OSSAA EAST OK 5A 6A REGIONALS
2024
—
Tulsa,
OK/US
IE Paradigm List
All Paradigms:
Show
Hide
Victoria Aary
Miami High School
None
Madison Adam
Jenks High School
None
George Alaback
Bishop Kelley High School
None
Caleb Baumgardner
Glenpool High School
None
Abbi Bertrem
Tulsa Washington
Last changed on
Thu April 11, 2024 at 3:53 PM EDT
Don’t spread or I won’t flow
Don’t shake my hand after the round
Be respectful and considerate of the others in the round
Don’t be racist, sexist, homophobic, etc.
Go fight win
Last changed on
Fri January 12, 2024 at 10:18 AM CDT
If you can add a relevant Game of Thrones quote or reference to your speech, that could get you an extra speaker point. Also, use all your prep time.
Elizabeth Brannon
Fort Gibson High School
None
Becky Braswell
Sapulpa High School
None
Sarah Buchanan
Glenpool High School
None
Ashlyn Bush
Bixby High School
None
Kenneth Butler
Bixby High School
None
Amy Campbell
Broken Arrow High School
None
Andrea Campfield
Charles Page High School
Last changed on
Tue February 20, 2024 at 9:26 AM CDT
Andrea Campfield
I did not debate in high school, so my experience judging is rooted within my 2 years coaching policy debate. Not sure if this qualifies as a paradigm, but this is what I find I look for in judging a round:
1. I am focused on the policy topic at hand as I judge. I am listening for reasonable arguments for or against adopting the policy in question. While I am open to good kritik strategy, I find way out there theory argument is a distraction to the task of quality civil debate and begins to sound like conspiracies on facebook. If you go off case, stay in bounds.
2. I also have found that habitually calling out abuse or lack of educational integrity and hoping it sticks or confuses is also a distraction. Definitely do so if there is merit, but if you have to try to win on calling foul all the time, what does that say about the strength of your own research and prepped case? Proving or disproving the validity of the topic is the debater’s job, and for me, the best job wins.
3. I also like an organized, respectful debate with clarity in speaking and questioning. Quality is better than quantity, so if a spread is merely to befuddle the opposing team, it will not serve well if I cannot understand your words. I don’t want to be befuddled.
4. I am also looking for your personal investment in the topic. Although we have to get through case cards, I am more interested in the debater’s response to the material.
5. And finally, I find that how both teams use cross X comes into my decision making, as well as the aff’s response to a solidly built neg block. Final rebuttals are key.
Again, not sure that’s a “paradigm”, but it’s honest. I am a work in progress, and I learn new things each time I judge. I hope you teach me a new trick!
Kayla Cao
Jenks High School
None
Gina Cattaneo
Glenpool High School
Last changed on
Sat January 27, 2024 at 8:38 AM CDT
LD is Value Debate. Propositions of Value
CX is Policy Debate. Propositions of Policy
Liana Cavanaugh
Bixby High School
None
Jeremiah Chism-McSherry
Jenks High School
None
Malachi Chism-McSherry
Jenks High School
None
Melanie Christner
Enid High School
None
Erin Clark
Bishop Kelley High School
None
Rebekah Clowers
Broken Bow High School
None
Jake Daniel
Fort Gibson High School
None
Jenna Davis
Tulsa Washington
Last changed on
Fri March 8, 2024 at 5:37 AM CDT
Jenna Davis (she/her)
don't be racist, sexist, or homophobic :)
good luck
Jennifer Denslow
Oologah High School
None
Last changed on
Thu January 4, 2024 at 8:55 AM EDT
Denslow, Keith Edit 0 3… Judging Philosophy
Keith Denslow,
Skiatook High School,
Skiatook, OK
I have taught academic debate for 32 years. I have coached both policy debate and value debate on the high school level plus NDT and CEDA for 2 years on the college level. I have coached regional, district, and state champions.
I give up. I embrace the absurdity which is post-modern debate. If you debate on a critical level, then it is your burden to understand and explain the philosophical position you are advocating and offer a rational alternative to the worldview.
