Hey guys,

My name is Syd, I debated throughout high school in a variety of speech events, primarily extemp and public forum in debate and graduate in 2023 and am currently going to Utah State. I have watched and judged rounds of most events so overall I have a lot of experience and can follow all arguments and speeches. I will flow on paper but also keep track of things on my laptop.

Strictly for debate kids:

I can follow speed but please make your taglines clear. If I cannot understand you I cannot flow it :) please work on being clear over your speed. Your speed is not taken into consideration for speaker points. Speaker points are determined by how well of a speaker you are and how well you know your information.

Cross-examination

PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL!!! Debate is a game and there is no room for disrespect to your opponent (s) or anyone else present. I do not flow cx and questions/answers of cx will not be taken into consideration of a round if its not mentioned within a speech.

Time Management

Please use your time wisely and if you need me to provide a timer for you I will, however if you go over time things said after 10 seconds will not be taken into consideration of the final decision for the round and an individual may be docked speaker points. I will not give you time signals I suck at it

The why

Why do I care about what are you arguing? What are my voters??? What are the impacts?? Why do the impact matter? If you don't give me a reason why I should vote for you why would I vote for you? This is one of the most important parts of debate

Speech Kids

Extemp/Impromptu

Make sure to fill your time, don't go too far over and work on not using filler words. If I hear you say oaky, like or what if every two seconds I will tell you that in the ballot. Tell me who your sources are. It is essential that you have a source to back up your opinions, while hearing your opinions about your topics is important I still want you to have officials backing you up. Tell me why I should care about your topic and why you care about your topic. Why does this *insert random country here*'s problems matter to me. How does this effect me? Notice your audience and gear your speech towoards them. I will appreciate a speaker triangle and emphasis then a million statistics. While statistics are important I want you to show me what is important with your voice.

For Everyone :)

Respect

Please be aware of when others are talking, do not interupt others or speak while a person is giving a speech. Please make sure you are not being distracting with a partner or friend while another person is speaking. Speech and Debate is an amazing activity that provides you with great life skills, so please treat others with overall respect at all times within a round and outside of it. Overall please just be a kind human:)

Discrimination

Any type of discrimination or disrespect will not be tolerated before, during or after the round. Please have respect and show kindness to each other, while debate is a fun extracurricular, it does not give you an excuse to be disrespectful to another human. Please also let me know your preferred pronouns before the round :)

If you have any questions about my paradigm, how I judge or anything else please ask me before the round begins. Overall please remember to have fun because this is a fun activity :)

I focus a lot on preparedness, however that might manifest itself in different events. For some events that would be memorization, and for others that would be research or thinking on your feet. Be ready and love what you do!

I'm a big fan of clear speaking. I like to judge to see what all of you have to share and say, so I want to be able to hear you!

Please, please be a good sport. "It is your response to winning and losing that makes you a winner or a loser." -Harry Sheehy

Quality over quantity. This means do not just try to give as much as possible as quickly as possible. I prefer to have fewer arguments that are better supported with real world examples and references to include quotes, data, and valid research references. Yes, I am open to being in the email chain. Detail and support are key. Be sure to address all areas of your arguments and counter in a way that really addresses what your opponent brought up. This attention to detail can make a difference.

In speeches and other associated areas be sure you remember the original audience in addition to the actual audience when speaking. Be clear, concise, and use the appropriate voice in all instances. Keep me interested. It should be as if I am hearing your speech for the first time.

If it is impromptu speaking, still try and be organized, creative, and clear.

Be sure to attack the arguments and concepts not the individual.

We are given a judging rubric and I will stick with that above everything.

Use logic and reason to advance your argument, and avoid hyperbole or exaggeration. Treat your opponent with respect. Do not spread or speak unnaturally fast. Please don't address me as judge in your speech, rather present your argument to the room.

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 debate 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) Speak at a normal, conversational rate;

(2) Make consistent eye contact (for interp. events hold a steady, consistent locus);

(3) Give a clear, real-life illustration of how your topic effects real people;

(4) Make me laugh;

(5) Make me cry;

(6) Make me care;

(7) Help me understand what you mean;

(8) Help me understand why your ideas are right;

(9) Help me understand why any competing viewpoints are wrong; and,

(10) Organize your ideas in a way that makes sense.

Don't treat Speech like it is another debate event; it is an altogether different animal that requires a somewhat different, more empathic skill set. Don't be intimidated by 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.

