I've been an assistant coach at Campus HS (Haysville, KS) for 7 years, and I was an assistant in Valley Center, KS, for 3 years. I also debated in high school.

Clarity of arguments is most important to me. Debaters should be understandable, and they can speak at a rapid pace. However, extreme speed--like that of an auctioneer--is unnecessary. It is better to have quality arguments that read a ton of evidence. I like for debaters to explain how the evidence supports the argument he/she makes. Merely reading a ton of evidence with no analytical link to voter issues is not productive debating. Don't assume that I will use the same reasoning or make the same connections as you do. It is your job as the speaker to help the audience understand and prefer your position in the debate. Keep it civil as well. I prefer arguments based in reality not theoretical or philosophical impossibilities.

If I stop flowing and cross my arms, that means you have lost me. Either you are confusing or you are reading so quickly I can't understand the words coming out of your mouth. This is your visual cue to adjust your speaking style to make yourself more understandable. Debaters often make the argument that the way a judge votes determines if a policy passes. I have never heard or seen a legislative session in Congress use spreading to pass laws. I really don't want to hear this in the round.

Above all, I vote on the logic and clarity of the arguments. This means that you must do more than read evidence.

John Hale

(He/Him)

Judging for Wichita East, I have limited experience with debate and am not familiar with acronyms or excessive debate lingo. I evaluate the round based on the number of points made and on which team has the most persuasive argument. I don’t flow, but I will take notes on the round and will always be as unbiased as possible.

Speed: I understand the theory behind Spreading, but cannot follow an argument made by someone using it .

K’s: As I have never debated before, I have no experience with K lit and I will probably not understand it whatsoever.

CPs: I have trouble understanding confusing perms and CP theory, please be thorough if you go for either of these strategies.

The use of racial/sexist/homophobic/transphobic slurs, in any way other than as used by individuals who are affected by those slurs, results in 0 speaks and a loss. Be mindful of problematic (non-slur) language. Mistakes happen, but so must sincere apologies.

Despite the fact I have never been a debater, nor have I ever coached debate, I have been judging debate for 15 years.

As a judge, I value the following:

A logical stream of arguments that are tied to solid evidence and even stronger analysis.

Respect and professionalism between debaters.

Passion for the art of debate.

Insightfulness

Humility.

I do NOT appreciate the following:

Belittling your opponent

Speed-talking--I must be able to follow the argument.

Hi!

I debated (Policy, Student Congress) at Andover High School for four years (Education, Immigration, Weapons, CJR)

Currently the policy assistant for Andover High/debater at WSU.

Yes, add me to the email chain, my email is gracemcmanus22@gmail.com

I am comfortable with any style of debate/speed in the round.

Framework- Usually debates inevitably come down to competing models of debate. You need to be able to explain why your model of debate is best. I will vote for the framework that has the best impacts(obviously but just making sure I put it out there) I have voted for education before (with fairness as an IL) but I am comfortable voting for literally anything.

K- I am super comfortable with K's, just make sure you are able to explain the alt well. Explain the role of the ballot and how the alt is able to function when I vote for a K, you know... the usual K things. I won't do the work for you when it comes to these types of arguments.

Theory- I love theory, but make sure you execute it properly. Not much else to say here, but if you have questions you can definitely ask me before the round begins.

T- I have voted for T in the past. I expect their to be competing interps when T is presented. I'm also cool if you read no interp and just impact turn T. Do whatever you want I will flow.

I have a lot of opinions on a lot of different arguments, but I will always defer to what is said in the round. I will vote for anything, my paradigm is only a suggestion of what I like to vote for. Just make the best arguments in the round and you will win the debate.

Above all be nice to one another. That doesn't mean you can't be assertive just don't be mean, it's pretty simple. If you have any questions, just email me.

I am debate parent and having been judging for the past 8 years. Consequently, while some speed is acceptable, if I am also focused on trying to understand you. Remember, if I need to understand you or your plan. I need you explain what your are reading off your cards from the laptop. I value your ability to think critically and analytically over your ability to speak rapidly. I need to know you understand your plan and the data you use to support your plan. I need to know you are able to process your opponents claims logically and are able to respond appropriately.

Asst. Debate coach 6 years, Debate in High School, Head Forensics Coach 6 years. Theatre Teacher

The biggest thing I look for in a debate is clear and precise speech. I am ok with spreading as long as you can annunciate every word and make sure that your speech is understandable.

Areas that I tend to give the most weight are as follows:

Solvency

Topicality

Inherency

I will flow throughout. The biggest thing I do not like in a debate is if it get's too far off topic and the plan is not debated at all or touched on very little.

To me debate is about being able to know what you are talking about and having clear answers and to have facts available at the tip of your tongue. It is not about reading. Know what you're talking about and you will be fine with me.

Xan Tolbert

Wichita East High School - Mathematics Department Chair

I was a previous high school debater competing for Damien High School in the late 80s. After high school I transitioned from policy debate to Model United Nations and was competitive at the collegiate level. My educational background is in Mathematics, Physics, Philosophy and History.

I judge rarely for policy debate but enjoy it and am looking forward to doing more.

I am a tabula rasa judge. As I have judged rarely in recent years I may not be up to date on all the current terminology. Please take into account the following:

Speed - I am fine with going fast as long as you are clear. Speed is not necessary to win but if you lack diction and enunciation it does not matter what the card says or the point you're trying to make. Clarity and quality of argument are more important than speed. I do enjoy fast rounds as long as they include the previously mentioned traits.

Kritik's - I have a philosophy degree with a heavy emphasis on epistemology and linguistics. Kritiks are fine as long as they are argued effectively and reasonable.

CP's - Have to provide more advantages then the aff. How much more is debatable.

Topicality - A round can be won or lost on T. Avoid semantic juggling and clearly indicate why the aff is not topical.

Disads - I need a strong causal relationship from aff plan that results in the disad.

Decision Rules - These don't seem to be used much in modern practice. They need to be logical and have a causal relationship.

Rounds can be won or lost in X. It's as important as any of the speeches.

Have fun and enjoy the experience of the round. One thing you can do to be more effective is to signpost, it makes your argument clearer to the listener.

(these are my thoughts translated into debate lingo by my daughter)

I am a lay/parent judge and evaluate stock issues. Please use judge instruction and tell me why you do/don't solve the aff. I prefer listening to DA's as they make the most sense to me. If you run a CP, I will not understand the rules of things like perms, linking to net benefits, etc. and will likely only evaluate whether or not the aff or the cp is a face-level better idea. Please do not run K's.

I like good public speaking skills, persuasion, and confidence.

Pronouns: she/her

Background: I am a former debater for Wichita East. I debated for four years from 2012-2016, primarily doing open debate. I have not judged many rounds for this year - I am pretty unfamiliar with the topic.

Preferences: I prefer a moderate rate of delivery. I am most familiar with DA/CP/Case debate. Please limit yourself to 1 or 2 perms on each CP if you're going faster. I am not a good judge for T and K debates (that's not to say topicality isn't important, you should run it if you want but I don't get super deep into it). If you do run a K, please explain it well to me!

Round Etiquette: Be respectful to one another, that includes opponents and partners. I don't care about Open CX, but if 1 partner does most of the answering/asking that will affect speaker points. Don't steal prep. Don't ask if everyone is ready, everyone is ready and will say something if they aren't.

Any questions just ask