Andrew Halverson Paradigm

Last changed Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 2:38 AM UTC

Name: Andrew Halverson
School: Wichita East High School (Wichita, KS), Assistant Coach
Experience: 20+ years. As a competitor, 4 years in high school and 3 years in college @ Fort Hays and Wichita State.

[BELOW IS UPDATED FOR DCI AND STATE - My original philosophy is after the update.]

I'm going to be that person that vent a bunch of my pet peeves regarding how the logistics of the debate go and how I adjudicate debates. Here's goes a quick list (I intended this to be a quick list, but now it's decent sized list of what grinds my gears):

1. If possible, I want to be on the email chain (halverson.andrew [at] gmail.com). If not, I want your speech docs flashed to me before you speak. There are a few reasons I would like this to happen: a) I'm checking as you are going along if you are clipping; b) since I am reading along, I'm making note of what is said in your evidence to see if it becomes an issue in the debate OR a part of my decision - these national qualifier tournaments put a heavy premium on quick decisions, so having that to look at before just makes the trains run on-time and that makes the powers that be happy; c) because I'm checking your scholarship, it allows for me to make more specific comments about your evidence and how you are deploying it within a particular debate. If you refuse to email or flash before your speech for me, there will probably be consequences in terms of speaker points and anything else I determine to be relevant - since I'm the ultimate arbiter of my ballot in the debate which I'm judging.

2. Don't make the roadmap harder than it needs to be. PLEASE DO HAVE A ROADMAP! If you were giving a 1nc roadmap, it should sound something like, "There will be 4 off and then case in the order of Advantage 1, Advantage 2, and Solvency." DON'T SAY: "It'll be 4 off and case." WTAF?! Where do I flow these arguments on case? Find a place to put your arguments. Keep to it.

3. This jumping around on the flow thing is ridiculous. I have judged more debates than I can count this year where a debater says: "On Solvency, the AFF is key to...wait, back onto Topicality. Reasonability should be the lens to evaluate T because...oh, back on the other T." THIS DRIVES ME BONKERS!! Be clean on your flows. If I can't figure out where you and what's you're doing it will costs you lots of speaker points and, most likely, a victory.

4. Don't debate off a script. Yes, blocks are nice. I like when debaters have blocks. They make answering arguments easier. HOWEVER, if you just read off your script going for whatever argument, I'm not going to be happy. Typically, this style of debate involves some clash and large portions of just being unresponsive to the other team's claims. More than likely, you are reading some prepared oration at a million miles per hour and expect me to write down every word. Guess what? I can't. In fact, there is not a judge in the world that can accomplish that feat. So use blocks, but be responsive to what's going on in the debate.

5. Blippy theory debates really irk me. To paraphrase Mike Harris: if you are going as fast as possible on a theory debate at the end of a page and then start the next page with more theory, I'm going to inevitably miss some of it. Whether I flow on paper or on my computer, it takes a second for me to switch pages and get to the place you want me to be on the flow. Slow down a little bit when you want to go for theory - especially if you think it can be a round-winner. I promise you it'll be worth it for you in the end.

6. Read below about this but I want to make this abundantly clear. I won't do work for you unless the debate is completely messed up and I have to do some things to clean up the debate and write a ballot. So, if you drop a Perm, but have answers elsewhere that would answer it, unless you have made that cross-application I won't apply that for you. The debater answering said Perm needs to make the cross-application/answer(s) on their own.

7. Stop stealing prep time. In terms of flashing, prep stops when the save is complete and the flash drive leaves your computer. At this point, you should have an idea of a speech order and be getting set to speak. Don't be super unorganized and take another 2-3 minutes to just stand up there getting stuff together. I don't mind taking a bit to get yourself together, but I find that debaters are abusing that now. When I judge by myself, I'm usually laid back about using the restroom, but I strongly suggest that you consider the other people on the panel - not doing things like stopping prep and then going to the bathroom before you start to speak. I get emergencies, but this practice is really shady. Bottom-line: if you're stealing prep, I'll call you on it out loud and start the timer.

