February Wyatt Tournament
2015
—
KY/US
Debate Paradigm List
All Paradigms:
Show
Hide
Joseph Grove
J. Graham Brown School
None
Michael Sharp
North Oldham High School
Last changed on
Wed August 13, 2014 at 6:16 PM EDT
Key Considerations:
- Substance of argument over style of argumentation is a primary metric by which I seek to appraise a round. There are many debate styles that may come and go in popularity, but the substance of an argument is central to all. Accomplish substance more thoroughly than your opponent and a win will be earned.
- Intelligent and Intelligible arguments are preferred. In other words, provide a clear thesis for which you are contending and make sure that you accomplish it in such a rate of delivery that can be followed/flowed in proper fashion.
- Strong development of argumentative framework, appropriate evidence, and proper linkage are all assets in a round.
- Healthy clash is encouraged so that each posited argument clearly claims its unique ground. Vigorous clash is welcomed as long as it is with clear respect for one's opponent.
- Special Note: A significant and primary task of a winning debate is to address the resolution, address the resolution, and address the resolution. Those who address the resolution will have a far better chance at earning a win than those who seek to address a matter that lies outside of the stated scope of a round. Specifically, one should be prepared to debate the chosen topic not a topic about the topic or of your preference.
Experience:
- I have debated in high school and college with primary experience in Policy and Lincoln Douglas styles. I have coached at the high school level for a number of years during my teaching tenure at North Oldham High School and strongly support the Wilson Wyatt Debate League philosophy of providing constructive reflection for debaters.
Jake Simpson
Trinity High School
None
Russ Wallace
Assumption High School
None
Alyssa Weaver
North Oldham High School
Last changed on
Sun October 14, 2018 at 11:11 AM EDT
At the heart of debate is an understanding of human nature and how we react to it in society. I will judge your round based on organized attacks against each of your opponent's points. Dismissive arguments or off-the-wall comments do not count as an attack. Your arguments should be thoughtful and appeal to ethos, pathos, or logos. For L-D debaters, the primary focus should be the value and criterion clash and how your argument is correct at the root of it. Your speaker points will be based on your diction, passion for the topic, eye contact, and speed. Failure to be well-spoken, or an indignant attitude, will lose you speaker points no matter how good your arguments.
aaron whaley
Highlands Latin School
I try to be open minded and let the arguments made in the round shape the decision. I know of no argument that I would never vote for. I tend to be a default policy maker but can be persuaded to adopt something different.
My background is as a policy debater. I debated HS policy in the early 90's and debated college LD. Some early CEDA pre merger and my senior year debated some NDT.
Fair warning with speed. While I am not opposed to it I am out of practice. There are levels of speed that I simply cannot comprehend anymore. It is not like riding a bike.