Topicality is an outdated mode of thought with tries to put up fences in our brain about what we can and can not talk about. It harms education and the marketplace of ideas. As a negative, only run Topicality if the argument is 100% accurate not as a test of skill or response.
It is important that anyone arguing counterplans have an understanding of counterplan theory especially how a counterplan relates to presumption. DO NOT automatically permute a counterplan or critique without critically thinking about the impact to the theory of the debate.
Style issues: Civility is important. Open CX is okay. Clarity must accompany speed. Numbering your arguments is better than “next” signposting. Detailed roadmaps are better than “I have 5 off” and prep time doesn’t continue for 2 minutes after you say “stop prep” Flash evidence faster!
Allison Dodge
Owasso High School
As a debate judge, my primary focus is on promoting a respectful and clear debating environment. Here are the key elements of my debate paradigm:
-
Respect and Decorum:
- I place a high value on respect in debates. Competitors should treat each other with civility and refrain from personal attacks, derogatory language, or disrespectful behavior.
- Maintain proper decorum throughout the debate, addressing your opponents and judges respectfully.
-
Clarity and Accessibility:
- Clarity is essential. I must be able to understand your arguments to give you credit for them, so please enunciate clearly and avoid talking too fast.
- If I cannot understand your argument, I cannot flow it.
-
Spreading:
- If competitors choose to engage in spreading (rapid delivery of arguments), they must maintain clarity. Speed should not come at the expense of intelligibility.
- Remember that spreading is not the only path to victory. Well-articulated, well-structured arguments can be more persuasive than sheer speed.
-
Use of Crossfires:
- I do not consider crossfires as a time for rebuttals. Crossfires are meant for competitors to ask questions and clarify their opponent's arguments. I do not flow arguments made in crossfire.
- Please use crossfires to seek clarification, challenge your opponent's arguments, and help me understand the debate better.
In summary, my judging philosophy is rooted in fostering a respectful and comprehensible debate environment. I believe that a respectful discourse is not only more constructive but also more persuasive. Clarity is essential, and I urge competitors to prioritize it, especially when spreading. Remember that crossfires are for questions, not rebuttals. Good luck, and let's have a productive and respectful debate!
A note about rule violations: I know the rules of debate. I am aware of both the OSSAA and NSDA rules and their various differences. I keep copies of the handbooks at the ready, so I can look up rules if I feel a rule was violated. That being said, I will weigh lies made in round in my judging decisions. Lies about cheating, evidence, drops, etc. are all weighed into my judging decision. Lying will not benefit you in my rounds. Debates should be about which team can make the best argument, not which team can trick the judge. If you need to lie to win, you did not win the round.
Notes for IEs:
I value genuine performance over screaming and fake crying every single time. Anyone can scream- few can act.
BIG NOTE: You NEED to implement trigger warnings if you have a selection with triggering content. You do not know what the experience of those in the rooms is- you could seriously hurt someone's performance by not giving a warning. You also do not know the lived experiences of your judges- they are a captive audience and you ought to give them a chance to prepare themselves. This is why dramatic pieces often get called Trauma Interpretations. That's not a compliment- it's a statement on how upsetting it is to see children acting out the most heinous trauma they possibly can in order to get reactions through shock value. If you are genuinely good- trigger warnings will not dull your performance- they will enhance it. If you rely on the shock of triggering people- consider if you are really a good actor. Trigger warnings DO NOT count against your speech time- there is literally no reason to give one.
Riley Dubois
Grove High School
None
Victoria Engledow
Bishop Kelley High School
None
Shelley Founds
Bixby High School
None
Amie Francis
Tulsa School of Arts and Sciences
None
John Francis
Bartlesville High School
None
Caroline Fravel
Bishop Kelley High School
None
Allison Freeman
Bixby High School
None
Wyatt Freeman
Bixby High School
Last changed on
Wed January 3, 2024 at 7:34 AM CDT
I am open to most any type of argumentation. I love kritiks, theory shells, topicalities, and all things squirrelly. That said, I believe spreading is an unethical practice and if I can't understand you enough to flow, you didn't say it. I have voted on probably 80% of speed Ks I have heard.
