Experience: My event of specialty is World Schools Debate, and I compete in the format domestically for Westchester Academy and internationally for USA Debate. I have also competed in Big Questions, Impromptu, and Senate Congressional Debate over the course of my high school forensics career and earned a variety of accolades including reaching octafinals at 2023 TFA State, finaling at Bluebonnet in the same year, and advancing to eliminations rounds at Greenhill and the Winter Holidays Open as a senior. I am also among the top 20 World Schools debaters ranked nationwide.

WSD Paradigms: True debate can only occur with engagement, that is, valuable engagement. However skewed a motion may seem, never opt for an abusive characterization or stance that offers your opponents minimal ground because that makes for an uncharitable and uninteresting debate. Characterization should neither take precedence over your argumentation nor be neglected, and framing debates are not the most enjoyable. In the event that you face a team that has made such a blunder, clarify the error succinctly and do not spend an unnecessary amount of time proving why your opponents got the definition of a motion term wrong. Time is especially valuable, so always use those 8 minutes to your best advantage.

Remember to never assume anything in a debate, and always provide warrants and mechanization explaining why an argument is true. Weighing should not be limited to the 3rd/whip speech, but used down the bench when interacting with the opposing team's content.

Style is also very important because debate is ultimately a game of persuasion. The PM/LO speeches are meant to be more than dramatic readings of case material and refutation. Purposeful inflection, eye contact, hand gestures, and rhetoric all contribute to whether the path to the ballot is yours. When talking about big impacts, you always want your tone to reflect the magnitude of those ideas. Make sure to always regard your opponents with respect and leave ad hominem remarks out of the debate.

This is my 3rd year competing with Westchester Academy and in WSD. I'm a two time NSDA National and TFA State qualifier, and am ranked both Nationally and in Texas.

When judging a round, I enjoy seeing engagement, warranting, mechanization, and impacts from both sides. Engagement is especially important because that's what the debate is all about. It becomes very difficult to vote when both sides only defend themselves and don't prove why the other side is worse. It's also important to not just argue against your opponents, but convince me, Your Judge, why I should be voting for you. Don't just say an argument is important or true, give me an explanation as to why. Weighing should be down the bench as well.

As for style, be confident but not aggressive. Spreading and/or yelling will lose you style points. Make sure your speech is engaging by using rhetoric and inflection to help me understand your arguments in a way that helps your side.

Be kind and respectful to your competitors. Attack their arguments, not the debaters themselves. It's important to be charitable when interacting with your opponents arguments. You will not win by being mean or condescending.

Me: Top 21st Nationally Ranked in WSD, 3rd year of S&D, 2x Nationals qualifier, 2x TFA State Octofinalist;

My Events: WSD, Congress, DX, IX, Impromptu

Debate:

- Although many judges say they are a blank slate, no one is. It wouldn't be true to say that my experience in debate, argumentation, and general knowledge doesnt play into my ballot. However, if you don't argue against a point even if its something like "the sky is green" its more likely to flow against you, but you all should be doing the debating, not me. I am here to evaluate. However, if arguments arent made, or even if they are something like the "sky is green" wouldn't pass through, understand that just because you say it (and possibly they dont respond to it) doesnt mean I have to buy it. When considering how I will follow your speeches, consider me an intelligent baby. I can follow your arguments as you put them and the debate as a whole but I can not piece together thoughts such as your claims, warrants, and impacts for you. Make your contentions links obvious.

Winning teams :

• Best prove their arguments were true (Practical through impacts, Principle through thoroughly proving importance, relevance, and uniqueness)
• Weigh both the principles and practicals to prove why they win on both, or one type of ground and why its the most important clash/argument in the round.
• It is not enough to prove to me that your world is "good" or that your opponent's world is "bad", you must prove to me that your world is comparatively preferable to your opponents on the same grounds or lower grounds.

Personal Preferences:

• Content and Strategy > Style (although style is still important)
• Clash heavy debates
• Framework carried through the whole bench
• Weighing that's fleshed out

Don't:

• Rude/Disrespectful
• Spreading (I can handle fast speeds but if it interferes with my ability to flow or your ability to flesh out your arguments you will lose points and my attention)
• Devolve into a definition debate, semantics, or try to tread the middle grounds
• Make me do your weighing or debating for you in my RFD

Speech:

• Speak at a pace that gets your information across, but also leaves space for style
• Use rhetoric not just content to get your points across and display emphasis
• Don't just be informative, be persuasive

Speech/Debate Experience - Director of Debate at Liberty Sr. HS in Liberty, MO. Debated policy debate in high school and have been coaching now for 7 years. I can follow above average speed (it's your responsibility to signpost/be clear) but I acknowledge this is a communication activity and see more value in quality of argumentation as opposed to quantity of arguments. I will be flowing but don’t expect me to do the work for you in extensions or weighing. Your speeches are the priority when determining what to evaluate.

In order to weigh something on the flow, you need to include warrants with your claims. You can tell me to vote on something but if I don't have a clear (and well extended) reason to accompany it, I will look elsewhere for a claim that does have a warrant included. A complete argument should include claim, warrant, impact. Extend warrants with authors - sure, they dropped Smith '22, but why does Smith '22 matter to the round? is a question you should be answering on every extension. Each side should identify and impact calculate the offense in the round as early as they are able. Do not expect me to do the work for you or to be as well versed on the topic as you, it is better to assume I do not know a term than to jump straight in and leave the judge behind.

I typically lean more towards traditional debate in that it presents topic specific education and clash. However, kritikal arguments are fine so long as the thesis of the argument is clear and the clash is evident. Case debate is my preferred style of argumentation and if the K can provide a good link story into the affirmative world. Alternatives of do nothing in general are boring. That's not to say that they can't win a round (Solvency takeouts alone function in a similar manner) but I always wonder how much more creative the alt debate could be beyond "stay in the squo".

Prep Time: If someone is not speaking, someone is running prep time. Per the event rules there are speeches, cross-ex and prep. Especially now that high school prep is 8 minutes instead of the original 5... please don't attempt to steal prep. It is your responsibility to exchange evidence efficiently (if online, establish an email chain before the round if you think you'll need it). I will not stop prep if you "say stop prep, I want to request evidence from my opponent's". Take care of that during cross-ex or email speeches before you speak. There are time constraints in debate for a reason, abide by them, don't try to bend around them. Additionally "flex prep" is not real.

Prep and email chains- I realize that the wifi is sometimes out of your control. I'm okay with stopping prep when the email has been sent but that is also under the understanding that you also stop prepping. If you're partner is preflowing the upcoming speech doc, or you are still working then prep should still be running as by definition -- you are preparing. The other team, the same. You should be refreshing your email and that's it.

OPEN CROSS - This will lower your speaker points automatically. The event is designed to demonstrate the expertise, skill and speaking quality of each speaker. Since speaker points are given to each debater and not a team as a whole, open cross weakens individual speaking points.

I've been doing World Schools Debate for 3 years starting my freshman year. I have been to the NSDA Nationals and TFA state and broke into elims for both tournaments.

I like a debate that's analytical and argumentative as opposed to descriptive. Delve into WHY the issue or motion is important and its IMPACTS rather than just describing what is going on. Please keep the spreading to a minimum and do your best to prevent repeating points over and over again. Have at least a 5 minute speech, I don't like to see super short speeches with low amounts of content.

Overall just have fun, learn from your rounds, and analyze all of our RFDs in order to improve your skills. If you have any questions about RFD you can contact me @: Irath.habani@outlook.com