Please be civil to one another during debates. You are arguing a topic, not an individual, so watch your voice.

I vote based on who (or which team) persuaded me of their position overall, whether I agree or not. I prefer an evidence-based debate. Sources should be at your fingertips. You should speak at a conversational rate, which means not too quickly. I should know your two or three points and your framework. Let me hear your refutations. I also pay attention to the questions askedor not asked during cross.

I prefer not to be told to vote for your side, such as the following: "Judge, you cannot vote for them," or "Judge, you must vote for our case," which will make me not want to vote for you. Don't tell me what to do. However, saying things like "Judge, their contention fails on this point" or "Judge, our case should win because of..." are acceptable.

I judge delivery and persuasion instead of content unless content is essential to the speech, such as IM or SpAr.

I retired in 2022 after teaching English Language Arts to sophomores, juniors, and seniors for 30 years. I try to leave helpful individual comments, but sometimes, I do not have time before Tabroom is closed for the tournament. Just as you are exhausted after debating all day, I am exhausted from judging.

If I cannot comment on Tabroom, I will try to send my comments to your coach, but this is not guaranteed. I also try to ensure you have comments before the Region Tournament. If I judge at the Region Tournament, I will try to ensure you have comments before the State Tournament.

DEBATE EVENTS:

I am a practicing attorney who occasionally moonlights as a debate judge. In real life, in a real courtroom, I will only win a trial if I win the hearts and minds of the jury---presenting artfully crafted arguments that accentuate my personal ethos, while balancing appropriate appeals to logic and passion. If I tried to "spew" or "spread" my arguments to a jury, I would lose the case. If I tried it in front of a judge, I would get kicked out of the courtroom! I would lose all my cases and my clients with them.

The same goes for nearly every other professional communicator. No teacher would teach that way. No news broadcaster would report that way. As far as I can tell, the only job opportunity available to a "progressively" trained debater is to deliver the annoying legal disclaimers at the end of tv & radio commercials.

That said, here is how to get my vote:

(1) Speak at a normal, conversational rate;

(2) Look me in the eye;

(3) Begin with a clear, real-life illustration of how the Affirmative or Negative case effects real people;

(4) Make me laugh;

(5) Make me cry;

(6) Make me care;

(7) Help me understand what the resolution means;

(8) Help me understand why your ideas are right;

(9) Help me understand why your opponent is wrong; and,

(10) Organize your ideas in a way that makes sense.

I realize that this rhetorical model is profoundly outdated (it is in fact about 2,500 years old). Nevertheless, in the spirit of learning something useful (rather than simply winning another piece of shiny plastic today for speed-reading), please give these ideas a try!

SPEECH EVENTS:

Many Debaters [and coaches] consider speech events to be "throw-away" events---something to do when debaters are not in a "real" debate round. Nothing could be farther from the truth! Speech events teach students about the power of pathos---of making human connections. They provide a wonderful balance to the logos-heavy debate events. To capture my vote [or the vote of most ordinary human beings], a student must be prepared to do the following:

(1) Begin with a clear, real-life illustration of how your topic effects real people;

(2) Make me laugh;

(3) Make me cry;

(4) Make me care;

(5) Help me understand what you mean;

(6) Help me understand why your ideas are right;

(7) Help me understand why any competing viewpoint is wrong [or "misinformed"]; and,

(8) Organize your ideas in a way that makes sense.

Don't be intimidated by all of this this [if you happen to be a hard-core, card-flipping, impact-calculus trained debater]. Instead, embrace the opportunity to learn a new [and equally real] way of communicating in a way that focuses on building human connections [rather than squabbling over obscure, marginally-relevant minutia].

Be civil. Debate beyond your case. As you debate, interact with and include all of the information brought up in the round. Speak clearly, and organize your arguments in a clear and concise manner.

I’ve coached debate in a fairly rural school for three years, but had no prior debate experience. I’m an English Major with an Emphasis in Rhetoric and composition. In other words, I know a lot about argument and organization, but I’m still learning a lot about the world of debate. As a result, I tend to judge based on argument, organization, and presentation over technicalities. If you’re communicating clearly, though, I can keep up with whatever you throw at me, and will not hold my preferences against any team/speaker who truly advances the better argument/case.

For Everyone: Be respectful toward all opponents/speakers.

Lincoln Douglas:

I prefer traditional arguments that are primarily focused on the resolution.

I will weigh my decision heavily on who is able to consistently uphold a moral argument.

Evidence is important for backing up theoretical/philosophical claims, but LD is less concerned with what is practical and more concerned with what is moral/ethical/right. In other words, if an argument is plausible despite difficulty, it still holds value so long as it progresses the moral agenda connected to the value. Your evidence is important, but only so far as it supports your moral line of reasoning. Moral claims DO need concrete evidence, though, to demonstrate applicability in the real world. Otherwise we are engaging in purely philosophical and hypothetical debate.

A good argument is one that is clear and easy to understand. I prefer a clearly established value and criterion, but a clear argument will sometimes sufficiently imply one or both.

Delivery is important, but the argument itself is more important for advancing your case.

