public address events but I also enjoy debate.
My professional background is in communications which influences my judging in any event. This means I’m looking for clarity and I want you to engage me with your speech. Please do not spread. I strongly prefer conversational cadence.
Analysis is important. I appreciate a clear explanation of your position, good organization with signposting, description of impacts and clash. I expect you to keep your own time.
Be professional. Be nice. Have fun.
Jonah Calhoun
Sprague High School
None
Courtenay Carr Heuer
West Linn High School
None
Pavan Chopra
Sunset High School
Last changed on
Fri January 12, 2024 at 11:31 PM PDT
I value respectful interactions between competitors and ask that participants try to enjoy themselves.
Ramesh Chunduri
Sunset High School
None
Philip Coleman
Clackamas High School
Last changed on
Thu January 25, 2024 at 7:53 AM PDT
Affiliation: Clackamas High School
Competitive experience: 2 years of NPDA (college parli), 1 year of CEDA (college policy)
Coaching/Judging experience: 6 years of NPDA coaching with 45-60 rounds judged per year, 10 years coaching high school policy
Pronouns: He/him
Post the order in the zoom chat ((especially when someone is afk) credit to Wichita BM and Gerrit Hansen for this one)
I’m into philosophy. It was my major for my decade-long undergrad, so that won’t change anytime soon.
I'm also a former law student focused on immigration, employment, and labor.
Although I have run topical affirmatives with a plan in the past, I have generally moved towards the critical as I have continued (From a Heg and Econ National Security Courts aff to Lovecraft performance and high theory).
In CEDA, I have gone for the Cap K with a Historical Materialism alt in every one of my 2NRs. This does not mean that I will automatically pick you up if you run it, but I will be familiar with most of the arguments and authors involved in that debate.
I have come to grips with the fact that I am not very good at evaluating Framework. This does NOT mean you shouldn't run it in front of me or go for it. I think Framework is a valuable debate to be had in most rounds and I encourage people to look at varying forms of this argument in debate. You should be aware, however, that I am not going to be able to fully appreciate the nuances of Framework arguments. It's really not you, it's me.
I hold a high regard for creativity in debate, both in strategy and style. In my mind, creativity is the reason debate is such a fantastic activity. I particularly like arguments that are novel, strange, or Weird.
I am also pretty expressive in round. If you notice me nodding my head or or making a face that suggests "Hey, that sounds reasonable" then that probably means I'm thinking that. If I look up in disgust or confusion, then that means I am probably experiencing one of those things.
All that being said, I am open to most any position or style so long as you can articulate why your arguments are preferable.
Also, feel free to find me outside of rounds and ask me about a round (please bring your flow or be specific about what went on in the round, I can only remember so much on demand) or about general arguments and strategies or whatever.
Clarity: I flow all speeches in the debate and I stick to that flow when making my decision. I will call clear if I can’t understand you. If you are still not understandable to me after I call clear twice, I will stop flowing what I cannot understand.
Clipping: If there is a challenge relating to clipping cards, it must be brought with video evidence. If a team has been shown to be clipping cards in my round; that team will receive a loss and the clipper will receive 0 speaker points for that round.
Email: forensicsresearchinstitute@gmail.com
Deana Cook
Nestucca High Speech Team
None
Riley Cook
Bandon High School
None
Eli Counce
Lakeridge High School
Last changed on
Wed March 6, 2024 at 10:34 AM PDT
If you're racist, homophobic, et., I'll vote you down.
Debate:
I did Parli for most of my time as a competitor. I judge through a policy lens, so please give me very specific impacts in each of your "worlds". All theory is open game if its done well. If no one brings up theory or metadebate, I won't vote on it. Whatever you tell me becomes reality- so build your reality well and remember to address all parts of the opponents' reality! Please be kind and respectful to one another.
Tell me what to vote on, or else I'll just default to whatever I think is most important. If you tell me that one impact is more important than the others, and have good reasoning to support that, I'll vote on it. Comparing your side's "world" vs. your opponents "world" will make my decision much easier. How will voting one way or the other actually manifest in reality?
Impact calculus really helps me decide how I will vote. If you have a really low probability high magnitude impact (like nuclear war), tell me why that matters more than your opponents high-probability, low-magnitude impact.
Speech:
I vote based on the following criteria:
Structure- If you have a hook, intro, thesis (if necessary), a few points and a good conclusion. For interps, just having a good intro and clear points is good. '
Content- Having interesting content is my second way of ranking people. I especially like personal anecdotes.
Rhythm / Clarity / Tone- Having consistent word density, memorizing your speech well, and hitting the 'highs and lows' of your speech are all important to me.
