1. I do not like spreading.
2. I take notes during the debate.
3. I expect collegial debate and respectful behavior

Experience & Education
Carrollton HS Speech & Debate '08-'12.
CHS S&D (Assistant Coach) '12-'16.
-
BS Political Science - University of West Georgia '16
Master of Public Policy - Georgia State University '20

~~~

PF: I prefer that PF stays as close to it's original intent (in terms of the use of debate theory, jargon, etc.) as possible - i.e., I should be able to judge this round as a layperson with no prior knowledge of the high school debate space. If you're going to spend a considerable amount of time between speeches calling for cards please weigh every card you've asked for.

LD: I appreciate as much of a straightforward framework and/or case debate as you can give me.

I require one essential thing, when delivering your speeches or debate arguments it is important that you show passion while delivering what you have to say. This shows your audience that you care about what you have written and that is important.

-Alex Bennett

Congressional Debate:

I have judged and/or been parliamentarian at local, regional and national tournaments, including Isidore Newman, Durham Academy, the Barkley Forum and and Harvard. My students have found success at both the national and state levels.

POs- I default to you. Remember, your tone as PO has a big influence on tone of the chamber. Be efficient, clear and consistent and have fun.

As far as the round and debate within the round, consistency is important to me. The way you speak and vote on one piece of legislation should most indeed influence your position on similar limitation unless you tell me otherwise. Debate and discourse does not exist in a vacuum.

Acting/characterization is fine as long as there is a reason and has a positive impact.

Finding a balance of logos, ethos and pathos is important. Difficult to accomplish in three minutes? Absolutely. The balance is what gets my attention.

I'll be honest. I don't like when debate jargon leaks into the chamber. SQUO, affirmative/negative, counterplan, link/turn, etc. This event is it's own unique event with norms.

Additionally, Student Congress is not Extemp-lite. If you are trying for three points in a speech, how do I know what to focus on? If everything is equally important then nothing is important. Take a stance, go for the impact and make the balance between logic and emotional to persuade. Include previous debate points, elucidate your point of view and have fun.

I am a language arts teacher at Dean Rusk Middle and sponsor the Dean Rusk Middle School Speech and Debate Club; I also work with the speech team at Sequoyah High School.

In addition to coaching at the middle school level, I have taught writing at the college, HS, and MS level. I appreciate strong organization and emotion when it is appropriate.

If you would type your topic or title in the chat box before your speech, I would appreciate it.

Have fun and please be respectful! If you have any questions don't be afraid to ask!

I look for rational, linear argumentation. Please do not advance contentions/make arguments without providing adequate warrant/evidence. Please avoid negating your own argument(s) with circular or incomplete warrants/reasoning. Please do not abuse your opponent. Civility will gain much more than overly agressive pursuit. Spreading is perhaps fine, but it had better consist of completed arguments (claim AND warrant) rather than scatter gun approaches designed as insurmountable "gotcha" gimmicks to merely trap your opponents into "dropping" arguments. If your claims and warrants don't actually WORK, then I'm highly unlikely to count them as actual arguments, and your opponent cannot drop arguments that weren't completed on your part. Also, if your speed is so rapid that I cannot flow it, then those are arguments you didn't successfully make, and which your opponent cannot actually "drop." Please do not present me with "theater of the absurd" contentions that are off topic or so bizzarely twisted that they are abusive to your opponent. Such tactics will not be rewarded as voters. Off time road mapping is, to me, highly suspect, as it can quickly appear to be an attempt to abuse the time constraints and thus abuse one's opponent, and leaves an overall bad taste in my mouth (not to mention in the mouth/mouths of your opponent/opponents). If you just MUST off time road map, then, of course, you will want to keep it to a minimum, .... but be aware that really ANY of it appears to me to be suspect/abusive. Please contain your claims and warrants to terms and phrases whose definitions you FULLY understand, and with which you are comfortable and fluent in pronouncing. Just because it is on the card doesn't mean it can't seriously break up your flow if you mis pronounce it or wholly or partially misunderstand all the implications it has. DO flow your opponents' arguments carefully, and feel free to turn claims that aren't warranted, or that are poorly warranted. Being able to so do with terms used by an opponent who clearly doesn't understand ALL implications, without being a wiseacre about it are often rewarded in voting.

Who I Am:

When I judge Speech, I look for your best effort alongside the criteria required for your event. I am an experienced past competitor in both Debate and Speech (primarily Speech) and I will judge you according to the NSDA rules.

For Interpretation Events:

If you are over or under the grace period of 30 seconds, I will not rank you first place, as is in the NSDA rules.

If you use your clothes or hair or glasses or any physical accessory as a prop, I will deduct some points from your score. Unless you are in an event that requires you to have a prop, it will be to your disadvantage if you use props.

I will provide time signals upon request.

Obviously, your content will differ per event. As long as your content is appropriate to your event, your piece is fine.

Pops and characterisation is keys. A clean, smooth performance is what I look for.

For Duo interpretation, if competitors touch each other, make eye contact, or use each other as physical props (like the clothes, hair, or accessories) I will deduct some points.

For POI, one quality I value the most is if your purpose/story/pieces make sense and flows. Fluidity is key. Obviously, memorisation, pacing, delivery, etc. is also highly valued.

Have appropriate pacing, especially in your intro or for purposeful pauses.

