Tab judge. I have coached, or actively coach events, on local UIL, TFA and national circuit for over a decade. For Debate, please ask specific preference/style questions before round and in the presence of your opponent(s).

Interpretation: Very open to community standards and performer specific interpretations of literature. I try not to bring any preconceived understanding of literature into the round. I do prefer a teaser of some length before the introduction. Blocking and vocal characterization should be as distinct and clearly separate throughout performance.

INFO: I do prefer the use of a visual aid throughout the speech. Topics that are creative and challenging, or inspiring, are most intriguing and tend to separate themselves in a section. Sources are not as important in quantity, but the information should be presented in a fresh and relevant manner.

Extemporaneous: I prefer a balance of information and speech fluidity and personality. Clearly answer the question with a unified answer and give enough background/context in the introduction. Sources should be used significantly throughout the speech, but do not sacrifice a personable delivery simply to provide facts/analysis.

Hello! I'm a parent judge. This is my first year of judging so if possible please speak slowly and comprehensibly so that I am able to understand what you are saying. Also, since I'm a parent judge, please speak and strategize accordingly. Please explain the argument so that I know what you're saying and I may vote off of it.

I am a parent judge and have been judging extemporaneous speaking and other speech events for 3 years. Many years ago, I competed in persuasive oratory, dramatic interpretation, and duo interpretation.

As an extemp judge, I look for organization, analysis, sourcing, and strong delivery. If you are making a persuasive argument, then you should consider addressing the other side of the argument at some point in your speech. Also, please state your question before you start and give me time to write it down.

DEBATE ROUNDS

To win my ballot: Logical links and clear connections are important whether you're running a traditional or progressive case. Your argumentation skills and strategies is what your opponent is challenging, therefore; a clear, cut, concise connection is what wins the round. Listen to your opponent, (FLOW), provide impacts and know what your talking about. If you've got a few tricks up your sleeve, be sure you know how to use them.

I do not mind speed, but if you decide to spread make sure you slow down on tag-lines. Consider speaker points when spreading. I look to vote for a strong link and one's ability to prove why your case wins the round. Voters are extremely important to me so make sure you use the time in your last speech wisely.

I do my best to flow all arguments presented in the debate and rely heavily on my flow to determine the round winner. Make sure to signpost well, and please give me a roadmap of your speeches.

If you decide to do an email chain please, add me. mhix@neisd.net

Speaker Points

Positives: politeness, confidence, well-placed humor, preparation and well executed strategies/arguments.

Negatives: rudeness and unnecessary condescending comments, pointless cross examination, skirting the issues or avoidance

SPEECH ROUNDS

Staying true to the competition rubrics.

If I can't hear you, then I can't score you. Please, speak loud and clear.

hello!

My name is Merina Joseph and I'm a sophomore at McNeil High School, located in Austin, Tx. I'm an LD debater. My interests include long walks on the beach.

please add me to the email chain: merinatjoseph@gmail.com

I'm good with anything, just make sure you explain your links and weigh. That being said, I usually run LARP arguments, but I'm fine with Phil/Theory/K, etc. Like I said, just make sure you explain your argument well. I'm good with speed as well, just make sure your opponent is okay with spreading.

I love to laugh so please make your speech entertaining. i love puns. funny speech = more speaks (that kinda rhymes lol) i want

if you're mean, i'll dock speaks

good luck and have fun! ask me any questions you want after round, y'all got this. fake it till you make it.

remember: live laugh love lose

"There was a debate suggesting the environment isn’t that important after all. It was pretty anti-climatic"

"After debating with a needle, I saw his point."

"I debated about global warming the other day, boy did things heat up in there"

School Affiliation: Coach at The Episcopal School of Dallas

Coaching & Judging Experience: I have been coaching teams and judging tournaments since 2006. This includes LD, PF, Congress, CX and IEs at different schools in Virginia and Texas. I have had debaters qualify for NCFL and NSDA on multiple occasions which are both considered traditional tournaments.

Speed: Although I am personally not a fan of it, please make sure your spreading is clear and coherent. If I can't understand you, I probably will not flow it. If you see me stop flowing for an extended period of time then it would be in your best interest to slow down. I also heavily prefer if you go slow on your taglines, analytics and any theory arguments, especially during your rebuttals.

Types of Arguments: Although I prefer framework heavy debates, a lot of clash in the round, and good crystallization and overviews in your final rebuttal, I will still vote on topicality, counterplans, some theory arguments at times and kritiks if they are explained well by the debater. I am not a fan of non-topical Affs as I tend to favor whole resolution ACs. Make sure when you run T, that you are linking your violation to your standards/voting issues and that when you run a CP, you explain your net benefits and how it's competitive.

Theory Argument: If you run any disclosure theory or new affs bad arguments, make sure you thoroughly break down the reasons to prefer. Although I have never really been a fan of these types of arguments, I am willing to consider them if you can show the impacts of the abuse committed by your opponent and how this outweighs. Please make sure that whatever theory shells you plan on running are presented at a slower rate of speed.