8. Disclosure is something I can't stand when it's done wrong. If proper disclosure doesn't happen before a round, I'm way more likely to vote on a disclosure argument in this setting. If you have questions about my views on disclosure, please ask them before the debate occurs - so you know where you stand.

9. New in the 2nc is bad. What I mean by that is whole new DA's read - old school style - in the 2nc does not foster good debate. I'm willing to listen to theory arguments on the matter, BUT they have to be impacted out. However, that's not the best answer to a NEG attempting this strategy. The best answer is for the 1ar to quickly straight turn whatever that argument is and then move on. Debaters that straight turn will be rewarded. Debaters that do new in the 2nc will either lose because of theory argument or have their speaks tanked by me.

---BELOW IS MY ORIGINAL JUDGING PHILOSOPHY---

I never know how to completely do these things – because I tend to think there’s no way this judging philosophy can 100% accurately describe how I evaluate a debate, but here goes.

Stylistically, I’m a decent flow, but I wouldn’t go completely crazy. That being said, I’m one of those critics (and I was the same way as a debater) that will attempt to write down almost everything you say as long as you make a valiant attempt to be clear. Super long overviews that aren't flowable make no sense to me. In other words, make what you say translate into what you want me to write down. I will not say or yell if you aren’t clear. You probably can figure it out – from my non-verbals – if you aren’t clear and if I’m not getting it. I will not say/yell "clear" and the debate will most definitely be impacted adversely for you. If I don’t “get it,” it’s probably your job to articulate/explain it to me.

What kind of argument and general preferences do I have regarding academic debate? I will listen to everything and anything from either side of the debate. You can be a critical team or a straight-up team. It doesn’t matter to me. An argument is an argument. Answering arguments with good arguments is probably a good idea, if the competitive aspect of policy debate is important to you at all. If you need some examples: Wipeout? Sure, did it myself. Affirmatives without a plan? Did that too. Spark? You bet. Specific links are great, obviously. Of course, I prefer offense over defense too. I don’t believe that tabula rasa exists, but I do try to not have preconceived notions about arguments. Yet we all know this isn’t possible. If I ultimately have to do so, I will default to policymaker to make my decision easier for me. Hope all of this settles a few things about argument selection with me as a critic.

A caveat to the above – I have recently developed a disdain towards Consult CPs and most “cheating” CPs. If it’s a part of your core strategy, you shouldn’t be dissuaded from running these styles of argument. However, I tend to be sympathetic towards the AFF on theory and substantive arguments vs. this style of argument. As the NEG, you had better REALLY win this argument to win my ballot.

Debate theory is something that is continually evolving. As a young debater, you learn and execute the basics. Then other theoretical concepts come into play as you grow in debate. In the end, debate theory can be either really complicated or really interesting. Lots of people like to stay away from theory goo—I used to be one of them. Over time, I changed my viewpoint on the matter. One of my dislikes as a critic is tagline debating—especially when it comes to theory. Repeating your tags over and over again aren’t going to convey your point any further unless you get deeper into the claims/warrants being argued. Anyway, thoroughly explaining your theory argument is a very good idea with me. Like other debate arguments, I want to theoretically know what your interpretation of whatever aspect of debate theory includes or exclude—what the world looks like under your viewpoint.

Comparing and contrast claims, whether with evidence or analytics, is extremely important for me. If you don’t do it, then you’ll leave me to kneejerk to my own proclivities. That means that I’ll probably end up concocting a story that makes sense to me—confusing you and probably leaving you a bit irritated. My advice is do the work for me so I don’t get into such a position. For the record, I do tend to lean liberal with both my debate and political proclivities.

Finally, I know you hear this a lot, but be nice and have fun. If you have any specific question about my philosophy (which you should because this certainly doesn’t explain everything), ask me questions either immediately before the debate or you can e-mail me at halverson.andrew [at] gmail dot com. Hope this clear a few things up. Happy Debating to all of you!!

And by the way, below is a semi-judge of how I give speaker points. I stole the bulk of this (actually all of it) from Lucia Scott, so I guess this means she’s gets a h/t in this portion of my judging philosophy. This is a guide for how I give speaks, but it is subject to contextual change with any given debate (which probably shouldn’t happen very often – if at all).