Dylan Curran
West Linn High School
None
Shelby Dallas
Neah-Kah-Nie High School
None
Opal Dennis
Bend Senior High School
None
Michael Doran
La Salle Catholic College Preparatory
None
Bryton Dorland
Tillamook High School
Last changed on
Tue January 23, 2024 at 1:17 AM PDT
Be kind, civil, and professional. This is paramount. I will not tolerate a debate that devolves into rudeness, name-calling, or inappropriate behavior.
I participated in Speech and Debate in High School. However, even with this, I am still a layperson when it comes to the specifics of debate. Communication ability is the most important aspect of any debate. If you do not have the ability to speak quickly, clearly, and effectively, then you are expected to slow down your arguments. It is better to have a few solid points rather than many hastily explained points.
If you have questions or concerns feel free to contact me, at any time, at dorlandb@tillamook.k12.or.us.
Diane Dye
Bandon High School
None
John Eaton
Sandy High School
None
Joel Ekdahl
Canby High School
None
Grace Elkhal
La Salle Catholic College Preparatory
None
Maraline Ellis
Douglas McKay High School
None
Gabriel Elmosleh
Clackamas High School
Last changed on
Fri March 22, 2024 at 3:47 AM PDT
About Me:
My name is Gabriel Elmosleh, and I'm a freshmen at Clackamas community college. I did speech and debate at Clackamas High school for two years, and I competed in parliamentary/Policy debate, and extemporaneous speech.
I'm a bit rusty when it comes to speech and debate, so I'll try not to be too technical or harsh when it comes to my grading, unless it's a style of speech and debate I'm familiar with. I have a very limited history of judging, so my feedback may not be too in depth at times. If you do an impressive David Attenborough or Michael Caine impression, you will get bonus points.
Lindel Evers
Oregon City High School
None
Shannon Evers
Oregon City High School
None
Cole Garber
Gresham High School
None
Tom Gardiner
Sam Barlow HS
None
Jay Gorsegner
Ida B. Wells HS
Last changed on
Sat January 27, 2024 at 12:27 AM PDT
Rookie judge. Figuring it out. My initial focus will be on how much I enjoyed the speech/debate and how I felt it flowed.
Rachel Gregory
Nestucca High Speech Team
None
Bella Grimes
Neah-Kah-Nie High School
None
Deborah Groff
Canby High School
None
Norm Guite
Cleveland High School (OR)
Last changed on
Fri January 12, 2024 at 11:28 PM PDT
I have been a parent judge for three years. My paradigms include clarity of arguments, minimal jargon and organization.
Sandy Haines
Bandon High School
None
Richard Hartoch
Ida B. Wells HS
None
Sadia Hasan
Sunset High School
Last changed on
Fri January 12, 2024 at 7:11 PM EDT
I want to see the points of argument be addressed at each stage with an emphasis on rebuttals— essentially, flow everything.
Derek Heath
McDaniel High School
Last changed on
Sat February 3, 2024 at 11:35 AM PDT
Email for Chains and Whatnot: dheath@pps.net
History: I have been coaching Speech and Debate in South Dakota and Oregon since 2015, with an emphasis on Policy, LD, Public Forum, and Extemp. While Policy and Extemp were the events of my youth, LD and Public Forum is where I have spent most of the last few years.
Event Specific Paradigms
Policy: Moderate speed, I don't like high speed debates. I'd probably be considered more of a "flay" (flow + lay) judge. I'm down to hear counterplans, topicality, disadvantages. I'm only willing to vote on theory if the abuse is obvious. Generic arguments are fine but clear links are necessary. I'm not your K judge. Ultimately I believe that Policy rounds should come down to direct clash, impact calculus, stock issues, solid argumentation, and/or competing interpretations of the resolution.
Yet more Policy: Speed is fine if clarity matches the rate of delivery. If a competitor is going so fast and wild that I cannot flow their arguments then I am not able to effectively consider and weigh them for the round. Counter Plans, Topicality, Theory arguments, Framework, ext. are all fine and I will enthusiastically vote on them, but I feel that they need to have some direct connection and relevance to the actual case. As in generic negative arguments are completely valid, but they need to have some clear and legitimate relationship to the discussion. I fear that I am constitutionally disposed against generic Kritiks, unless they are narrowly interpreted and directly applicable to the affirmative plan and the ideas that it represents. Ultimately I believe that Policy rounds should come down to direct clash, impact calculus, stock issues, solid argumentation, and/or competing interpretations of the resolution. All of this is simply preference, however, and if a team can successfully convey the meaning and importance of any set of arguments I will absolutely vote for it.
LD: I love a values debate. Contentions and criterions are fantastic things to discuss and debate, but I feel that LD is at its best when it comes down to a clash of who upholds a value most successfully, and why that value should be the central consideration in the round. Speed is fine, but I do feel that LD should be a clash of ideas versus a contest of tactics and game theory.
