DEBATE EVENTS:

I am a practicing attorney who occasionally moonlights as a debate judge. Over the past 30 years I have watched competitive debate deteriorate from a program of teaching students effective communication to a program contrived to win rounds by any strategy, including so-called "progressive" tactics that are designed to confuse and overwhelm opponents with tangential and obscure minutia rather than inform and persuade judges with impactful, well-reasoned argumentation.

This is ironic because 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! If I tried to win every case by overwhelming the judge, jury and counsel with every "card" I ever stumbled upon (even remotely related to the case), 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 radio commercials.

I realize that my views are hopelessly outdated. No one reading this paradigm statement will ever select me as "1" on a judge preference sheet. Nevertheless, if you have the bad luck of getting me in a round anyway, here are some tips on 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I realize that this rhetorical model is profoundly outdated (it is in fact about 2,500 years old).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, evidence-stacking 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].

I'm new to judging so I probably won't be impressed by crazy tactics. Don't be rude to your opponent and help me understand your case and you'll do well. Speak up, don't fidget and have fun!

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.

DEBATE GENERAL: I am not a fan of spreading/spewing; if I cannot understand the speakers, I cannot judge based upon the arguments. Fast is fine as long as enunciation is clear. If it gets to the point where I cannot flow, I will judge you based upon presentation alone. During cross, I want to know that you can answer the question, not only rely upon cards. I prefer a civil debate; it makes my job more difficult if I have to discern between what you're saying and how it's presented.

CON: I expect a debate. Unless it's the first aff/neg speeches, I do not expect canned speeches. I am not a fan of voting blocks to keep people low on priority because I think it's important to see how everyone is doing, not just the select few who are better at networking. That being said, if the debate is not being furthered because there are no new arguments or clash and the same speeches are given over and over again, I welcome a motion to PQ to move the session along. I expect the Chair to know the basics, like Robert's Rules, as well as the Orders of the Day, and keep everything running smoothly.

PF/LD: I am looking for evidence but I also want to know that you understand your cases. In LD, if you are going to run a CP, make sure all of the components are there. While a criterion is not required, I do prefer that you have one. In PF, if there is a framework, I expect it to be upheld.

CX: While the biggest impact is important, it should be a realistic one.

my first time judging will be at the Skyhawk smackdown.

Good day! I am new to the world of debate; never have done it myself but was introduced to it by my daughter. I like to see concise arguments, clear speaking, and respectful discourse. I am extremely impressed and proud of the students who participate in speech and debate and I really appreciate the dedication, hard work, and willingness to put themselves out there. These are skills that will serve you well for years to come.

I'm a pretty straightforward judge. Be clear and concise in speeches, carry your points and contentions through the round as well as your opponent's. Be prepared and professional, I prefer debaters time themselves and don't use gendered pronouns in referring to their opponent. Along with that, I urge for political correctness in the round, arguing something that is explicitly racist, sexist, ableist, xenophobic, homophobic, transphobic, etc. will not help your case. Beyond that have fun and take it easy.

I’m a dad judge and have been judging for 3 years. I have judged a lot of Policy, LD and a little bit of PF.

I look for good clash, warrants and extensions. If you are going to spread please do it at 75% speed and make sure to slow down at cards or points you think are important. Even better if you can stop and explain those to me in your own words. Please sign post and provide off time road maps.

I tend to lean on the side of truth over tech. For policy judge instructions in the 2NR/2AR is very helpful.

I participated in speech and debate in high school and have been judging for a few years. My paradigm comes from Aristotle. I am looking for pathos, ethos and logos. Pathos- Is there an emotional connection? Is it personal? Why should I care? Ethos-Are there reasons to support your credibility? Logos- Do you have a logical and reasonable argument?

More specific to Debate: I understand that debaters have a lot of evidence to present, but if you speak so fast that I do not know what you are saying than you will likely rank lower. It is important that you know how to pronounce words, otherwise it doesn't seem like you know what you are talking about. It is vital that you cite sources to support your case. I will be flowing and trying to give weight to arguments that best carry through. Please avoid personal attacks. ln LD, your case is stronger if the value and criterion line up with contentions.

Dislike: nitpicking about rules.

I expect everyone to be respectful of one another, in speech and in action, during speaking and listening.