Speaker Points:

25 or below – You were so offensive I almost told you to shut up. You're lucky my RFD wasn't as long as they would give me telling you how terrible whatever you said was. This also includes instances where I think you probably aren’t ready for the level of debate that I was judging at the time.

25.5-26.5 – You didn't use all your speech time, and/or your partner gave most of your rebuttal. You probably repeated yourself a lot and your speech, most likely, was not compelling at all. You also might have just been absurdly rude.

27 – You failed to extend warrants, your speech was so disorganized it hurt, and/or your rebuttal was clearly scripted. You made some kind of damning strategic error. I had to say clear twice and you still weren't clear.

27.5 – This is where I start. Your speeches were pretty average with no glaring strategic errors. You were decently clear, but by no means should you quit speed drills.

28 – Your strategy or the way you deployed it impressed me in some way. You're pretty fast and pretty clear.

28.5 – You're fast and I understood almost everything you said. You're persuasive. Your strategy was efficient and effective.

29 – I understood everything you said. You obviously know your arguments well, maybe even cut the argument yourself. You were smart and aggressive without being rude at all. I
had fun watching you debate.

29.5 – Your speeches were so devastating the other team had no chance. I heard every single word of every single card. You didn't rely on cheap arguments. Everything you said could've been the 2NR/2AR. This was a super easy decision.

30 – You're not getting one of these UNLESS there are some amazing circumstances that permit it OR you have given one of the top 3 debate speeches that I have ever heard. Usually, this amount of point means that I think you could win the NDT right now.