Public Forum: Direct clash, clearly identified voters, and framework are the things that I initially look for in a round. Speed is fine, but clarity and rhetorical skill should be the primary skills demonstrated. Try to demonstrate how one case is better than the other, however the idea of better might be defined within the round. By the Final Focus speeches there should ideally be a couple of clear and distinct voting issues that provide some level of clarity on the round. If the round turns into a deep and meaningful framework discussion I am completely fine with it.
Mikayla Heston
Sam Barlow HS
None
Katie Hunking
Battle Ground High School
None
Kris Igawa
Beaverton HS
None
Jasdeep Jaitla
Ida B. Wells HS
Last changed on
Fri April 5, 2024 at 5:28 AM PDT
I grew up in a very argumentative family that used both emotional and logical/rational arguments. I also did some LD debate in high school (pre-computer and pre-internet) so it was a bit different in how you researched and presented arguments.
I am extremely partial to strong linkages, and arguments that lack explanation of linkage and impact I find less or even non-compelling and borderline heresay.
Speak with clarity and slowly to have the most clear voice and impact of your arguments!
Noah Jenck
Tillamook High School
None
Augustin Jeyakumar
Sunset High School
Last changed on
Fri January 12, 2024 at 1:33 PM PDT
Hi! My name is Augustin Jeyakumar. This is my first year as a judge for speech and debate.
Here are some tips on how to get my vote:
Debate:
-
Please don’t spread! It makes it hard to understand
-
I don’t flow cross
-
No complicated jargon please, I’m new to judging
-
I appreciate offtime roadmaps
-
I’m tabula rasa
-
Please be respectful to your opponents!!
Speech:
-
Try not to fidget because it’s a bit distracting
-
Platform events: have your points clearly stated. Make sure your gestures, blocking, and body language help put your point across! Speak loudly and clearly. Have pauses, and pacing, prioritize eye contact!
-
Interp events: have intro memorized. Have good blocking and body movement. Try to use as many hand gestures as you can. Try not to look at your binder too much. Use dynamic movement a varied tone.
Overall:
-
Don’t stress too much! Enjoy it and don’t be too nervous!
-
Make sure to have good eye contact and speak loudly and clearly.
-
Most importantly, be respectful and have fun!
Thank you!
Ethan Johnson
Battle Ground High School
None
Jamaica Jones
Sam Barlow HS
Last changed on
Thu February 15, 2024 at 10:00 AM PDT
I am a tabula rasa judge for the most part. I expect teams to show why arguments should be voted on, instead of assuming a certain paradigm. Basically, tell me how your impacts outweigh at the end of the round. I am fine with speed and K.
Katie Kantrowitz
Silverton High School
None
Last changed on
Thu January 4, 2024 at 2:21 AM PDT
Please be civil and clear in your speech. I'm not a fan of spreading or Kritiks. I appreciate clearly outlined contentions and organized arguments.
Darren Kenworthy
La Salle Catholic College Preparatory
None
Sarah Kilburn
McDaniel High School
None
Jennifer LeSieur
Adrienne C. Nelson
Last changed on
Tue January 2, 2024 at 6:59 AM PDT
I am a communication judge. I like students to clearly communicate, give real-world examples and have clear clash. Structure and organization are very important and will help me flow the round. I don't like progressive LD. I don't enjoy a definition debate in any form of debate but I will vote on topicality. I want civility, persuasion, and a clash. I generally vote on stock issues in Policy and I am not a fan of K's.
Jarod LoBasso
Tillamook High School
None
Bert Ma
Lakeridge High School
Last changed on
Fri April 19, 2024 at 7:06 AM EDT
Former LD debater and I judge on flow. Framework and impact calculus are the most important--explain clearly how I should judge the round and why you won. At the end of the day, will vote on the issues you convince me to vote on, and generally open to creative arguments as well. Crystallize at the end of the round how I'm supposed to vote and why. I will assume as a default that unaddressed arguments are conceded unless you explain why they shouldn't be, and generally won't flow new arguments in rebuttals (of course refutations are fine).
Brian Malan
Gresham High School
None
Mike Malmstrom
McDaniel High School
None
Megan Mandel
West Linn High School
None
Trini Marin Quiros
Lakeridge High School
Last changed on
Fri January 12, 2024 at 8:25 AM PDT
Zero tolerance policy for bigotry. Please be kind and respectful to one another.
Debate:
Most of my debate background is in parli & policy so I appreciate structure and specific impacts. I judge primarily on the flow so please tell me where we are on the flow with proper signposting, it will make everyone's lives easier. I appreciate creative arguments, but make sure they are well thought out. Other than that, it's up to you to tell me how the round should be judged and what I should be voting on. Otherwise, I'll default to what I think is most important.
