Tabroom.com

National Speech and Debate Tournament

2025 — Des Moines, IA/US

Michael Convey Paradigm

Policy

Policy Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)

Coach of a team
NDT/CEDA debater in college
Policy debater in high school
Occasionally judge Policy Debate

How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?

0-10

Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?

Tabula rasa

RATE OF DELIVERY

9/91 = slow and deliberate
9 = very rapid

QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS

7/91 = a few well-developed arguments
9 = the more arguments the better

COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES

9/91 = communication skills most important
9 = resolving substantive issues most important

TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:

7/91 = often
9 = rarely

COUNTERPLANS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

GENERIC DISADVANTAGES

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

Additional remarks: Topicallity in my view is more to check in round abuse and shouldn't be a first time offense position. Regarding my rating for rate of delivery it is simply to show I can handle the fastest debaters and not punish them, the circumstances for speaker points will vary in the round. Simply mumbling through your constructive does not count as reading but if a student can really rip through cards clearly then that's fine.

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.