I did Public Forum for 4 years, and have been judging for 2.

I can handle speed but depending on the event I might rule that speed is less critical than hearing contentions

I trust you guys to time yourselves

I lean toward tech>truth

I do not flow cross, It is a clarifying period for both debaters, however, if you deem something important was brought up in cross, please mention it in a speech in order for it to continue on the flow. Make sure not to end up having cross becoming a yelling match, it is not going to make me want to vote for you more.

I love Impact Calculus in rounds, ex.(magnitude, timeframe)

Quantifiable impacts are not necessary but if argued correctly, I will weigh them over likelihoods.

if you need my email for email chains: scottccoller@gmail.com

My name is Cheryl Davies, I may be a parent judge, but I work in financial forensics, so don't think you can lie to me.

truth > tech

• Please do not spread. I need to hear your arguments in order to judge you properly.
• I expect clear argumentation for your warrants (not just evidence, show me that you understand the evidence)
• Aggressive cross is appreciated but please be respectful of each other
• I won't flow cross so if you want to have me judge based off an argument made there, bring it up in rebuttals
• Don't steal prep time - quickly start and stop your timer
• Please time yourselves
• Stay away from personal anecdotes, I won't be giving pity points
• Don't make race or gender arguments unless you can directly correlate them to the resolution
• I won't vote for you just because you feel "personally victimized" (unless there's a legitimate ad hominem fallacy) - arguments like that take away from the debate and I consider them abusive

Ks:

If you're going to run a K, make sure it's flushed-out and has a strong link that you clearly articulate.

Theory:

I'd prefer if debaters stay away from theory arguments and stick to the content under the resolution (no disclosure or frivolous theory please)

Tricks:

No.

If you make me laugh, I'll give you an extra speaker point.

Paradigm for BQ:

If you have a framework, please explain it and why it matters. I like sign posts and clear taglines.

I do not like spreading, as it is difficult for me to process as quickly as you speak. If I cannot understand the speakers, I cannot judge based on the arguments. If you do speak more quickly, please speak clearly and enunciate.

I don’t mind (and often encourage) passion, but I prefer you to convey your arguments in a respectful way.

It’s fine to argue about definitions, but please don’t make it the entire debate. It’s so boring.

Lincoln Douglas

I have been judging speech and debate tournaments for five years with the bulk of my experience focused on speech events. I have an extensive background in political consulting, speech writing and public speaking. I prefer a more traditional approach with a comfortable conversational speed. However, I am fine with rapid conversational style speaking mixed with spreading IF your value criterion, definitions (important) and contentions are clear and audible. I prefer quality over quantity so, if you plan to spread make sure the plethora of information is necessary. In other words, I'm more impressed with those that provide the most content using the fewest words.

Although a charismatic presentation can often sell your argument on the surface, in LD I am more influenced by your content. I can appreciate passion in your arguments provided you are being respectful to your opponent. I tend to prioritize value criterion and contention level arguments. I'm open minded to progressive arguments but they are not preferred.

I love a good CX! Your questions matter. I tend to give high marks to those that can strategically ask questions that require simple answers. Furthermore, those that can take control of the CX by respectfully not allowing their opponent to beyond the scope of the question, will also gain high marks from me. I believe there is a strategy to an effective cross and I am paying particular attention to those that make those most of their time.

I give speaker points from 25 - 30. Please feel free to ask questions before the round begins.

I'm a first year head coach at Skyline High School. I have three experience as an assistant coach. I've mostly worked with speech events, but also congress and Public Forum with limited experience in Policy and LD.

Policy:

Overall: I don't believe I'm experienced enough to understand theory or be able to strongly evaluate Kritiks.

Speed: I'm OK with speed as long as you email me your speeches (tfhenry@granitesd.org) , but please slow down for your taglines.

RFD: I typically base my decision on the the stock issues of the plan on the Affs ability to defend it and prove that it is better than the status quo. The NEG wins if they can prove the plan is worst then the status quo or the status quo is better than the plan.

General intro:

I’m an engineer and former debater/extemper who has judged off and on in the many years since. Always feel free to ask me any questions at the beginning of the round. For all events respect is important, personal attacks or disrespect towards others in the round can affect ranking.