Spencer Gardner
Jenks High School
None
Matthew Gilman
Bixby High School
Last changed on
Fri February 2, 2024 at 7:30 AM CDT
LD Debate Paradigm
You are not here to personally convince me that your side is correct. I have my own opinion on the topic and you will probably not change my mind about it as I have been keeping track of philosophy and politics for about 30+ years now.
I am here to measure:
- The skill at which you argue your case.
- The ability to speak clearly and get your points across.
- The ability to listen to your opponent and counter their points.
I'm like a boxing judge measuring which blows land and which blows are countered.
What I like:
- Convincing and proving that your value is higher than your opponents is good.
- Tie your impacts back to your value. What's the use of a morality debate when the impacts of your contentions don't apply to your value and you don't remind me of it?
- Don't tell me that your opponent's evidence is bad. Tell me why it's bad and why your evidence is better. I usually disregard any attacks against evidence without a good reason why.
- Voter Issues. Tell me why. Don't just say, "I win this issue." Tell me why you win this issue.
Haley Goodman
Jenks High School
None
Kristina Gray
Broken Arrow High School
None
Sydne Gray
Tulsa Washington
None
David Hamby
Tulsa Washington
None
Damien Hartzell
Tulsa School of Arts and Sciences
None
Jeffrey Haynes
Grove High School
None
Jennifer Hertel
Oologah High School
None
Monica Hettick
Sapulpa High School
None
Kaylea Hutson-Miller
Miami High School
None
Aspen Jackson
Glenpool High School
None
Michelle Johnson
Bartlesville High School
Last changed on
Thu January 4, 2024 at 8:10 AM CDT
Debate: I am not particularly picky on anything, but please be respectful to your opponent(s). Feel free to run progressive arguments, but beware that I may not get them if you aren't clear.
LD: Make sure to clarify how your criterion supports your contentions! Also, don’t drop all your contentions for the sake of the value debate. Do not make all of your arguments cross-applications of your own case unless there is a legitimate clash. I vote primarily on the quality of coverage.
PF: Any speaking speed is fine, just make sure you are coherent. A heated cross-examination is fine but please don’t spend the entire time yelling at each other. I vote on the quality of evidence and general coverage.
Jacey Johnston
Miami High School
None
Lakshmi Karande
Union HS
None
Susan Kilpatrick
Fort Gibson High School
None
Wayne Larkin
Tulsa School of Arts and Sciences
Last changed on
Wed February 28, 2024 at 8:11 AM CDT
I am most engaged and convinced when an individual speaks with confidence. This includes content knowledge and eye contact.
Suzanne Lauritsen
Bartlesville High School
None
Lailah Lebaron
Enid High School
None
Misti Lettenmaier
Broken Arrow High School
Last changed on
Mon June 17, 2024 at 3:40 AM CDT
I am a 4-year LD debater and an 8-year debate coach. In Lincoln Douglas debate I believe in traditional debating (less policy), but I will vote for a K if done correctly. However, this is a value-based debate and excessive stats/evidence will not be weighed more than value; value and value criterion are essential to the debate. Also, off-the-clock roadmaps are not necessary, unless doing something from tradition.
GEORGE LOWRY
Bixby High School
None
Cassy Lynch
Bishop Kelley High School
None
Catherine Lynch
Bishop Kelley High School
None
Shannon Mabe
Tulsa School of Arts and Sciences
None
Grace Mangrum
Poteau High School
None
Beth Mason
Bixby High School
None
Jennifer Maupin
Union HS
None
Sean McCarthy
Jenks High School
None
Lilly McCaskill
Glenpool High School
None
Kelly McCracken
Tulsa Washington
Last changed on
Wed January 3, 2024 at 2:27 AM CDT
LD: I'm pretty traditional. I like values and criteria and evidence and clash. If you read a K or a bedtime narrative, I will stop flowing the round and take a nap. I have a speed threshold of "don't" and if you could please keep the jargon to a minimum, that would be great. Theory is cool, in theory, but it shouldn't be an entire framework. I like long walks on the beach, and a good tennis match. Also, don't shake my hand at the end of the round.
