Last changed on
Thu October 3, 2019 at 10:13 PM CDT
Yes, I want to be on the email chain: jennifer.condron@me.com.
FYI……
Full disclosure, I am a parent judge with limited debate experience. That being said, I have learned to love LD debate and realize the responsibility that accompanies the role of judge. I have taken the necessary steps to educate myself in preparation so that I may competently judge and critique an LD debate round.
BIO
I received my Bachelor’s degree from the University of Connecticut and my Master’s degree from Yale University 100 or so years ago, give or take about 80 years.
JUDGING
I am open to all styles of argument if you are committed to doing it well. In short, be clear, explain yourself, share your knowledge and evidence, persuade me. It’s been a while since I shared tea with Nietzsche so explain your jargon.
I believe that being open-minded as a judge and evaluating embedded clash (making intuitive connections for you) are mutually exclusive.
I prefer clarity and persuasive inflection to monotone spreading but if you can accomplish both at a moderately fast pace, I am fine with speed. I’ll yell “clear” or “slow” three times before I stop flowing and lower speaks. Reading as much information to me as fast as possible is not likely to convince me that you have given much thought to the topic at hand. I prefer that you demonstrate that you fully understand your argument and convince me that you believe what you are saying, whether you do or not. This is a skill learned in debate, is it not?
SPEAKER POINTS
<26: Offensive, clipping cards, or generally being an ass.
26-27: Novice level, needs significant improvement
27-28: Below average, probably won’t break.
28-29: Around average, might break but won’t be competitive in later elimination rounds.
29-29.7: Above average, likely to get a bid.
30: Either an amazing performance K or you should win all rounds in all tournaments always.
In extraordinary circumstances, such as a lay tournament with weird norms, these may change.
Note from her daughter (Stanford OHS Independent EC): Jen’s a smart cookie, but she’s not very receptive to generic non T (she really likes performances, though) or tricks. Explain your ballot story well; she doesn’t want to do any work for you. Please, for the love of all that is holy, do NOT run presumption triggers. Unless you explain very clearly why presumption is necessary, save it. Don’t think that just because she’s a parent judge, you can slip new args into the NR/AR and she won’t notice. She will. Just explain your positions and you’ll be fine. Any questions for me? erinmcondron@gmail.com.