I prefer clear speaking at a reasonable pace, but will not hold speed against the debater with the stronger case as long as I can understand it.

Don't rely on me to read your case to understand it. I should be able to understand what you are saying by listening to you in the round.

Speech Events (Oratory):

I’m looking for your overall purpose and your ability to engage an audience via your performance. My priorities are:

1. Clarity of argument’s purpose.
2. Clear line of reasoning/structure.
3. Stage Presence/Command
4. Importance/Relevance/Impact of Topic

Speech Events (Dxtemp):

I look for your ability to clearly and efficiently address the prompt. Judging priorities:

1.Clarity of answer to question

2. Structure/organization of argument

3. Quality/specificity of evidence

4. Presence/Delivery

Speak and commit your cases with clarity

In debate events, I have four expectations:

1. Respect. If either team/debater shows disrespect to the other's argument, it will reflect badly. Great debates can happen politely. I also expect a level of respect for debate protocols--please don't go over time, don't make statements while questioning, and remember to thank your opponents after the debate is over.
2. Logic. A case needs to make logical sense. If your arguments stay strong on their own, that's best. If you have to defend them, I expect you to think about the topic in new ways. Repeating your contentions is not an adequate defense. My perception of each team's position should change as the debate goes on and they formulate new ways to argue for their sides.
3. Counters. No matter how strong a team's case is, they'll still need to address the case of their opponents. For me, this part of debate determines who wins or loses. If either team/debater has a contention that goes through the debate uncontested, that team is winning in my eyes, so make sure to prepare counters for each of your opponents' contentions. In making counterarguments, refer to expectations 1 and 2.
4. Clarity. It is crucial that I am able to understand each debater's arguments. This includes speaking well (loud enough, with diction, etc.) and thinking well. If you make a point that makes no sense to me, it's not a good point. As debaters, your job is to inform me about the topic and present well-thought-out, clear arguments to me. If I don't understand something, that's on you.

In speech events, I have three expectations:

1. Organization. Especially in impromptu events, make an effort to keep your thoughts and speech orderly. Conjuring thoughts off the top of your head, pausing to think of what to say next, and random interjections that change the topic or flow are discouraged. Remember to speak circularly--rehash everything you've said at the end of your speech, just like in an essay.
2. Speaking Skills. These are speech events, which means you should be comfortable speaking publicly. It's ok to be nervous, but your words themselves should be as solid as you can make them. Have sufficient diction, volume, and inflections. Be mindful of your physical movements and how quickly or slowly you are speaking.
3. Content. Whatever the event, your topic should be clear, thought through, and specific. I want to have a takeaway from your speech. Interpretive events should follow this mold as well--there should be a reason you are giving the speech. If you said a lot of things well but I'm confused about what your speech was about, that's not great.

Overall, I hope you guys have fun and enjoy yourselves! Speech and Debate is one of the most enjoyable activities you can participate in at this age. Good luck!

IE/Speech: Please make sure you are a clear speaker and keep a good pace (ex. not rushing or going too slow just to fill time) and that your speech is structured appropriately for your event. Be engaging and interesting! I love to see confidence and passion in a round. If your event allows you to add in personal elements please do so, and don't be afraid to properly emote while presenting. (Impromptu speeches that are well structured will rank higher in round)

Debates: Be polite in round, I understand that debate sometimes gets heated but you still must be cordial to your opponents. You are attacking their case, not them. Try your best to use neutral pronouns (they/them) and do not look at your opponents during cross.

I value structure and the flow of the argument, rounds will be decided on whichever argument makes the most logical sense depending on the debate format and which side counters their opponents better and more clearly. Make sure that you attack down the flow and in order, as it keeps your rebuttal speeches organized and it helps me give you better feedback.

Experience: I was primarily a Congressional debater, I also participated in Public Forum, Impromptu, and Extemp (Foreign and National). I have learned the formatting for the other IE’s and debates throughout my time in debate which is why correct structure is valued highly in round.

Above all, I appreciate civility. Respect your opponents and maintain a positive attitude. I don't mind a little aggression, but if you start to get snarky or roll eyes, I will start deducting speaker points. I'm not a fan of spreading or spewing. I will flow as best as I can, but if I can't follow, don't expect to win. Please keep your case appropriate for today's practical application. Clash well, speak clearly and persuasively, and have fun and you should do well.

Reasoning is cool, presentation is cool, and speaking skills are cool but none of them mean anything to me without evidence (with sources) to back them up.

Tabula Rasa, for the most part. I will reject on my own truly absurd arguments, and I highly value analysis over just card-spewing.

Spread is fine; I did policy in high school and parliamentary debate in college. BUT if your tags are unclear and I don’t get them on the flow, they essentially don’t matter. I don’t share in the email chain of cards. It only matters what is delivered in the speech; I should not have to rely on an email chain to get some clarity about what you are talking about.

If you can’t spread clearly, don’t do it at all.

I look for professionalism/poise, conscious involvement, and organization. Knowledge of the topic is a perk.

I dock for eye rolls and drama.