Clarity:

There should be a clear format that is followed, with that said it does mean there is an openness to many different styles and speech deliveries. Clear pronunciation, volume, and clarity within the content itself. Be topical.

Delivery:

Performance shall be judged based on the round and those competitors in said round. Energy, personality, and conversationality are key to receiving high ranks.

Passion:

A sense of self-awareness in terms of familiarity with the event, competition, and higher-level stakes at the State should be presented. Professionalism is of the most importance.

Overall:

Congrats on making it to State, have some fun and remember quality is valued above quantity. Good Luck everyone!

Overall in Online Performance:

• Blocking is an essential tool to help move the performance along. However, in an online world, make sure the camera is propped in a favoring fashion.
• make sure you are always on frame

Speech IEs

• Clean and polish performances go a long way.
• Articulation is a must (make sure your mic is picking your voice crisp and clean)
• Character(s) should all be unique and well developed.
• Make sure all characters are differentiable
• Big fan of innovative blocking or performances.
• All blocking should be meaningful and purposeful
• Make sure your intro says the importance of the piece.
• Use time wisely, nothing too short, and definitely nothing over time.
• I'm okay with mature content as far as it is done with professionalism and matureness.
• NO insensitive or appropriating content
• If you use the binder as a prop, make sure it is clean and clear.
• Proper binder tech.

L.P. and Public Speaking:

• Clean and Polish performances
• If you are able to use body points or speaking triangles, do so.
• Be Creative with road maps and A.G. ( Extemp, Impromptu, etc.)
• If you have visual aids (V.A.s), you are familiar with them.
• Make sure sources are cited completely, with the date and where from.
• creativity and outline are a big plus (O.O.)
• Try to stay away from Cookie-cutter, overdone topics.

Depending on the event, I like content to, obviously, be relevant to theme/topic.

Clear/clean delivery with good use of volume, rate, pitch.

In debate, I like to be able to understand with clarity.

Speech: OO/INFO

Speech structure

Delivery style

Sources

Tangible Solutions/applications

Analysis of topics

Speech: IX/USX

Answer to question well thought out response

Roadmap

speaking style/delivery

sources and deep analysis of points made

Speech: Interp DI/HI

Clear teaser to develop setting

Intro with clear argument and support

Delivery/style

overall literature and performance

Speech: Duo/Duet

Clear teaser to develop setting

Intro with clear argument and support

Delivery/style

overall literature and performance

Partner balance and dynamic

Debate Paradigm

EVALUATION-I will evaluate the round through the framework/interpretation provided and argued by the debaters. In other words, if the aff wins framework, I will evaluate that way; if the neg wins framework, I will evaluate that way. The exception would be if I found the framework itself to be morally repugnant. In the absence of a framework, I will revert to policy maker, which is my personal preference. Unless you have an exceedingly strong policy advocacy and an exceedingly clean link story, I do not want to see a performance aff or neg.

SPEED- I prefer a moderately-paced debate. I understand the need for speed in the 1AR, and I can follow well signposted fast argumentation. You can spread if you please but don't if you cannot properly.

ORGANIZATION-Organization is critical to me. I need you to give a succinct road map before your speech starts and then signpost as you go including numbering. Additionally, before you speak put your speech on the flash drive or email chain so that it is easy to track prep time. I prefer most negative positions to be started in the 1NC . Disads,CP and T should always be started in the 1NC.

PARTICULAR ARGUMENTS

KRITIKAL ARGUMENTS- I generally will accept well applied, resolutionally focused kritiks and affs. K’s need to have a clear alternative beyond reject.

DISADS/ADVANTAGES- I feel that disads are almost essential for the negative. I will vote a disad down if the aff articulates and wins that the link fails. I generally will not vote on a minuscule chance of the disad or on a “try or die” analysis from the affirmative. In sum, I want impacts to have a reasonable chance of happening before I consider them in my impact calculus.

TOPICALITY- I will vote on topicality as it is a key limiter.

INHERENCY-I will not vote on inherency unless the negative proves outright that the aff plan is already happening. I don’t think I have ever actually voted on inherency.

SOLVENCY- I like solvency and vote on it often usually in conjunction with another argument.

COUNTERPLANS- I vote on them and generally accept that they can be topical.

THEORY-I buy warranted ground loss based theory arguments and will vote on them.

FUNDING- I cannot remember a time when I found funding arguments convincing (by saying this I am NOT saying that I do not like funding based DA’s).

GENERAL- Open CX is fine if both teams agree. Be certain that one gender is not preferred over the other through interrupting or condescending. Rude/sexist behavior and/or racist speech will result in lower speaker points. I will not, on principal, vote for those engaging in racist or homophobic speech. Kicking is fine but be certain to make it clear. I do prefer the negative to sit on the right and the affirmative to side on the left.

Speech Events:

What are your stylistic preferences for extemp? How much evidence do you prefer? Any preference for virtual delivery?: properly structure your speech, quality over quantity for evidence (6 is a good number for me, but of course more is ok), no preference for virtual delivery - speaker's choice

What are your stylistic preferences for Oratory/Info? How much evidence do you prefer? Any preference for virtual delivery? - just persuade me and leave me with some realistic solutions. solutions that are not even possible for me to enact will be considered less than ones that I can actually do something about. I don't have the ability to change the entire educational system, so please don't tell me to.

Any unique thoughts on teasers/introductions for Interpretation events? intros are important

Any preferences with respect to blocking, movement, etc. in a virtual world? speaker's choice

What are your thoughts on character work? need to be realistic, I want to hear their story, not you pretending to, make it real

How do you feel about author's intent and appropriateness of a piece? For example: an HI of Miracle Worker (author's intent) or a student performing mature material or using curse words (appropriateness)? High school tournament = high school appropriateness. This isn't college yet.