LD:

Lincoln-Douglas was my passion in my debating years. Here are a few of my views:

• LD is first a foremost a value centered debate not a battle of evidence, you need a framework and to tie each argument to it

• I’m not formalistic in judging LD there are no set rules on how to set up a framework or make arguments

• While I did debate in LD it was a long time ago during an era I've heard referred to as "traditional", as opposed to the more modern progressive era. Traditional LD was more truly value based with less spreading and focus on amount of evidence. But an increased focus on definitions and articulate arguments. I recognize that this can be difficult with many of the modern (non-value based) topics being generated by the NSDA currently.

• I understand that some new era LD coaches push adding "plans" to LD cases I'm not a fan of this in my opinion there is no place for a plan in value debate, I will not expect the other side to provide a counterplan or convert to a more policy/plan based debate if that is the route you choose in your case. That being said I have given the win to debaters who presented plans

Policy:

I was never a policy debater so I'm certainly less skilled than many but I have judged policy a bit so I'm not new to the field. Here are some points I focus on:

• I can handle moderate spreading but certainly not full nationals level speed

• Please speak to the quality of the evidence provided not all cards are equal and I will weigh the strength of the cards against each other.

• Do more than dump evidence, spend time on connecting it clearly to the plans and arguments

PF:

Public Forum is the debate I've judged the least, but given that it is designed to be judged by a non-expert that is the approach I take. Your delivery should be such that an common citizen could understand. Be respectful and share time during cross-fire. I want to see evidence but don't let it become a policy style battle to see who can read the most card with no clear connection between them.

BQ:

I love BQ it reminds me a lot of how LD was in the "good old days" before NSDA forgot how to create LD topics. Keep the arguments directly related to the topic. You get the same topic the entire year so I expect to see very refined cases the later we are in the season.

BQ should be very philosophical, given that while you should have supporting evidence you should also clearly connect it together with your own reasoning in a way that clearly clashes with your opponent.

Remember all your arguments need to connect directly to the resolution.

Extemp:

• Please cite your sources I prefer the source name and a date but at least a name

• Give a definitive answer to the question

• You are welcome to time yourself. I will also be timing and have a timer large enough you will likely be able to see it, I usually use it in count up mode so no beeping disturbs your speech.

Obviously I can't list every event here but if you have questions just ask.

I’m a former speech geek. I competed in oratory, duet, poetry and student congress when I was in high school. I have judged before as well. Feel free to ask me any questions at the beginning of the round. For all events respect is extremely important. Any personal attacks or disrespect toward other competitors will impact ranking.

I have an autoimmune disorder that can lead to poor muscle movement. I may slur my speech or stumble. I often struggle with double vision so I frequently wear an eye patch. In addition, typing (while listening) is difficult for me. I take lots of notes and I will transpose my notes onto Tabroom.

Sources are very important. They add strength to your position and need to be cited. Not all sources are created equal. Please refrain from using Wikipedia, encyclopedias or the internet as primary sources. These are great resources and can lead you to more reputable sources.

I am a first diamond coach from western Colorado. I have some knowledge judging debate.

In a debate, I look for clarity and link. If your content has zero link to you are trying to solve, then I cannot consider it. I expect information and logic that help decide my flow.

Do not attack your opponents but you can attack the information that they provide.

Opening speeches should be detailed and well organized. Evidence should support contentions. I like crossfires that are respectful and with use of evidence presented and then attacked as appropriate. Final summaries should convince me why they are correct and their opponents are wrong. I like good even voice tempo, not rushed with good use of voice inflection.

I did policy for 1 year in High-school without a coach And somehow ended up Being the Head coach of East High school. I don't know how this happened and I want to go home.

I am a technique over truth judge, I will vote on theory, topicality, Condo, and all other goofy things if I believe it comes down to that. Nothing is really off limits when it comes technique and how you deal with them. I just love good technique.

That also means I will give wins over uncontested arguements.

I have given wins to teams that have claimed that climate change isn't real because their opponents didn't touch it. No matter how ridiculous it, you just have to relate it back to the case

If you are going to speak fast, it will be beneficial to my flows if you slow down and make it clear when you read a new card. Read the title of the card, date, and author of the card clearly. That greatly helps me and you if I can correct flow.

With flows in mind. Please have a good road map before you start to speak. I will struggle without one. Though it's not required, I would recommend asking for permission to start a speech so my flows are in order (after you roadmap)

1. any reference to high school musical will make you lose points. That franchise doesnt exist, yes I know I coach the High-school musical school, but it doesn't exist

With that in mind, have fun, be respectful, keep in mind that I barley know what I'm doing, and good luck.