PF: Um....win more arguments than the other team. Go. Fight. Win.
Penny McGill
Muskogee High School
None
Cassie Mitchell
Bixby High School
None
Laci Moore
Broken Bow High School
None
Napayshni-Ohitekah Morales
Charles Page High School
Last changed on
Fri April 5, 2024 at 2:19 AM CDT
Put me on the email chain tekahmorales03@gmail.com
Charles Page High School 22’ - OU 27’
Conflicts: Charles Page High School, Sand Springs - Will Rogers High School, Tulsa
I don't care what you run, just have fun and explain it well for me
I will flow on paper (if I have it) so make sure your speaking is well enunciated, this being said speed doesn't matter as long as you're clear on tags and postings.
I’m absolutely terrible with making sure I fill out the comments and RFD fully, I tend to forget since I give oral feedback and my RFD’s aloud - if you’d like for me to type some stuff out in the comment let me know and I will make sure to write feedback ballots
Abby Morey
Bishop Kelley High School
None
Luke Ontman
Union HS
None
Linda Outhier
Enid High School
None
Monty Peliti
Bixby High School
None
Tiffany Quinton
Sapulpa High School
None
Kadee Ransom
Enid High School
None
N. Georgeann Roye
Miami High School
None
Erin Shepherd
Jenks High School
Last changed on
Sat February 10, 2024 at 8:08 AM CDT
Simply put: The best argument will win.
My background is in Lincoln-Douglas and Student Congress in high school, and now a policy coach.
Speaking style: Slow it down a little. Show me that you understand the arguments, and the vocabulary by not tripping over your words.
Argumentation: Understand your cards. If you cannot show me you understand the card during CX or rebuttal, you will not win the round.
Clear, cohesive arguments that show me you understand the very basics of debate (claim, warrant, impact) will win my rounds.
Jacob Shepherd
Jenks High School
None
Iyan Smith-Williams
Tulsa Washington
None
Ricinda Spatz
Union HS
None
Brogan Spears
Broken Arrow High School
None
Rani Spindle
Tulsa School of Arts and Sciences
Last updated: September 28, 2023
Betty Stanton
Jenks High School
Last changed on
Mon April 22, 2024 at 11:04 AM CDT
I prefer speechdrop but here is my email for document sharing/evidence chains if you need it:betty.stanton@jenksps.org
I'm the head coach of a successful team, and have been coaching for 18 years. I did CX in high school so long ago that Ks were new, and I competed in college.
LD: I'm a very traditional judge. I like values and criteria and analysis and clash. I want framework debate to actually mean something.
PF: I’m a very traditional judge. If the round becomes a very short CX round instead of a PF round, we have a problem. I want evidence and actual analysis of that evidence, and I want actual clash.
CX: I can handle your spread and I will vote where I'm persuasively told to with the following exceptions: 1) I have never voted on T. I think it's a non-starter unless a case is so blatantly non-topical that you can't even see the resolution from it. That's not to say it isn't a perfectly legitimate argument, it's just to say that I will probably buy the aff's 'we meet's and you might have better uses for your time than camping here. 2) If you run a K, you should firmly and continuously advocate for that K. 3) I, again, will always prefer actual clash in the round over unlinked theory arguments.
General Things ~
Don't claim something is abusive unless it is.
Don't claim an argument was dropped unless it was.
Don't advocate for atrocities.
Don't be a jerk to your opponents (This will get you the lowest speaker points possible. Yes, even if you win.)
Last changed on
Wed March 27, 2024 at 4:14 AM CDT
I do flow, but only what I hear.
I do time, but that's addressed later in the paradigm.
I am ready before each speech so just debate like I'm not there.
I WILL VOTE ON THE FRAMEWORK MOST OF THE TIME.