Also, please do not feel pressure to fill time just because you have run out of things to say, I will not hold going under time against you.
Speech:
General things I look for
Structure - Basic intro and general organization & cohesiveness to the speech
Specificity - I tend to prefer specificity in your content rather than broad generalizations. This can come in the form of including personal anecdotes/specific stories, carving out a specific niche with your thesis, etc.
Rhythm & Tone - Memorization, hitting clear emotional beats, adequate use of speed & volume, etc. all are key
Creativity - Speaks for itself but I appreciate creative content/performance choices, have fun with it
Tabitha Marsh
McMinnville High School
None
Amanda Marshall
McMinnville High School
Last changed on
Sat January 27, 2024 at 3:07 AM PDT
My Speech and Debate experience includes competing in Individual Events and CEDA debate as an undergraduate student at the Universiry of Oregon (1988-1992) coaching Debate at Willamette University while I was in Law School (1002-1995), and judging High School and College Speech & Debate as a parent of debaters at McMinnville High and University of Oregon.
I have been a trial lawyer for 30 years. I like clash, quality evidence from qualified sources, comparative analysis, and crystallization in last rebuttals. Don’t take anything for granted. You have to explain your arguments, why your evidence is compelling, and how the arguments weigh in the round. It’s your job to persuade me and communicate your positions in a way that is effective - that is how you will win my ballot. I don’t like whining, personal attacks, dominance, aggression, and disrespect. I do appreciate professionalism, kindness, and integrity.
Be smart and speak well.
Emily McClain
Douglas McKay High School
None
Ali McIntyre
Oregon City High School
Last changed on
Sat January 27, 2024 at 12:16 AM PDT
1/2024
I am a parent who was honored to judge at many tournaments last year, both Debate & IE rounds. I have a legal background and currently work in the pet and veterinary space doing research and analytics. Thus, pretend that I know nothing about speech & debate. Explain what you are doing and why.
I prefer clean, eloquent and well-supported arguments in debate events. Please don't speak too quickly (spread) even in policy debate. If I can't hear you/understand you, I can't evaluate your position. Debate still requires skills of persuasion, and much of that comes from tenants of communication like eye contact, facial expressions, vocal inflections, etc.
With IE events, please hold yourself with confidence. Body language is the first point of impression. Speak clearly, take pauses when you need them rather than stumbling (you can catch yourself and breathing through moments for clarity is key).
Nadya Megy
West Linn High School
None
Melanie Merryman
Nestucca High Speech Team
None
Jim Mick
Nestucca High Speech Team
None
Malia Mills
Bend Senior High School
Last changed on
Tue January 2, 2024 at 9:51 AM PDT
In debate rounds I expect:
Organization
Sign-posting
'Clash' as needed
Professional Behavior
In debate rounds I have difficulty with:
Spread (overly rapid delivery) - Due to tintinitis (ringing in the ears) I cannot fully understand 'spread' and thus if I cannot understand what the competitor is saying, I cannot give credit for what is being said, or the ability to 'flow' my notes so that I can judge accurately.
In Individual Event rounds I expect:
To hear a 'well polished' speech.
Ethan Miranda
Douglas McKay High School
Last changed on
Sat January 27, 2024 at 12:35 AM PDT
I am judge for Douglas McKay High School.
I am still new to judging and ask for your patience if there some rules I am missing or errors I make.
Depending on the event I am placed in, I primarily make my decisions on coherency, organization, and significance. I am someone who values content and good analysis/interpretations.
I will always try to give competitors lengthy feedback on what I like, what I saw, and what I think can be improved upon.
Regardless, I try to remain open-minded and respectful for I know I can definitely learn from those I am judging.
Adam Moeglein
Crater High School
Last changed on
Sat April 20, 2024 at 9:37 AM PDT
Heyo! I'm Adam Moeglein (He/Him), I debated at Crater HS until 2022 and now go to Oregon State. email for whatever: ajmoeglein@gmail.com
I competed in LD and parli for 4 years, and broke at nat circ tournaments a few times. Practice your dumb shells in front of me pls :>
TL;DR
Explain stuff. Evidence and speed are meaningless unless you have a story to back them up with. Best way to get through to me is advantage structure/whatever standard your given arg has, because I already know what args slot where in a narrative
I disclose, so don't run anywhere after round
Speed is fine, but I have information processing issues so pls just send the doc
Run anything
Bigotry bad >:(
General Stuff
signpost as much as possible. If you don’t I’m probably wasting 5 seconds tracking where to write what you’re saying instead of listening to what you’re saying
The only unchangeable assumption I make about the world is that logic exists. Everything else needs a warrant if challenged
I ran security, cap, and a Dr. Seuss performance in my career, as well as Rawls, Kant, and Baudrillard. And I think I might understand Heidegger and Nietzsche? Maybe?