Debate is love
Debate is life

My name is Gideon Martin, and I'm a Speech and Debate Judge with extensive experience on both sides.

Speech: I'm looking for great presentation, excellent vocabulary, and a clear understanding of your topic. Having a speech that is well structured and easy to follow is a huge plus. (If your competing in an event that requires sourcing, make sure that you properly source your speech. I can't believe any sort of statistics or information you give me if you don't have a source to back it up.)

Debate: Clear, logical, and well sourced arguments are what I'm looking for. Make sure your arguments/evidence are quantifiable. Prove to me that I should prefer your sources and evidence to your opponents, or that they outweigh your opponents arguments. Make sure that there is clash between your case and your opponent. I also want to be given clear voters. You need to tell me exactly why I should vote for your side. (Especially in Final Focus for all you pfers)

Ultimately I expect you to communicate persuasively and move the arguments forward. In policy I expect you to move the argument, explain the flow, and advocate for voters. I will vote on stock issues, topicality, solvency, counterplans, etc. based on where you push the argument and where your opponents push back. You can spread but realize I will likely ask for you to provide me the key cards so that I can read them in context--ensure you are properly using the text.

In LD realize that value and criterion will be key from which I will evaluate your persuasiveness of how you lay out the case. Do not ignore what your opponent says, rather address their arguments to refute them.

I have judged debate before but I am not an experienced policy judge so speak slow and show me clear arguments. I have background knowledge about policy but in order for me to vote into things like topicality. Terms like Perm, mutually exclusive or conditionality or condo (any theory terms ect) will need to be explained (very well) in round. I wouldn't run theory/topicality arguments unless you this it is very likely you will go for them in the final speech. Whoever proves their point best wins. Case debate is good.

Salutations, I am Zeque (pronounced: Zeek) Murillo. I am so stoked for the exposure to the topics you are all bringing to the table and using this platform to bring attention to the passion of the future.

-----------------

BACKGROUND:

Competitive Experience: I competed on the high school level from 2010-2014. My main events of the competition level were Duo Interpretation, Dramatic Interpretation, Humorous Interpretation, Original Oration, Impromptu Speaking. I definitely understand what it's like to Double/Triple/Quadruple/Penta/Hexa - Enter, so I'm always understanding of individuals who do multiple events.

Judging/Coaching: I've been part of the judging circuit from local, state, and national level since the fall of 2014 season - Current. I've judged all speech categories and even up to a few quarter final rounds at varying national years. I was an Alumni volunteer assisting with the NSDA program for 2-3 years. I then started Assistant coaching specifically for speech from 2017- Current. My main expertise is in the Interpretation events, but I am also well versed in assisting with the Public Address Events.

JUDGING:

Interpretation:

Content: An introduction in the piece that states the title and author is weighed heavily into account. I also really enjoy the details in the piece and if it's from a play/book/media content that is typically longer than 10 minutes, how is it cut? I enjoy material that has a nice flow and reflects the message that you are trying to get across whether that is humorous or serious in nature. Your piece should still make sense and leave an impact.

Blocking: I do love seeing the choices that students make to elevate the piece and create an environment. I notice the details in pantomime and the consistency of items that you have created out of thin air. For example, if you are holding a cup and then all of a sudden it disappears because you never put it down, I'ma notice :) Blocking is such a beautiful technique to help transport me to the environment of the scene. I think it's super cool when you can play with the dimensions of your speech.

Characterization: I take into account the emotion that you flesh out in your characters and utilizing voice, attitude, posture, and mannerisms to create an easily recognizable character. If you have multiple characters in a piece, I also will evaluate the technique in how you are transitioning from character to character. Lastly, I also consider facial expression and emotional invocation that allows us to better understand the character.

Public Address Events:

Content: Originality of the topic or stance on topic is an item I will take into consideration pretty heavily. I also am dissecting how you structure your speech and how the information is flowing into each other to develop one systematic idea. If you are providing sources, are you citing the original source, & dates.

Delivery: How are you using your movement, tonality, & gestures to engage with the audience? I look for effective speaking tools through using your natural instruments as a speaking tool to elevate the information and bring us in. I also listen to the words you are emphasizing to show how you are highlighting the information and playing with pace.

