I am a volunteer judge. Using the guidelines and rules set forth in the West High Speech and Debate Judging Handbook I strive to evaluate and then rank the contestants accordingly.

Overall presentation: Is their premise stated clearly? Is their argument supported by resources or facts? Is their conclusion logical? What did I learn from their speech? Did it intrigue me? Did it convince me?

Performance quality: How clearly did they speak, including diction, enunciation, pacing?

Engagement with audience: How did they use body language, gestures, eye contact, and their space to connect with their audience? What is the emotional impact?

Creativity and originality: What was their hook, how have they set the stage? How have they used or interwoven resources/materials to build their positions and support their assertions? Have they used different emotions, for example interspersing some humor within a serious topic? Are character transitions clear and consistent?

Have the speakers adhered to required parameters such as time limits, memorization, utilization of space or props?

Keeping these considerations in mind I rank the speakers.

I am a high school teacher. I have a degree in theater, psychology and English. I took debate all four years in high school and have been head coach for state champion speech and LD teams for years. I competed equally in policy and in Interp events.

I can follow most spreading, but I would rather not.

I am not a fan pf progressive debate - no performance or outrageous K's.

I appreciate the ability of a debater to think logically for themselves and not regurgitate cases written solely through purchased evidence files or a college coach. With that said however, you better have more than analytics to back up your arguments.

I typically won't vote for lack of fair education - unless the other team is very egregious is their abuse.

In partner debates I expect each partner to debate strong enough on their own that tag-teaming is not necessary.

I expect debaters to frame their arguments with a weighing mechanism with which you want me to view the round. Tell me why your argument is better - don't expect me to to just get it. If you want me to judge based on your defined values, you better explicitly state them.

You could win ten arguments to their six, but if their six have more weight, you will still lose.

Hello! I've judged speech events for a year now and have a background in government and public service. I place a high emphasis on a clear, organized speech, with strong clarity in structure and meaning. I like references that support and extrapolate the topic, allowing for an argument with more nuance and interest. Instead of just explaining why the topic is relevant, I appreciate speakers who take the idea to a new level, anchored with personal anecdotes and strong references. Thank you all for participating and I'm looking forward to judging!

I am a parent judge. I have judged multiple speech and debate events. I am an attorney and have experience with oration, delivery and making evidence-based arguments under pressure within time constraints. I have read the rules and will strive to judge fairly. Thank you for this opportunity.

I am a parent judge. As a student I participated in several student debate events. I have judged multiple debate and speech events. I am a practicing attorney with over 16 years, and have a great deal of experience with oration, delivery and making evidenced based arguments under pressure and within time constraints in both academic and professional settings. I am a frequent public speaker and have great deal of experience preparing and delivering speeches. I have reviewed the rules for all speech and debate events and strive to judge fairly. Thank you.