I generally think probability >>>> magnitude but try me cowboy
I won't flow cross but I do believe its binding
Procedure
Tag teaming is A-okay. I'll only flow what the speaker is saying though.
Shadow extensions generally don't work
Stand or sit or do a little dance while you speak, I don't care
If the roadmap is more than 5 words some bad thing will happen karmically in the universe
Theory!
Be explicit and precise with your shells. I won’t assume parts you don’t give me
RVIs are acceptable if that's your mojo but I'd rather see another shell saying something like "Debaters can’t run X arg" to keep the round organized
semantics arguments like Nebel are meh unless you have a pragmatic reason to vote on it, or an analytic dump that throws my preference for pragmatism out the window
At bid tournaments disclosure is standard procedure in LD. Look into it if you're new to big tournaments! I will vote on it
I'm happy to listen to friv stuff, just give me a story to vote on
K
Don't make tags complex. winning via confusion is cringe
I'd be happy to hear a K-aff but I don't think they're strategic. Happy to be proven wrong though
Explain your lit well. Make it link. I'm voting on the consequences of an aff ballot, not some impact card your alt can’t possibly hope to resolve
William Montoya
Crater High School
Last changed on
Sat January 27, 2024 at 12:41 AM PDT
Hello my name is William,
I am 31 years old, born and raised in Oregon. While being new to judging Speech and Debate, I have a professional passion for mediation and community building. I work within Multnomah County for the Public Health department.
Samantha Moorhead
McMinnville High School
None
Katherine Morrison
La Salle Catholic College Preparatory
None
Ben Ohling
West Albany High School
Last changed on
Fri January 26, 2024 at 2:22 PM PDT
My background is varied. I've worked in IT and I currently work as a software developer. In college, I studied psychology and political science.
Most of the points below apply for both speech and debate.
- For me, theory supported by evidence is always preferred to theory alone. If a theory does not appear to be based on a set of premises that justify the conclusion, I'll likely dismiss it, even if evidence which you provide supports part of the overall claim--the theory must first be logically sound.
- I'm a lateral thinker, so non-linear argumentation and storytelling is fine by me.
- For debate in particular, one thing I'll be looking for is some form of thesis statement that encompasses your argument. It would be best to lead with this statement, or I may misidentify the thesis. This is different from a roadmap. Whereas the roadmap acts as an outline for your speech, a thesis statement briefly summarizes the core or your argument.
- When reviewing research, I usually ask myself the following questions, so it will only help if these points are included when you cite your research:
1. "Did the research use proper sample size, and is the sampling method appropriate for the type of research?"
2. "Was the research replicated, producing the same results, or was it otherwise peer-reviewed?"
3. "Does the research prove cause, or is it simply demonstrating correlation?" This is the most important aspect of research, in my opinion.
- If I can see that the research neglected to account for confounding variables then the research is less meaningful to me.
- As far as delivery goes, I like to see good use of inflection to emphasize important points, but I am much more concerned with the content of your arguments.
- I find that ethos and logos arguments are typically more persuasive than pathos.
Adeline Oka
La Salle Catholic College Preparatory
None
Briana Olvera
McMinnville High School
None
Casey Parrett
Crater High School
Last changed on
Sat January 27, 2024 at 12:39 AM PDT
I am a former high school debate and IE performer from 2008-2012. My debate format of choice was PF! I also performed in Dramatic Interp primarily and in other acting events.
Currently I'm an assistant coach on the Speech and Debate team, I am familiar with all forms of debate, but I have the least experience in policy.
I value facts and data to support arguments!
Teri Patapoff
West Linn High School
None
Daphne Patrick
Bend Senior High School
None
Ashley Pearson
Bandon High School
None
KC Perley
Corvallis HS
None
Bryce Phillips
Adrienne C. Nelson
Last changed on
Sat April 27, 2024 at 4:06 AM PDT
Hello!
I am a newish judge, I competed in IE in high school and Congress in college in Illinois. So sometimes I have slightly different expectations than folks who have always been in debate in Oregon. This is my second year judging in Oregon. I am also a coach.
I try to encourage competitors to try their best to try to shape their arguments without attempting to tailor their arguments to an individual judge's paradigm. Particularly when you have several judges, it can be a challenge when their paradigms are not complementary. Nonetheless, a few general things for me
- I try to choose the person I think won the debate. Simply because you counter or respond to an argument and say "this shouldn't flow" doesn't mean I have to agree that it doesn't flow.
- I value organization greatly.
