Last changed on
Thu March 7, 2024 at 9:37 AM PDT
2022
Similar preferences to those below. I still value clarity and clash. For Congress, I value presentation, delivery, and style as well. Most of all, be your authentic self. Make passionate arguments you care about. Discuss the real-world impacts. Be respectful of your opponents and have fun!
Stanford 2020 and 2021
Here are some preferences:
I prefer traditional NSDA LD debate. If you spread, run theory, and/or kritiks, I will do my best to keep track but I do not yet have the experience to judge it yet. I'm getting better at it, though, so if you have more "circuit-type" argumentation, be sure to signpost and explain.
It is also my belief that skilled circuit debaters can be just as skilled at traditional debate (take a look at NSDA Nationals 2011 and 2018). And this year's NSDA National Champion competed at this same tournament a couple years ago. So there is lots of crossover.
Signpost. I will flow, but you can help by keeping the debate organized.
Crystallize. Break down the debate. Tell me what you think are the most important voting issues. Weigh arguments and impacts.
Have fun debating the big ideas of this resolution. It matters and your opinions matter, so challenge everyone in the room to consider this topic both philosophically and practically.
Stanford 2019
Please put me on the email chain: hcorkery@eduhsd.k12.ca.us
English teacher. Long time baseball coach; first year debate coach!
Here are some preferences:
Stay with traditional NSDA LD debate. If you are on the circuit, I respect your skill set; I’m just not ready for it yet. If you spread, run theory, and/or kritiks, I will do my best to keep track but I do not yet have the experience to judge it yet. And it is my belief that skilled circuit debaters can be just as skilled at traditional debate (take a look at NSDA Nationals 2011 and 2018).
Signpost. I will flow, but you can help by keeping the debate organized.
Crystallize. Break down the debate. Tell me what you think are the most important voting issues. Weigh arguments and impacts.
Have fun debating the big ideas of this very important resolution. I am a Marine Corps veteran and I understand the real-world impacts of foreign policy decisions. Your opinions matter so challenge everyone in the room to consider this topic both philosophically and practically.
Stanford 2018
Public Forum debate was designed with both the public and the lay judge in mind. For this reason, I'll judge your round based on the side that presents the clearest, best-supported, most logical argument that convinces the public and the public's policy makers to vote one way or another on a resolution.
I appreciate it when you explicitly state when you are establishing a "framework," making a "contention" or claim, providing a "warrant" or "evidence" and analyzing an "impact."
For speaker points, I value poise, eye contact, gestures, and pacing (changing your voice and speed to make effective points).
Finally, since this is JV Public Forum, we need to have a "growth mindset" and understand that this level of debating is developmental. JV Public Forum debaters are trying to improve and ultimately become varsity debaters. Winning is obviously important (I've coached sports for 20 years), but in my mind there is a clear distinction between JV and Varsity levels in any activity. JV is developmental competition. Varsity is the highest level competition.