Impact: I need to know your take/stance on the presentation. Why do you feel passionate about this topic or how do you truly believe this will be resolved. Why should we be listening to this speech and what will be the major take aways?

Lincoln Douglas:

As I flow your round, I’ll be looking to see how your value and criterion work in tandem to prove the moral rationale that LD rests; furthermore, I don’t like when crossfires engage in obnoxious back-and-forths with questions that don’t add any substantive value to the round. Lastly, it's imperative that you underscore the credibility of your cards, especially when making claims including stats, data, points, and political and historical claims that attack your opponent’s arguments.

Public Forum:

I enjoy PF and like to flow the rounds I judge to provide you with the best feedback I can. I love to see link chains and impacts that are substantial to the case; rather than just reading the cards, I’d appreciate you explaining and further reinforcing your points, data, and stats, to let me know that you know your case all around. If you speak too fast, I’ll try to keep up as I flow but once you’ve lost me, I’ll stop flowing. I am not a fan of voters that are reliant on ethos; I prefer you use logic in voters that explain to me what you’ve argued in round. Don’t forget that I’m also flowing the round so if your claim is that they’ve dropped certain points, I’ll refer to my flow to assess that claim.

I am a new judge.

This paradigm will summarize my preferences as a judge and what I often look for when judging a round.

Topicality - I look for the degree of which an argument addresses the topic at hand and how transformative it is towards an individual's perception of an issue.

Delivery - I look for confidence, vocal tone, and how fluid the argument is presented. For example, including short pauses to ensure their point comes across properly and ending their sentences on a lower pitch when the statement is not a question.

Appeal of an Argument - I look for arguments that have copious aspects to them for the purpose of making them memorable: These include expressing intertwined emotional and rational arguments, how the passion of a speaker reflects their points, and the impression they give of how important the issue is to them.

For Policy:

I tend to be fairly progressive and will listen to most arguments you run.
With that being said, I don't typically vote off of T.
Kritiks are all good (as long as you know what you are doing).
Framework and voters are a big deal and I base the round off of these typically. Tell me why you should win. Go down your list of arguments, tell me why your opponent didn't beat them, and which ones are of greatest importance.

Most importantly, have fun and be respectful.

I see a speaking score at 4 as doing exactly what is expected of you, so a score of 25 is good. I will only give higher scores if I see exceptional talents and abilities.

Evidence is key!!!

I am a policy judge. I debated for 3-4 years, coached for 3 more, and have judged for 4ish years now (all policy).

I can understand spewing/spreading/whatever else you call it.

I do not flow cx so if you make a good point you need to bring it up in your next speech or I will not flow it through. If I am typing during cx, I am probably catching up on my notes from the previous speech.

I like judging on impact calc, but the role of the debate is the most important thing to me (if aff or neg does not fulfill their roles, it is an automatic loss). I also invite you to write the ballot for me (tell me what arguments you won and why, what arguments they dropped, etc). Structure your rebuttal speeches that way.

***Make sure you flow your arguments through unless you intentionally drop them***

I have no history with debate, but I do have a history with law and business.

I also invite you to write the ballot for me (tell me what arguments you won and why, what arguments they dropped, etc). Structure your rebuttal speeches that way. Showing respect and professionalism is very important. Creating a strong case is just as important as breaking down the other team's case.

Hi! I'm Ronan Spencer, a student at Utah State studying Political Science. I have debated for 7 years of my life and am currently debating collegiately. I believe in the power of public speaking and think that debate is one of the most powerful skills you will ever develop, here's my paradigm...

Congress:

Please have a roadmap and consider having an engaging intro, as well as speakers triangle if you find fit.

Public speaking in this event is important, use hand gestures and eye contact.

Referencing other opponents is important, if you attack somebody's speech and use evidence to back yourself up then you are very impressive.

Papers and computers are fine, I probably won't give your more preference if you have your speech on a legal pad, however it is impressive if you were able to create a speech extemporaneously (BUT HAVE EVIDENCE PLEASE!!!)

PO/chair should be able to keep time and be able to run the round smoothly without hiccups, if you make a mistake or mess something up dont worry because being a PO can be hard. Having a PO sheet on the board or online is always appreciated.

LD:

I appreciate clash and thought-through cases.

I enjoy when people attack others on their cards and pick apart their case based on the validity or relevance of their evidence, beware of cards because they might not always be completely accurate!