- I do weigh arguments, some are more central than others, and winning on one argument is sometimes enough for me to make a decision. Winning on two smaller points is not as good as winning on the biggest point. In debate terms, I am weighing impact.
- Stick to the resolution and the event you are in. Funding shouldn't be a key argument in LD or BQ, but it should be a central point in Policy/CX or PF. Additionally.... debate rules are not universal for all of the events. For instance... Public Forum does not have the "no no new arguments in final focus or summary" rule that exists in other styles of debate. It might be frowned on, but it isn't a DQ or anything.
- No personal attacks. I strongly frown on inferred or direct insults. Yes "my opponent is not a good debater" is a personal attack.
- I am generally open to people running Ks and Ts and other parts of the alphabet but I do not vote for them very often. My philosophy has always been that K's should be last resorts when neg or aff bias is unavoidable, not an excuse not to debate a resolution you don't think is cool.
- An extension is not a new argument. Debaters on not confined to only repeating themselves in their final speech.
- Saying "we don't have time to respond to that" is taking time to respond to it, especially if you repeat it a few times.
- My flows/notes are often general and often messy. I am sorry, that is also just how I take notes and how I flow for myself.
- Adding this one because I got a question about it... I will flow cross but I won't always flow like 'can you restate your 3rd sub-point" type stuff. If a question has an impact on the round or if I thought it was a good question, I will usually make a note at least.
Civility always. Ethical frameworks > than economic ones (i.e. people over profit).
Harmful, racist, profane or inflammatory language is intolerable.
I respect sound reasoning and articulate rationale, passionate argumentation in pursuit of the highest good.
Jeff Puukka
Sam Barlow HS
None
Muthu Rajagopalan
Sunset High School
Last changed on
Fri January 26, 2024 at 4:21 PM PDT
I am a parent judge from Portland, very excited to be a judge.
As a judge, I focus on the following aspects of the speech
-
Content
-
Reasoning
-
Knowledge
-
Originality
-
Relevance
-
Delivery
-
Clarity
-
Voice
-
Emotion
-
Body Language
-
Eye Contact
-
Focus
I don’t like shouting, negative body language, or artificial expressions.
All the best to all the participants!
Claire Rapp
Crescent Valley
None
Steve Root
La Salle Catholic College Preparatory
Last changed on
Sun January 21, 2024 at 1:18 PM PDT
All Debates:
Feel free to time yourself but my time counts!
I don't mind "Off Time Road Maps."
Looking for good organization with clear concise ideas supporting what you are trying to convey.
In LD and Public Forum; I don't like speed, this is not a sprint is a marathon of information make me understand.
Courtesy to Opponent (includes abusive behavior or interrupting the other team let them finish statement n questioning). In Parli when talking to your partner during presentation do it quietly not to interrupt the speaker.
In Parii my expectations have risen due to the use of internet. I am expecting good quality work and quoting of sources will be a must to support your contentions.
"Pretend I am dumb as a rock and educate me!"
Travis Root
La Salle Catholic College Preparatory
Last changed on
Sat February 17, 2024 at 7:06 AM PDT
My paradigms are few and fairly simple. This is partially for your own information as well as a way I can remind myself when asked in round.
1. I am a seasoned veteran in the space with competitive experience at the high school and college level. Roughly 5 years in total. I have been a full time judge for almost twice as long. So you can understand that I am able to understand most arguments and positions one may choose to run in a given round. With that in mind certain position pertaining to theory or K shells I would rather not see in events outside CX. If a parli round does involve a Counter plan or a T sheet of some kind, I can roll with it as long as it is well explained and reasonably fits in the scope of the resolution.
2. Given my experience you may think that I can keep up with speed. Mind you I can but it is not something I particularly care for. What I like to hear is well thought out and warranted points that best describe your position. I'd much rather see 2 fleshed out contentions rather than 5 blippy ones you hope to out-spread your opponents on. Along side this if (Pertaining to everything not Parli) if you have a card and you read it, explain what you just read or how it connects to the overall thesis of the contention/argument. Don't just read a study or a statistic and expect the judge to do the work for you.
3. In cases where a definition or the value criterion/weighing mechanism is a point of clash, I want to see good argumentation explaining why I need to prefer your side over the other. DO NOT assert that you are in the right for one shallow reason or another. Explain why the debate should be looked the lens you believe it should. On the same page, if you have a value you want considered, try to tie your case back to it. IE, when explaining the impacts of the case show or reference it is the more utilitarian or more just impact. You get the idea.
4. -LD can disregard- I believe partner-style debate to be exactly that, a partner/team sport. So if you wish to confer with your partner at any time at all during the course of the debate, fine. I encourage it. That being said, please be advised I only flow and focus on the words coming out of the currently timed speaker's mouth. Meaning if your partner says something to you or helps you answer a question during cross that is fine, but if the speaker does not audible say it, I will not care and likely disregard the comment. Therefore, make sure you and your partner are communicating effectively to make sure all cases notes are properly presented.