Hey guys! My name is Savannah Roylance, and I am right out of high school and am currently a sophomore at BYU. In high school, I was my team's congress captain, though I consider myself more of a speech kid actually. I ended my career with over 2,000 NSDA points, qualified for nationals every year in multiple events, and placed at state. I have tried every speech event multiple times as well. I don't say those things to brag, I just want you to be aware that I know what I'm doing and will be able to judge you fairly (if you are a speech or congress kid). You will notice that my paradigm is pretty wildly different from most judges, so consider yourself warned :)

Speech: Though content is essential to any good speech, delivery will always be my priority. You can have good thoughts and articulate them well, but if you aren't engaging, I will quickly lose interest. For me, it is 60% delivery and 40% content.

Impromptu: Delivery is your biggest job. Intros are the easiest place to catch my attention, and you will always get extra points if you tie that back at the end of your speech. One thing that will guarantee you a high placing is variance in both volume and speed. If you are getting to a big point in your speech, speed up and get louder, hit the point, let it sink in, and then talk slowly and quietly. If you can pull that off well, I guarantee you will get first. Content-wise, I'm looking for something well-organized, well-thought-out, and personable. Impromptu is a fun event, so let it be fun! Creativity is a big factor in impromptu, so show me you can think quick on your feet :)

Extemp: Extemp was a huge event for me. I'm looking for credible sources cited in natural ways. Delivery wise - refer to my impromptu comments. Treat me as if I know nothing about the topics you are assigned.

Oratory and Informative: I would still say it is 60/40 with delivery and content. However, content is a bigger factor here because you prepare it ahead of time. Your topic must be ORIGINAL to be placed high. Hearing the same topics over and over is tiring and boring (ex. abortion, sexual assault, racism, things of that nature. If you can pull it off, good for you, but you will definitely lose some points for originality). Also, relate the topic to ME. If you can't give me a good reason I should care about it, I won't care about it.

(All other speech events run along those same lines)

LD, PF, or Policy: I'm just going to apologize in advance, I'm not well-versed in any of those events. I will work to learn those events better, but please be patient with my judging. Hopefully, I won't be assigned to judge debate events, but if I do, I'm sorry.

Congress: Though I preferred speech events, Congress was my expertise. Congress is always the event that gets judged wildly wrong, but rest assured I will judge you very fairly. Take note: Delivery is my priority in congress. I hated how boring congress was when I was in high school, and I would love to see people take it more seriously in engaging aspects. If you can get up there and give a solid speech extemp style without notes, I can pretty much guarantee you will get top 3, if not first. As far as chairing goes, know that I chaired nearly every tournament throughout high school, so I'm very aware of how difficult it is. I will likely always give a good chair top 3, and an exceptional chair will always get 1st. But know that my standards are high when I say that. Good chairs are extremely quick, accurate, professional, and knowledgeable about procedures. If you can do all of those things, I willgive you first. My biggest thing with congress is I want to know that you were prepared before you started the round. In addition, show me you are paying attention in the round by asking as many questions as possible and refuting points rather than solely bringing up new ones.

Most of all, have fun! I enjoyed debate in high school, and I want all of you to enjoy it too. Let me know if there's anything I can do to make it a better experience for you :) As far as feedback goes, know that I will try to be lavish with my praise but will also give you a lot of areas to improve. Not because you did badly by any means, but because I want you all to improve as much as you can. I can't wait to meet you!

I prefer that you time yourself. Be civil and collegial. I will not tolerate disrespectful language or behavior in a round. Your judge does not shake hands.

Policy and other debates - I am a traditionalist in debate in that I believe debate should be training for public communication. I prefer a conversation of ideas, not a speed reading contest with no connection to your opponent. Please watch your speed and listen and respond to your opponents arguments to help strengthen your own.

- give me road maps throughout. Thanks.

- I am not experienced in Policy, except for coaching basics and judging. I learn more from you, so don't be afraid to show me what you know.

Public Speaking: A great public speaker chooses topics that are unique, interesting, and relevant and delivers them with passion and authority. Do not trauma dump on me. It won't work. I will vote for the best speech and speaker, not the most dramatic.

Be respectful and professional. The debate space is not a place for emotional manipulation, fallacious use of accusations, and cheating.

Thank you.

Competitors should hold themselves to a high standard of etiquette.

Reasonable arguments are the best kind of arguments.

Social justice is favored.

Your judge does not shake hands.

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

I dock for eye rolls and drama.

I am a flow judge. I need signposting and don't drop arguments unless you explain why it is no longer relevant. Don't look at your opponent in round, specifically cx. Don't use gendered pronouns to refer to your opponents (use they/them or "my opponent/s"). Above all else, anything explicitly racist, sexist, xenophobic, transphobic, homophobic, ableist, etc. will not help your case--and depending on the severity I will stop the round.