Full Judging Record

Tournament Date Event Rd Aff Neg Decision
Sunflower District Tournament 12/7/2018 CX 1 9 Silva & Gardner 10 Allman & Fuson AFF
Sunflower District Tournament 12/7/2018 CX 2 10 Marin & Walentowski 4 Goodnight & McDavitt NEG
Sunflower District Tournament 12/7/2018 CX 3 9 Kurtzweil & Vu 2 Lara & Quintero NEG
Sunflower District Tournament 12/7/2018 CX 4 6 Walker & Willis 11 Bansemer & Hybki AFF
Glenbrooks Speech and Debate Tournament 11/17/2018 VCX 1 Barstow TD Westwood SB AFF
Glenbrooks Speech and Debate Tournament 11/17/2018 VCX 2 Heritage Hall SN Walter Payton CP LA NEG
Glenbrooks Speech and Debate Tournament 11/17/2018 VCX 3 Isidore Newman HV St. Vincent De Paul BP NEG
Glenbrooks Speech and Debate Tournament 11/17/2018 VCX 4 West Des Moines Valley CK Little Rock Central CW AFF
Glenbrooks Speech and Debate Tournament 11/17/2018 VCX 5 Shawnee Mission East RC Barstow SF NEG
Glenbrooks Speech and Debate Tournament 11/17/2018 VCX 7 Jones CP BR Walter Payton CP YR NEG
Panther Debate Tournament 11/9/2018 JV 5 Hutchinson Colvin & Owens Manhattan Brockman & Singh NEG
Panther Debate Tournament 11/9/2018 JV QF Hutchinson Owens & Fleming Andover Central Lara & Quintero NEG
Andover Ce on a 2-1
Panther Debate Tournament 11/9/2018 JV F Manhattan Brockman & Singh Andover Central Lara & Quintero AFF
Andover Ce on a 2-1
KCKCC TOC DCI Qualifier 11/2/2018 DCI 1 Blue Valley West Supta Das & Aryan Verma Barstow Sam Short & Taha Fanaswala NEG
KCKCC TOC DCI Qualifier 11/2/2018 DCI 2 Lawrence Free State Timothy Huffman & Gwendolyn Elo Washburn Rural Petre Dimitriu & Mohit Garg NEG
KCKCC TOC DCI Qualifier 11/2/2018 DCI 4 Blue Valley Southwest Ted Shi & Anna Lee Barstow Robbie Putney & Shaunak Lokre NEG
KCKCC TOC DCI Qualifier 11/2/2018 DCI 6 Barstow Solomon Park & Noah Waldman Eisenhower Mathew Grossman & Austin Stiffler AFF
KCKCC TOC DCI Qualifier 11/2/2018 DCI Doubles Shawnee Mission East Graham Revare & Grant Colvin Lansing Sr Salem Clemens & Madelyn Atkins NEG
Lansing Sr on a 2-1
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2018 VCX 1 Barstow ML Reagan PV NEG
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2018 VCX 2 Union HW Derby SC AFF
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2018 VCX 3 Crossings Christian HC Barstow LT NEG
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2018 VCX 4 Eisenhower JH Blue Valley Southwest SW NEG
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2018 VCX 5 Topeka RJ Reagan CM NEG
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2018 VCX 6 Barstow PL Liberal Arts and Science CU AFF
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2018 VCX Partials Blue Valley Northwest SM Barstow PW NEG
Barstow PW on a 3-0
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2018 VCX Octas Blue Valley Southwest SW Jenks BZ NEG
Jenks BZ on a 3-0
ONW Debate Invitational 10/5/2018 JV 4 4T 14P NEG
ONW Debate Invitational 10/5/2018 JV 5 23P 2V AFF
Blue Valley Southwest Invitational 9/28/2018 1 LawFre WaBa BVNW KV NEG
Blue Valley Southwest Invitational 9/28/2018 2 BVW ST SME RC NEG
Blue Valley Southwest Invitational 9/28/2018 3 LawFre SV SME BS NEG
Blue Valley Southwest Invitational 9/28/2018 Octos LawFre GH SME AW AFF
LawFre GH on a 3-0
Washburn Rural Debate Invitational 9/14/2018 VADB8 2 Jenks BM BV North BL AFF
Washburn Rural Debate Invitational 9/14/2018 VADB8 3 Lansing BD BV West AK AFF
Washburn Rural Debate Invitational 9/14/2018 VADB8 4 Maize MP SM East RC NEG
Washburn Rural Debate Invitational 9/14/2018 VADB8 5 BV North AV BV Southwest ShWu NEG