I expect your piece to be memorised later in the season (towards late September). Pieces that are not memorised can and may be voted down if it is late in the season.

For Non-Interpretation Events:

If you are over or under the grace period of 30 seconds, I will not rank you first place, as is in the NSDA rules.

If you use your clothes or hair or glasses or any physical accessory as a prop, I will deduct some points from your score. Unless you are in an event that requires you to have a prop, It will be to your disadvantage if you use props.

I will provide time signals upon request.

For original oratory, I expect a roadmap in your intro, cited resources, and solvency. Eye contact, meaningful tone and hand gestures are crucial and I highly value them when determining ranking.

For informative, I expect a roadmap in your intro and you keeping my interest. Your visuals, if provided, should make sense and should be referenced/included in your speech. I will not deduct any points or vote you down if you do not have visuals.

Have appropriate pacing and inflection, especially for purposeful pauses.

I expect your piece to be memorised later in the season (towards late September). Pieces that are not memorised can and may be voted down if it is late in the season.

For Impromptu:

I will give time signals (four down) with a "c" at 4:30 and a fist at 5 minutes unless you request something else. I will also give verbal warnings during your prep time at 1 minute, 1:30, and 1:50. As long as your piece makes logical sense, regardless of how outlandish your content is, I'm perfectly okay with your speech. Have meaningful hand gestures and minimal pacing. I do allow notes in the beginning of the season but towards the beginning of November, you should not be referencing your notes. I will deduct points from your score but it may or may not affect your ranking.

For Extemporaneous:

Essentially, I have the same rules for OO. I do allow you to use your notes. Make sure to restate your question. Concise and well thought out points in your piece will result in your receiving a higher ranking.

Overall tips for Speech events:

Don't be on your phones unless it is an emergency. Make sure they are silenced.

If you present any argument or piece that is inherently sexist, homophobic, racist, xenophobic, etc. without the intention to point out that that argument/piece is wrong, you will automatically get last place even if you think you should have gotten a higher ranking.

Be respectful to your competitors.

I prefer if you tell me the title of your piece before we start.

If you are double/triple/quadruple entered, please tell me before the round starts. If you are coming into the round I am judging from your other round(s), please wait until the competitor presenting is finished. I want to avoid as many distractions as possible.

If you stutter, keep going. If you forget, keep going. I am lenient and I understand, you're human, but you will gain more respect from me if you give your piece your all and do your best for that round.

I coach PF Debate and have judged LD for 15+ years. I love to see professionalism, real logic in cases and rebuttals, impeccable speaking skills, and good time management. Please avoid barraging me with questions about my expertise before the round starts.

“Off-time road maps” serve no purpose. Framework and observations are not just for show; I weigh them throughout the round. Spreading does not belong in PF or LD, and I will not flow arguments that I cannot hear.

Good argumentation matters the most to me. I should hear incisive warrants to support all claims. Your impacts should be specific and resonate throughout your contentions. Good debaters achieve turns and can group arguments well.

In regard to PF:

Summary speeches should, above all, situate the round and extend the rebuttal.

Try not to turn the round into just an “evidence-off”. Know when to move on from a dispute over one piece of evidence.

In the Final Focus, you must weigh arguments with specificity and effective persuasion, but the focus should be on the holistic argument and impacts, not line-by-line analysis at that point.

I don't give long-winded verbal feedback at the end of rounds, but I try to give an abundance of ballot comments for your benefit.

For Debate:

- I focus on the flow of the argument

- I look for clashing - I want to see competitors breakdown the opponent's argument

For Speech Events

I look at the creativity in the speech, but also listen for tone and inflection and to present a speech or performance to convince me in what you are saying.

I debated LD in high school and then debated in college Policy Debate at George Mason University for two years. I have not kept up in relevant topic literature but I do keep up with general news/politics and I still care a lot for debate. Education is good!!!

For LD debate, I prefer the "old school" structure as opposed to bringing policy debate aspects into it. LD is geared towards more of the theoretical and ethical, while policy debate relies on immediate real-world application, so please keep that in mind. I can handle speed but start to dislike spreading and DO NOT clip your cards - I will put it in the RFD. Framework debates are important only if the framework is significantly different; if the competing frameworks are similar enough, I would rather see some time spent on the evidence and argument of the debaters' contentions.

For Policy debate, I can pretty much go either way whether it's policy or theory debates - though I will say that anything fairly high theory will have to be thoroughly well explained for me to grasp it. You probably shouldn't read performance arguments if you're going to speak for others' identities.....I just can't see those arguments holding water. I can handle spreading as long as you are CLEAR, especially with difficulty in these virtual debates, it's harder to hear than normal. I alert all teams that I prefer to have docs on hand so I can better follow along and flow your arguments.

General debate:

BE POLITE unless you don't care about your speaker points and don't care that I won't like you in the round. All pillars of presentation are IMPORTANT and give you real-world practice. How are you going to effectively network and work in teams if you're rude and annoying?

I value evidence very highly - I prefer for there to be discussion of relevance and date of the evidence so there is a better understanding of the context of the evidence. Considering evidence is the backbone of any argument, I find it very important for any debater to investigate the warrants and intent of evidence and how they would apply in the context of these debates.

I do care about how cross examination goes - I will want answers gathered in CX to be brought up in rebuttals, otherwise CX might as well be wasted time.