I think that even in a debate based event its important to consider speaking ability as well, I like people who use hand gestures or make an effort to not stare at their laptop during their whole case.

During rebuttals it is your time to shine, make sure you make it understandable and structured, nothing is more important than a roadmap.

If you throw multiple sub points and bombard the other speaker with lots of points that don't make a lot of since, I won't consider it completely bad if the opponent decides to drop them (within reason). I know that some people like to throw half baked points at the opponent, quality over quantity unless its interesting subpoints!

Crazy link chains can be fun if you explain them correctly and provide evidence.

Make your case understandable, when people read a card and then explain it briefly and why it is important I like that. Also voters are important!

Policy:

Clash with your opponents on their cards, ask them about them in questioning.

You don't need to spread for everything, personally, I like being able to understand your case more than having you try to get through it the whole time. If some cards are exceptionally long then I don't see it as trouble.

Counterplans are good if you can explain them correctly!

I don't see any problem in Kritik's if you make them understandable and don't fill them jargon that me or your opponent won't understand. If you run a K, do it because you care or because it fits with your goal. It can be interesting to see unique K's play out.

Impacts and solvency are important, if me or your opponent don't understand how your plan achieves something or why that is important then your case won't seem effective enough to win.

Crazy link chains and outcomes add something interesting to a debate but don't overdo and if you do, provide your evidence!

Impromptu:

Personally stories are super powerful so share them!

I like when people relate things to something more interesting, for example if you get the topic plant make it into a speech about how humans grow and blossom (like a plant).

If you can, memorized statistics are always interesting or if you bring in a phenomenon or historical event.

Engaging intros are important and will be given more preference, as well as speakers triangle!

I'm not as strict on time, just make sure you aren't using 2:30 and above of prep time if its not needed.

Qualifications:

2023 6A Congressional Debate State Champion

4x Region Champion

2x Semi-final Congressional House Debater at NSDA Nationals

5x NSDA National Qualifier

Speech and Debate Team Captain for Corner Canyon Highschool 22-23

Collegiate Debater at Utah State University

I promise I will give you a fair and reasonable ballot, I know what its like to be judged unfairly or be placed low in a round where you tried your best. Debate is hard but I think we should all be considerate of one another and be respectful, at the end of the day we are doing this for fun. Keep debating and never lose that passion!

Hi, I am still learning the ropes, so with debate events specifically, I would appreciate it if you do not speak too fast. PLEASE do not spread! Also, please be very clear with taglining your contentions. I wish you all the best of luck, and have fun!

Lisa

I'm Katie Summers. In high school, I competed in Public Forum for two years and Poetry for one. This is my second year judging.

Disclaimer: This list isn't complete or perfect. Sometimes I discover preferences during rounds that I hadn't anticipated. I've done my best to cover everything, but I may overlook or not consider some aspects. I strive to be a fair judge, but I acknowledge I'm not infallible.

Debaters: I recently switched to studying Criminal Justice and learned that improperly obtained evidence can be excluded from court. Assuming many debaters are interested in law careers, I'm committed to enforcing the OFFICIAL NSDA rules of your debate format to better prepare you. If you reference rules, make sure they're the official and current ones.

While it's not explicitly against NSDA rules, avoid introducing new evidence after the summary. I find it problematic.

Any falsified or illegally obtained evidence will be disregarded if discovered. I cannot base my decision on it. Plagiarism may lead to losing the debate, but the opposing team must still present valid evidence and strong arguments to receive good speaker points.

In debates, I value clear, well-supported arguments with data and evidence. I discourage logical fallacies and typically won't reward them with high scores or a win, unless both teams are equally guilty — in which case, I'll often side with the team using them less or having stronger arguments overall.

Representatives/Senators:

Orators/Speakers/Etc.:

Info Presenters: I know you've already prepared your speech, so I'm giving you an idea of where I'll likely rank you.

I enjoy hearing fresh and intriguing information in speeches. It's okay to delve into controversial topics, but I expect a balanced presentation covering both sides if it's divisive. I prefer insights that go beyond what's just on social media and are well-researched.

Regardless of your topic, I'm not interested in your personal opinion or feeling like I'm being persuaded. This is about presenting information, not persuasive speaking. If I have significant unanswered questions by the end (like where your topic came from), your ranking may be lower.

General/All: I don't mind your speaking speed or if you use jargon or technical language in debates.

When you give a speech, I'll be focused on you and likely taking more notes during debates.

