National Speech and Debate Tournament
2025 — Des Moines, IA/US
Kiara Tooley Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Coach of a teamNDT/CEDA debater in college
Policy debater in high school
Frequently judge Policy Debate
How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
11-20Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
Hypothesis testerRATE OF DELIVERY
4/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
4/91 = a few well-developed arguments9 = the more arguments the better
COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES
6/91 = communication skills most important9 = resolving substantive issues most important
TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:
2/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
2/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
I encourage debaters to focus on clarity, thorough clash, and full use of prep and CX time. Speed is fine, but clarity is essential, especially online. I value argumentation that addresses what opponents did say, not just what they dropped. Evidence must be readily available to competitors and judges. Use all speech and CX time strategically; professionalism and preparation matter. Respect your opponents and the activity, but have fun too. Jokes and genuine engagement can improve speaker points. Always make sure I’m ready before starting the timer, and refer to me by name, not as "judge."
Note: if you wish for your pronouns to appear the debaters you judge on text/email blasts, log into Tabroom, click Profile at top, and add them in the Pronouns field.