5. When is comes to question and answer periods (cross examination or questions in parli) REFRAIN from making any argumentative statements/questions. Any and all questions should be purely clerical in nature. Meaning, please limit your question to matters pertaining to explanation of statements made by the opposing side. If you want to ask about mechanics of a plan or to explain a point more, that is fine. Along the same line, please keep question periods civil. Do not step over your opponent until they have finished their answer. Lastly I do not flow during cross examination periods. If there was something brought up in those moments you want to be addressed, bring them to my attention during your time.
6. Simply put. BE. COURTEOUS. I cannot stress how much I despise overly hateful rhetoric, calling out the other team in a demeaning way, and just overall cockiness. Be kind, be conversational, be nice. No calling the other team racist, no blaming groups of people for current global crisises, no homophobia. Makes sense? It should.
7. -Parli only- With the dawn of internet prep I think it is more incumbent on the competitors to have some evidence. Now granted evidence does not win debates and I won't take a lack of evidence as a reason to prefer. That being said I expect more fleshed out contentions and hopefully a stronger debate. If you can provide evidence and leverage that as a voter cool. I really would like to hear at least one full citation from each side.
If you have anything more specific to ask in round, be my guest. I will answer straightforward and honestly.
Mack Rote
McMinnville High School
None
Rajesh Sapra
Sunset High School
None
Nicole Schuman
West Linn High School
None
Kathleen Serven
Nestucca High Speech Team
None
Jessica Shelton
Ida B. Wells HS
None
John Sugar
West Linn High School
None
Michael Sugar
West Linn High School
Thank you for reading my paradigms! And thank you for being part of speech and debate. I have a few priorities. In debate...
- Number your contentions, advantages, disadvantages, etc.. Make it clear to me what part of your argument we are listening to, and likewise, which part of your opponent's argument you are addressing. Good road maps and sign posting help me be a better judge.
- Rules are important, but don't hide behind them. In some events, Neg doesn't have the burden of a counterplan. That said... I expect you at least mention what kinds of plans could exist as an alternative. Saying "Aff's plan is bad" can work...but at least describe a couple alternatives that are feasible. You need to demonstrate that there is an alternative, even if you don't flesh it out. It's totally possible your opponent's plan is terrible; what I'm asking is that you demonstrate that your opponent's plan isn't simply the least terrible option out of really, really terrible options.
- Tone matters. Spirited, enthusiastic, even emotion-filled debate is great. But always treat your opponents and partners with enthusiastic respect. This includes non-verbals: looking at your opponent like they're crazy doesn't make me happy :)
- I start timing when you're talking. Off-time road maps don't fly with me because everyone has a different vision of what exactly can and can't go into an off-time road map.
Last, some background about me that may help, especially for people doing Individual events or interps:
I am the West Linn Coach. That said, I am a newer coach, so particularly with LD and PF I may need greater levels of context to grasp what you're discussing. For something like POI or Poetry, don't assume I can grasp poetic abstractions immediately. Speak at a pace that gives me time to process.
I teach history. I'll be honest: an argument or speech that effectively draws on history can really catch my attention; likewise, one that messes up historical analysis can undermine a case significantly.
I also have a theater degree, and have spent a lot of time with our pal Shakespeare. I have spent a good deal of time on stage, and directing plays. Know that I appreciate a good performance, and good speaking craft.
In contrast, sports and music are weaknesses of mine. I don't know them well. While I think Taylor Swift is cool, as I write this...I can't actually give you the name of a song she has written. Though I might recognize one. Maybe. That doesn't mean you should avoid mentioning Taylor Swift or talking about music or sports -- you just have to give me context. What does that lyric you recited refer to? How does it apply? What does that sports metaphor mean? Why do these things matter to what we're discussing?
Given the background described above, when it comes to speaker points: I am in this coaching job because I want students to develop public speaking skills that will serve them throughout their lives professionally, politically, theatrically, or in whichever setting you desire. As such, speaker points for me are about quality, not quantity, of arguments and respect for the process and others. An appropriately placed pinch of dramatic flair never hurts either.
Kristen Sullivan
Crater High School
Last changed on
Tue January 2, 2024 at 8:48 AM PDT
My priorities for judging any debate are
1) the use of factual evidence that shows understanding of the topic.
2) clear and organized arguments.
3) each team's ability to support their value, weighing mechanism, or other framework throughout the entire debate.
4) professionalism and appropriateness.
