National Speech and Debate Tournament

2024 — Des Moines, IA/US

Scott Odekirk 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?

Games-playing
 

RATE OF DELIVERY

7/91 = slow and deliberate
9 = very rapid
 

QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS

3/91 = a few well-developed arguments
9 = the more arguments the better
 

COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES

1/91 = communication skills most important
9 = resolving substantive issues most important
 

TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:

3/91 = 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

3/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks: There are two things that I despise about how debate has evolved: 1) I despise the emphasis on the speech doc: this is a speaking activity. I value persuasive speaking. I will be flowing on paper and I will not be looking at a speech doc while you talk. I will be looking at you, listening to your voice, and flowing. I also call for very few cards after the round so as to put the emphasis on the round that happened not the one in your coaches' heads. Persuasion matters. Pathos matters. Nuanced Evidence comparison in the round matters. Tactical ability matters. Style matters. 2) I despise the lack of creativity that I observe in the arguments: I am especially bored by the way that jargon flattens our characterization of things to ready made labels so that everyone speaks and thinks the same. My favorite DA debaters I have ever watched have their own singular ways of characterizing impacts and even their 1NC shells have unique structure and emphasize different internal links than the standard form. My favorite Kritik debaters of all time see the connection between the content that they are presenting and the form that they use to communicate. They try to do something new and they take some risks. One last note: I understand that debates can get heated but when the debate gets personal I get cynical and I wonder why I am still giving time to the activity.

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.