Kanellis Invitational 2/23/2018 VCX 1 Millard North KC Eisenhower SJ AFF
Kanellis Invitational 2/23/2018 VCX 2 Barstow TD Washburn Rural PK AFF
Kanellis Invitational 2/23/2018 VCX 3 Millard North PF SMNW KO NEG
Colleyville Heritage Winter Invitational 2/2/2018 VCX 1 Caddo Magnet KG Katy Taylor BK NEG
Colleyville Heritage Winter Invitational 2/2/2018 VCX 2 Jesuit CP GT Liberal Arts and Science BW AFF
Colleyville Heritage Winter Invitational 2/2/2018 VCX 3 Westwood RD Grandview SH AFF
Colleyville Heritage Winter Invitational 2/2/2018 VCX 4 Jesuit CP FJ Washburn Rural KP NEG
Colleyville Heritage Winter Invitational 2/2/2018 VCX 5 Lindale MW Coppell DG AFF
Colleyville Heritage Winter Invitational 2/2/2018 VCX O Katy Taylor BK Guyer IM AFF
Katy Taylo on a 3-0
KSHSAA 6A 2 Speaker Shadow Tab 2018 1/12/2018 KSHSA 1 9C 15B AFF
KSHSAA 6A 2 Speaker Shadow Tab 2018 1/12/2018 KSHSA 2 17D 14C AFF
KSHSAA 6A 2 Speaker Shadow Tab 2018 1/12/2018 KSHSA 4 14B 17A AFF
KSHSAA 6A 2 Speaker Shadow Tab 2018 1/12/2018 KSHSA 6 14A 5B AFF
KSHSAA 6A 2 Speaker Shadow Tab 2018 1/12/2018 KSHSA DOFs 2B 9B NEG
9B on a 3-0
Kansas Debate Classic 1/5/2018 KDC 1 AW Schieffer & Bright AS Fabac & Saia NEG
Kansas Debate Classic 1/5/2018 KDC 2 AM Payne & Keenan AJ Kincaid & Buchholz NEG
Kansas Debate Classic 1/5/2018 KDC 4 AH Rowley & Sturm AT Fair & Boutte NEG
KCKCC TOC Qualifier 11/3/2017 DCI 1 Washburn Rural Ryan Reza & Niko Sims Lawrence Free State Spencer Yost-Wolff & James Vereen NEG
KCKCC TOC Qualifier 11/3/2017 DCI 2 Sumner Cheyenne Mielkus & Simon Folson Shawnee Mission Northwest Noah Gruman & Ashley Ellis NEG
KCKCC TOC Qualifier 11/3/2017 Nov 3 Little Rock Central Benjamin Satterfield & Glenna Ratcliff Washburn Rural Tanisha Maru & Austin Rea NEG
KCKCC TOC Qualifier 11/3/2017 DCI 4 Moore Paige Clark & Charlie Norbury Lawrence Free State Li Gordon-Washington & Maxwell Lillich NEG
KCKCC TOC Qualifier 11/3/2017 DCI 5 Washburn Rural Brenda Alvarez & Jake Berry Union Eve Gerbrandt & Tyler Rossow NEG
KCKCC TOC Qualifier 11/3/2017 DCI 6 Blue Valley West Srivats Narayanan & Animesh Shrouti Derby Noah Graham & Alec Hinecker NEG
KCKCC TOC Qualifier 11/3/2017 DCI Doubles Blue Valley West Srivats Narayanan & Animesh Shrouti Barstow Shaunak Lokre & Robbie Putney NEG
Barstow Sh on a 2-1
KCKCC TOC Qualifier 11/3/2017 DCI Octos Little Rock Central Sakshi Garg & Valorie Lam Shawnee Mission Northwest Julian Kuffour & Emmanuel Osei NEG
Shawnee Mi on a 3-0
Panther Debate Tournament 10/27/2017 DCI 1 Topeka Caracioni & Jacques Eisenhower Brown & Jacobson NEG
Panther Debate Tournament 10/27/2017 DCI 2 Mulvane Benson & Willig Eisenhower Stiffler & Hartter NEG
Panther Debate Tournament 10/27/2017 DCI 3 Maize Mitchell & Wolgast Topeka Reed & Hatesohl NEG
Panther Debate Tournament 10/27/2017 DCI 4 Lawrence Kimura & Petrovic Washburn Rural Dimitriu & Malay NEG
Panther Debate Tournament 10/27/2017 DCI 5 Trinity Koster & Payne NEG
Panther Debate Tournament 10/27/2017 DCI 6 Wichita Northwest Flores & Herrmann Newton Garnica & Garrett AFF
Panther Debate Tournament 10/27/2017 DCI DCI Quarterfinal Blue Valley West Tallavajhala & Vasudevan Lawrence Free State Gordon-Washington & Lillich NEG
Lawrence F on a 3-0
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2017 VCX 2 Shawnee Mission East CR Moore LD AFF
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2017 VCX 4 Crossings Christian BK Derby SS NEG
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2017 VCX 5 Liberal Arts and Science IJ Union GR NEG
JW Patterson Invitational 10/20/2017 VCX Partials Washburn Rural PK Winston Churchill CB NEG