I prioritize strong arguments over style. Preparation and logical reasoning impress me more than charisma. While I appreciate passion, I prefer a logical approach over emotional intensity. Objective analysis is crucial for me to rank or award a win in speech and debate, though a blend of both can be most effective. Persuasive arguments earn higher speaker points from me, not necessarily smooth delivery.

Lastly, please show respect by not interrupting or laughing during others' speeches. Everyone deserves a fair chance to speak their mind here.

Quentin Unsworth - He/Him Pronouns

Experience:

I am currently the Head Speech and Debate Coach of Logan High School (10 years).

I participated in High School and College Speech and Debate.

Debate specific items:

I am fine if you want to go faster. I would stop short of "spreading". I like an urgent delivery but I do struggle with some "spreading" especially when students try to speak faster than their abilities allow. If you would like to go faster please slow down for your tags and authors. This is still a communication event and I need to be able to understand and follow you.

I do not want to be on the email chain. This is a communication activity and I will only evaluate what I hear in round. It is your responsibility to be clear.

This is your activity/round and you should do whatever you want. I will vote on anything you tell me to provided you explain why. I am not a huge fan of theory debates primarily because most students do this wrong. If you want to run theory arguments make sure that you know what you are doing and that you fully develop the theory in context of the round and topic.

Framework is important and should be carried throughout the entire round. If you tell me to view the round through a certain lens then all the work that you do needs to fit within that lens.

I need analysis on the card. Please do not just read the card. I will not do the leg work for you.

Please avoid "REHASH" if you want to bring up the same argument multiple times I need you to do something new with it. I want meaningful extension beyond the words: "extend my such and such evidence", again I will not do the leg work for you. Dive deeper.

If you need/want me to pay attention to something that happens during cross-examination you need to mention this in your speech time. I think cross-examination can be really important but I do not flow cross-examination.

Go line by line during rebuttal or at least clearly roadmap and identify where you are on the flow so that I can follow you.

Begin collapsing the round early, do not waist time on arguments you know do not matter. I like clear voters that show me you know how to prioritize and evaluate everything that has happened in the round.

Things to do Speech and Debate:

Have fun. This activity requires far too much effort and energy for us not to enjoy it. If you are not having fun you are doing something wrong or it may be time to consider trying something else (possibly a new event).

Be kind. I appreciate passion and conviction and think that witty observations are fun, however I do not enjoy watching rounds where students are rude to each other and/or the judge. We are all at different levels and are all here to learn.

Do the leg work for me.If something is important and you want me to vote on it, fully develop that idea. Do not assume that everyone understands the complex arguments you have spent countless hours developing. At times you may need to educate me/your opponents about a unique concept or interpretation in order to really have meaningful dialog.

Be professional. Act and behave in a manner consistent with the effort and energy required for you to participate in this activity. Respect the time of your opponents and judge. You need to be prepared, this activity is far too challenging to attempt with anything less than your best effort.

Be Topical. You can run unique and progressive arguments but you need to clearly (link) identify and establish why your approach is the most appropriate approach given the designated topic.

Things to avoid:

Foul language for the sake of foul language. I am not personally offended by "foul" language but I expect more out of Speech and Debate students. Do not feel like you need to edit language out of a script or quote but think about your own personal word choices and use language that reflects your intelligence and professionalism.

"Yelling" at the judge. I have found that students who try to go fast in round often "yell" at the judge. I am usually sitting a few feet from you and I prefer a volume level and tone that is appropriate for such a setting.

Stealing Prep Time.

The New England Patriots, onions, chewing with your mouth open/smacking gum or other food (this aggravates me more than anything else in the world) , snakes and sharks.

I did debate all four years in high school so I know how tournaments go.

What I would like to see in round is just a well done, civil debate. I appreciate a good amount of clash, just don't become too disrespectful. Please make sources used very clear so I know where your information comes from.

Other than that I trust you to make the round go smoothly by timing yourselves (I will also be timing) and to be prepared to speak loud and clear, and sell your case to me.

I love debate and being able to judge after graduation. Just remember speech and debate is hard work but it is also so important and valuable in your lives; don't forget to have fun with it!

For my speech friends, all I ask of you is for your name, your prep time (if applicable), and your speech time. I ask that you do your best to not go over time, but I will respect the grace period given. That being said your final time will play into my final ranking and decision.

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

I dock for eye rolls and drama.