John W. Arnold

Howard High School
Ellicott City, Maryland

I have been competing in forensics since middle school! I have taught public speaking, coached and judged IE, LD, CX and Public Forum debate since 2006.

Public Forum Debate Judging Philosophy

I find Debate to be much like a game of chess. A good clash of ideas makes a most enjoyable debate for me. So, don’t be afraid to take risks and be passionate about your arguments, so long as you support, defend, and explain them. PFD is a debate of currently relevant events; therefore, please make sure that your arguments and evidence reflect that current relevance.

Communication skills and the resolution of substantive issues are equally important to me. Speed has the potential to harm your communicative ability. If you are reading too fast, I will let you know, and expect you to adapt to my request. Your speaker points are based solely on your ability to communicate with me. Please remember that you are trying to persuade me to vote in your favor. Therefore, it is in your best interest to make sure that I can understand you.

Teach me, explain and apply the evidence to me, don’t just read it. The quality of your evidence is much more important to me than sheer quantity of evidence. You must be able to use--weigh, impact, link, extend—your evidence, showing me that you know and understand it.

Absent a framework being established, I will evaluate the debate on the voting issues presented in the Summaries and Final Foci. Be sure to use those speeches to explain and convince me of what the debate boils down to, and why I should believe you over your opponent -- be sure to warrant these assertions!

Crossfire, especially Grand Crossfire, should remain civil.

Lincoln-Douglas Debate Judging Philosophy

I will not intervene during the debate, nor ask to see evidence after the debate. Feel free to ask any questions prior to the round.

I enjoy judging LD rounds when the debaters focus on communicating with each other and educating me. This is the basis on which I assign speaker points. Don’t be afraid to clash, in fact, clash intentionally, but with civility.

I prefer a clear standard with which I can evaluate the round. Make sure that you link and impact back to the standard. Don’t just tell me that they do, prove it. I am definitely listening for claim—warrant—impact in the presentation of evidence and logical argumentation. I’d rather LD debaters did not spread, but as long as your speed does not affect your articulation and comprehensibility, I am fine with it. Make it easy for me with road maps and signposting. Both AFF and NEG should be sure to clearly and effectively crystallize their position in their final speeches.

My decision is based on my review of what I have on my flow at the end of the round.


Policy Debate Judging Philosophy

I find Debate to be much like a game of chess. A good clash of ideas makes a most enjoyable debate for me. So, don’t be afraid to take risks and be passionate about your arguments, so long as you support and defend them.

Communication skills and the resolution of substantive issues are equally important to me. Speed has the potential to harm your communicative ability. If you are reading too fast, I will let you know, and expect you to adapt to my request. Your speaker points are based solely on your ability to communicate with me. Please remember that you are trying to persuade me to vote in your favor. Therefore, it is in your best interest to make sure that I can understand you. Teach me, explain and apply the evidence to me, don’t just read it. The quality of your evidence is much more important to me than sheer quantity of evidence. You must be able to use--weigh, impact, link, extend—your evidence, showing me that you know and understand it. I’d rather not evaluate the debate in topicality issues, but will if forced to. Absent an in-round framework being established, I will evaluate the debate on whether or not the topical plan would be a good idea. I don’t think kritiks provide for the best debates, but will listen to them and consider them, if given a clearly articulated and warranted reason to.

Argue what you believe in, are passionate about and are good at. Enjoy what you are spending so much time doing!

Paradigm 

I vote on almost anything if you win the debate. I believe that debate should be an even competition of what happens in the round and how it affects the outside world instead of the other way around. Also don't do anything racist, homophobic, sexist, patriarchal, transphobic, heteronormative or simply disrespectful in round without expecting poor speaker points. It will also affect how I view your argumentation in this safe space.

 Spreading

In regards to spreading I'm fine with it just don't start out at full speed I need time to adjust to voices. Also be clear and slow on tags so I can know what you are saying and what I should be voting on. I can't vote on something that I  can't hear.