I am an alumnus of Dominion High School in Sterling, Virginia (Class of 2017), and currently attend classes at George Mason University. I have participated in tournaments for congressional debate for the Washington and Arlington Catholic Forensic League (WACFL) and the National Speech and Debate Association (NSDA) during my high school career. Since graduating, I have judged speech and debate tournaments on behalf of Dominion High School. I have also served as a parliamentarian for the Chesapeake District of NSDA for their National Qualifiers.

Congress Expectations:

Evidence:

I expect a source, date, and author for every piece of evidence brought up in a debater's speech. Exceptions for authors include the Economist, collective organizations and government institutions, because they do not provide authors for their articles. Failure to provide a source, date, and author (as appropriate) for each piece of evidence mentioned lowers a debater's ranking/score. Not mentioning any evidence in one's argument will seriously harm a debater's ranking/score.

Clash:

Except for an authorship speech or first affirmative speech, I expect every succeeding debater's speech to include clash with previous debaters arguments. Congressional Debate is not just just mentioning a position on a bill/resolution, but also defending that position against conflicting principles. Failure to do so will lower a debater's ranking/score.

Rehash:

I expect every debater to bring new points/arguments in their speech for any bill/resolution. Any rehash of previous points/arguments for any bill/resolution will lower a debater's ranking/score. Furthermore, if a debate on a particular bill/resolution becomes one-sided, the rankings/scores of the debaters who decide to prolong the one-sided debate will be seriously harmed. One-sided debate indicates a lack of preparedness to flesh out as many facets of an issue, instead focusing on only the most familiar about the issue itself.

Posture and Tone:

I expect every debater to deliver their arguments clearly, concisely, and most importantly, naturally. This not only includes how the debater delivers their speech orally, but also how the debater carries himself or herself. Movement that appears natural and purposeful adds weight to a speaker's message, whereas movement that distracts from the speaker's message ultimately weakens his or her position; distracting movement will lower a debater's ranking/score. Confidence in one's tone when delivering speeches and answering questions indicates a high level of preparedness and will result in a higher ranking/score.

Aimee Sann Paradigm

Policy is a fascinating debate format! I love it, and I am still learning it. If I am your judge and you are sending emails, please include me: sanna@notredameprep.com.

1. Be organized. I prefer claims numbered, deliver tags clearly and with emphasis, roadmaps, and signposting. Otherwise, my flow will just fall apart. My flow will be on paper.

2. Lay out your framework clearly and don’t fail to say why you won. In the end, I need to hear what you believe carries the most weight in the round. How you met your burden. How the other side failed to meet theirs.

3. Don’t assume I know all the jargon. I have familiarity with most of it, but explanation matters.

4. Treat statistics with care. If there is clash on them, I will be attentive to your knowledge of how they are collected and how to measure their strength.

5. In Ks, I will be looking for specificity with reference to the AFF’s plan, and I will be listening for your alts.