Kritiks: Run at your own risk because I'm not really a fan of complicated philosophical arguments that have nothing to do with the actual resolution that should be debated upon. I'm not saying you can't win if you run them, but I might look at you funny and simply not flow the argument depending on the complexity of the K.

Speaks: Clarity over speed is prefered. If your spreading is incomprehensible, this will reflect on your speaker points. Any acts of rudeness or displays of an unprofessional demeanor towards your opponent will also be taken into account. If you go against an inexperienced debater or a traditional style opponent, it would be in your best interest to accommodate their format and invest some time clashing with or turning their value, criterion and contentions. Also, please do not ask me if I disclose speaker points. It's not going to happen. In addition, please do not use profanity at all during the round. It will impact your speaks and could also impact my decision so don't do it. Lastly, please refrain from attacking the character of any political figures or political parties as a whole. It's okay to discuss policies of the USFG but please avoid bashing politicians or parties that you may dislike as I consider that type of tactic in a debate to be very unprofessional and offensive. Debaters have lost my ballot over this in the past.

Tricks: Please don't.

Overview: Debate the resolution, clash with your opponent's arguments, provide framework, slow down during tags and analytics, throw in some voters at the end.

Email Chain: If and only if both debaters are sharing files, please include my email as well: kesslert@esdallas.org

Hi - I am a parent judge, usually judge IEs when I am judging.

IEs - I don't know much about IEs but speak really well and be animated. Make sure the message of your performance is clear and conveyed. For extemp, make sure you have good substance and sources to back up your claims and the speech should be organized.

Debate - I don't normally judge debate, and am unaware of the intricacies of debate rounds. If I'm in the back of the room, go slow. Go slow, and make sure to explain your arguments so I know what I'm voting on. Try to simplify arguments for me so I have a clear understanding.

Speaks for debate: I'll give above a 28 most of the time, but if you spread and if I can't understand I'll give you 25 speaks. If I can't understand you, I won't vote for you.

I will try my best to judge well, good luck!

I'm a volunteer parent judge.

I believe that debaters who speak deliberately and clearly when they are presenting their first prepared aff/neg cases are a lot more effective than those who speak at a 100x pace (spreading) and hoping for a technical win on "failing to answer all opposing arguments". If you need more time to go through contentions, we can discuss that at the start of a debate and see if we can come to a mutual agreement. This does NOT mean those who use spreading automatically lose the debate (though it WILL translate to low speaker points), but I prefer to hear clear arguments in a debate - LD is not a speed talking competition. But if you do use spreading to exclude an opponent, know that it is a turn off (low speaker points) as it may indicate that you are unable to debate on the merits of your case.

I also pay close attention to the CX and rebuttals and weigh both the questions posed during CX and the defense to your contentions when questioned by your opponent.

Please set your own time, honor your time limits, and please be respectful of your opponent, judge and any audience at all times before, during and after the debate.

I don't pay attention during cross fire. Anything brought up in cross fire has to be brought up in the next speech for it to be weighed. All impacts need to be clearly stated.

Just speak clearly. Anything over 150 wpm will not be flowed.

My paradigm

Debate is the test of the truthfulness of a claim, thus truth is important. I don't understand the tech over truth argument, nor do I want to.

Debaters should:

Speak slowly.

State the resolution, as that is what is being debated

Explain everything. Don't assume that I know what a K is. Because I don't. Don't assume I know what anything else is either. I probably don't.

Speak very slowly.

Explain what the big arguments are and why the opposing side is not winning.

Be nice to each other.

Give me a reason to vote for your side. Or more than one.

Speak slowly.

To summarize, in debate judging, I adopt most of the nuance but very little of the substance in this abstract on the qualitative vs. quantitative debate that Kenneth R. Howe espouses in the American Journal of Education Vol. 100, No. 2 (Feb., 1992), pp. 236-256 (21 pages) Published By: The University of Chicago Press. FYI, '92 was a good year for debate about debate in educational philosophy.

Speakers should:

Be entertaining, thoughtful, logical, organized.

Present evidence/sources (not so much in IMP maybe, but definitely in OO, INF, EX,

Don't go too fast, but instead go at the exact right speed.

Be entertaining. Try not to steal minutes from your audience's life (especially mine) by being boring. Try and pretend this stuff is fun.

Interpers should:

Be real, or sometimes in HI or humorous DUO, be so polished and perfect in your blocking, gesturing, and facial expression, that the hyperbole does not need realism.

Real acting is seen in the eyes. Are you believable? Is there anything about your performance that distracts?

I do my best to judge the performer not the script.

I am a parent judge and this is my third year judging. Please write your title in the chat as it will make it easier for me.

For extemp, I am looking for someone who has a clear understanding of the question. Please state your opinion and have the facts and mainstream media sources to back it up. Incorrect facts will be affect your ranking. Please use your time wisely, pace yourself and don't finish 3 minutes early.

For HI, OO, PO, PR, DI - I will rank based on speaking ability, content, confidence and interest. I have been very entertained by the high level of talent in these tournaments.

For virtual setup - please verify your setup to make sure the judge can see you. I can't see if you if you shine a light in my face.