National Speech and Debate Tournament

2025 — Des Moines, IA/US

Jonathan Alston Paradigm

Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)

Coach of a team
Policy debater in high school

How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?

11-20

Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?

Tabula rasa
 

RATE OF DELIVERY

7/91 = slow and deliberate
9 = very rapid
 

QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS

4/91 = a few well-developed arguments
9 = the more arguments the better
 

COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES

5/91 = communication skills most important
9 = resolving substantive issues most important
 

TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:

4/91 = often
9 = rarely
 

COUNTERPLANS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

GENERIC DISADVANTAGES

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS

4/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks: Be clear. Not just speaking clearly, but be clear with your strategy and your argumentation. Make the strategy make sense. The later in the round the strategy is revealed, the more likely you are to lose me. Make the strategy clear early and often. That said, the rebuttals are really important. Narrow the round down for me. Crystallize the round. Do a lot of weighing.

Note: if you wish for your pronouns to appear the debaters you judge on text/email blasts, log into Tabroom, click Profile at top, and add them in the Pronouns field.