Winston Ch on a 2-1
Hutchinson High School Tom Kelly Invitational 10/13/2017 DCI 2 Emporia HP Olathe Northwest CC AFF
Hutchinson High School Tom Kelly Invitational 10/13/2017 DCI 3 Emporia VG Eisenhower SH AFF
Wichita East Invitational 10/6/2017 Var 3 LawFre YV Eisenh BJ AFF
Wichita Northwest Debate Tournament 9/23/2017 1 G HD NEG
Wichita Northwest Debate Tournament 9/23/2017 4 E BF AFF
Washburn Rural Invitational 9/15/2017 VDB8 Var 1 Lansing KW Garden City CU NEG
Washburn Rural Invitational 9/15/2017 VDB8 Var 3 Blue Valley North MT Olathe East MS AFF
Washburn Rural Invitational 9/15/2017 VDB8 Var 4 Shawnee Heights BL Blue Valley Southwest MP NEG
Washburn Rural Invitational 9/15/2017 VDB8 Var 6 Blue Valley West MM Olathe Northwest JT AFF
Washburn Rural Invitational 9/15/2017 VDB8 Var SFS Blue Valley North CM Blue Valley West NS NEG
Blue Valle on a 5-0
Grand Nationals 5/27/2017 CX 1 118 137 NEG
Grand Nationals 5/27/2017 CX 2 170 104 AFF
Grand Nationals 5/27/2017 CX 3 188 165 NEG
Grand Nationals 5/27/2017 CX 4 163 150 AFF
Grand Nationals 5/27/2017 CX 5 191 109 AFF
Grand Nationals 5/27/2017 CX Quarts 129 177 AFF
129 on a 3-0
Colleyville Heritage Winter Invitational 2/3/2017 VCX 1 Godley LM
Colleyville Heritage Winter Invitational 2/3/2017 VCX 2 St.Mar SR NEG
Colleyville Heritage Winter Invitational 2/3/2017 VCX 3 CadMag CA Hebron RD NEG
Colleyville Heritage Winter Invitational 2/3/2017 VCX 4 Dulles YR St.Pet PW AFF
Colleyville Heritage Winter Invitational 2/3/2017 VCX 5 Airlin TB SanMar HO NEG
Colleyville Heritage Winter Invitational 2/3/2017 VCX O BluVal RB Reagan SS NEG
Reagan SS on a 2-1
Colleyville Heritage Winter Invitational 2/3/2017 VCX Q BluVal LK Greenh KM AFF
BluVal LK on a 3-0
Maize High Debate Invitational 12/2/2016 VP RD 5 Emporia MV Topeka RT AFF
2016 Glenbrooks Speech and Debate Tournament 11/19/2016 VCX 1 Georgetown Day BS Union JS AFF
2016 Glenbrooks Speech and Debate Tournament 11/19/2016 VCX 2 Harker WJ Trinity Valley LL NEG
2016 Glenbrooks Speech and Debate Tournament 11/19/2016 VCX 3 Westwood SC Isidore Newman AL AFF
2016 Glenbrooks Speech and Debate Tournament 11/19/2016 VCX 4 Iowa City West JW Isidore Newman XZ AFF
2016 Glenbrooks Speech and Debate Tournament 11/19/2016 VCX 5 Gulliver Prep MP Jesuit CP LV AFF
2016 Glenbrooks Speech and Debate Tournament 11/19/2016 VCX 7 Mountain Brook CM Desert Vista QG NEG
2016 Glenbrooks Speech and Debate Tournament 11/19/2016 VCX Qtrs South Eugene LS Meadows BN NEG
Meadows BN on a 2-1
KCKCC DCI TOC Qualifier 11/4/2016 DCI 1 Millard North Kim & Le Blue Valley West Kohnle & Sander NEG
KCKCC DCI TOC Qualifier 11/4/2016 DCI 2 Blue Valley North Clary & Mendelson Lindale McWhorter & Wyatt NEG
KCKCC DCI TOC Qualifier 11/4/2016 Nov 3 Little Rock Central Carlisle & Perrin Blue Valley North Chavali & Deng NEG
KCKCC DCI TOC Qualifier 11/4/2016 DCI 4 Blue Valley North Anderson & Chilappa Little Rock Central Jung & Jung NEG
KCKCC DCI TOC Qualifier 11/4/2016 DCI 5 Blue Valley West Vasudevan & Schrag Barstow Butch & Lokre AFF
KCKCC DCI TOC Qualifier 11/4/2016 DCI 6 Sumner Sullivan & Franklin Shawnee Mission East Hassett & Massa NEG
KCKCC DCI TOC Qualifier 11/4/2016 DCI Octos Lindale McWhorter & Wyatt Shawnee Mission East Hassett & Massa NEG
Shawnee Mi on a 3-0
BHS Crusader Classic DCI 10/21/2016 DCI R3 21 TE 7 KA AFF
NDCA National Championships 4/9/2016 POL 5 Rowland Hall-St. Mark's BB Wayzata KS AFF
NDCA National Championships 4/9/2016 POL 6 Homewood-Flossmoor HL Harker SJ AFF
The Heart of Texas Invitational at St Marks 10/18/2014 VCX Round 3 Jenks DR Homewood-Flossmoor LS AFF