Eessa Vanderspek
Crescent Valley
None
Cindi Vick Beaudin
West Linn High School
Last changed on
Mon January 8, 2024 at 8:19 AM PDT
Thank you for participating in Speech & Debate and regarding all present with respect and support.
As a judge, I appreciate clear enunciation paired with a steady flow of information.
Suresh Vodapally
Sunset High School
Last changed on
Fri January 12, 2024 at 2:05 AM PDT
Hi, I'm new to judging; please be kind. I'm a parent judge, so please don't use too much confusing jargon, and don't spread. Above all, have fun!
Tim Volpert
Adrienne C. Nelson
None
Shayla Wacker
Neah-Kah-Nie High School
None
Rachel Wilczewski
Sam Barlow HS
Last changed on
Wed January 3, 2024 at 6:44 AM PDT
Background
I was a high school and college policy debater in the 1980's. I have taught policy debate for 21 years both in California and Oregon. I have coached several policy teams to nationals. I love this form of debate.
Paradigm
I am a real world policy maker judge, who is somewhat traditional. I look to see who advocates for most viable and beneficial policy. I am a recovering stock issues judge.
What Makes Me Smile
I like to see an organized flow, with lots of analysis connecting evidence to claims. I also like to see a fun spirited debate, where debaters are polite to one another and are in this activity to learn, not just to win.
Speed
I can flow a fast debate, but prefer communication over speed. I find that most policy debaters who spew, can't really handle the speed they are attempting and therefore lose their judge and opponents, ultimately rendering this communication event moot. However, if you must race through your arguments, at least be slow and clear on the tags.
K's
I do not like Kritiks. I will listen to them and weigh them against other arguments on the flow, but overall am not a big fan. If you run a K, make sure to fully explain your philosophical position and don't run positions that will bite your K.
T
I will vote on T if not used as a time suck. "If you run it, go for it, don't kick out of 4 T's in your last rebuttal."
Tag Team CX
I don't mind tag team cx; however, I award speaker points based on your ability to ask and answer questions, so if one partner is "tooling" another, then one of you will suffer point wise. I like to see that both partners are knowledgable about the topic and debate theory and get disgruntled when one partner will not allow the other partner a chance to answer any questions.
Flex Prep
What? Really? No!
Flashtime
I don't count flash time as prep time, unless it becomes ridiculous.
Amy Willingham
Sandy High School
None
Jeneveve Winchell
West Albany High School
None
Trevor Winder
Corvallis HS
Last changed on
Sat April 20, 2024 at 2:30 AM PDT
Hi, I’m Trevor
I’m currently studying English and Education at Oregon State University.
I’m a former Parliamentary debater and Extemp speaker with four years of experience in high school.
For Debate
I primarily judge on major points and impacts. Signposting and good clash summarization are essential for me to understand what the important pieces of your argument are.
I am tabula rasa, so I won’t connect the dots for you other than the broadest layers of your arguments. Make your points clearly and engage with your opponents in the same way.
Please be courteous at all times to everyone in the room, I will not hesitate to give exceedingly rude teams the loss even if they’re performing better.
The ultimate impact of debate is educational value for all involved, so keep this in mind when creating and presenting your cases, and in your conduct in-round.
Notes on jargon/spreading: I can and am willing to handle only so much of these. Make sure you are clear in your presentation and try and limit the amount of debate jargon you are using. Ultimately these arguments should be based in the real world, and as such they shouldn’t be completely incomprehensible to listeners unused to debate language. That being said, I’m pretty experienced so I won’t mark you down unless you’re being over the top. But please don’t spread.
For Speech
I have experience competing in Extemp, but when it comes to judging I will try my best for any speech events I am assigned.
Clear speaking, emotional impact, limited distractions, all good stuff. Also follow the rules of your event, please, I will almost always give the loss to, for example, an Oratory that is read and not memorized. Follow the rules, and I will do my best to judge based on the quality of the speaking and the thought put into the content.
Cynthia Worden
West Linn High School
None
Seth Worthylake
Crater High School
None
Amarou Yoder
West Linn High School
Last changed on
Fri February 9, 2024 at 11:26 PM PDT
Hello folks,
I am a former head coach--and current assistant coach--of West Linn High School's Speech and Debate team.
In my mind, debate is fundamentally a way for you (both teams) and I to engage substantively with a complex topic. I like intellectual rigor and good-faith clash with your opponents. I am really turned off by the debate being turned into a game, rather than a debate, so take that as you will.
In terms of speed, you can go at a brisk conversational speed, but if your speed interferes with my ability to understand you (or if you are not particularly articulate), then I will stop flowing.
Background: I teach AP Lang and Comp. I've been an English teacher for 15 years. I have a PhD in Educational Studies - Curriculum Theory. I am comfortable with critical theory and welcome its appropriate/creative use in debate.