My LD paradigm is super simple. I'm okay with all types of arguments as long you can prove a strong value/criterion link. I'm a traditional LD Judge, I won't knock progressive but I do ask that you are clear in your argumentation. I flow and I expect arguments to not be dropped and extended throughout the round. Besides that, I enjoy a fun round so don't be rude but don't be passive. Again I'm open to whatever just make sure that your arguments are clear, logical, and have a strong Value/Criterion Link. Please don't say your card names, say the argument. I do not flow card names if you say "refer to my john 3:16 card" I will have no clue what you're talking about, but if you say "refer to x argument" I'll be on board. As a traditional judge, I like hearing some philosophy. I am not a philosophy expert but I do know the major points of the more used arguments and I wont count it as part of the RFD unless your opponent calls it out. If they don't then run with it I guess.
PF is very similar, hit me with your creative arguments. I generally vote for winners based on which team can either give me the bigger impacts or who can give me a good amount of strong arguments. IF YOU SPREAD IN PUBLIC FORUM I WILL NOT FLOW. I AM A PF PURIST. DO NOT SPREAD I WILL TRULY LOOK AT YOU AND MAYBE WRITE ONE THING. IF YOU ARE A PFER AND SAY USE A PHILOSOPHY FRAMEWORK I WILL NOT APPRECIATE IT. PF IS FOR THE LAY JUDGE. TREAT ME LIKE A LAY JUDGE.
Also if you are reading this, just an FYI please TIME yourselves so I don't have to interrupt you. Again I'm super laid back so just make sure that arguments are very clear and logical.
CX is not my favorite so I have no real paradigm for it. Just tell me why your arguments are good. I like Ks but I hate nukes(extinction).
As you can tell by this paradigm that I'm somewhat lazy. So if you have any specific questions feel free to ask before the round AND do not be afraid to ask me what you can improve AFTER (LIKE IN THE HALLWAYS) the round or for advice.
If you try to post-round or debate me because of the results of the ballot, I will shut it down immediately but feel free to ask for critiques.
Kenna Stimson
Glenpool High School
None
Tracey Stowe
Bixby High School
None
Bryanna Stuever
Skiatook
None
Ronald Stuever
Skiatook
None
Olivia Thomas
Grove High School
None
Max Thorp
Tulsa Washington
None
Sarah Tirrell
Tulsa School of Arts and Sciences
None
Meagan Todd
McAlester High School
None
rebecca Turner
Skiatook
None
Grace Wall
Sapulpa High School
None
Jordan Wallace
Jenks High School
Last changed on
Fri March 8, 2024 at 11:16 AM EDT
I did PF in high school so I'm not much help on Its but I can speak broadly on the debates.
I like impacting out arguments. Tell me WHY what you're saying is important and explain the reason behind your arguments. I love evidence and will vote on cards if its too close. Don't die on your opponents hill so make sure you stay focused on explaining your own arguments.
Nathan Wallace
Tulsa Washington
Last changed on
Fri March 8, 2024 at 9:14 AM CDT
Went to nationals twice in PF, got 5th at state in FX, got 8th at state in PF.
Totally comfortable with theory/progressive debate as long as it is not sloppy.
You can spread if you like just share the case with me first, and know that I will not give you any bonus points for doing it.
Add me to any evidence sharing chain (I will look at all the evidence) I will not flow against bad cards unless the opponents indict it but I might doc speaks for it.
Make the most of CX, because I will flow it through.
If you do not extend an argument, I will not either.
I am going to vote off warrants so make sure those are pretty clear.
Try to tell me what the bigger picture is, like what a AFF v NEG world looks like. (especially in National Circuit Tournaments)
Also, I appreciate any references to Taylor Swift or the exceedingly long One Piece anime series.
Overall, be respectful and have fun!!!
Robert Walters
Broken Arrow High School
Last changed on
Mon May 20, 2024 at 3:52 AM CDT
I am a traditional PF judge. I don't really do kritiks or speed. Win me with strong arguments and impacts.
Melanie Wicks
Fort Gibson High School
None
Jamie Williams
Miami High School
None
Juddie Williams
Tulsa School of Arts and Sciences
None
Jerica Wilson
Skiatook
None
Julie Womack
Skiatook
None
Crystal Wright
Oologah High School
None
Last changed on
Thu January 4, 2024 at 5:23 AM CDT
Hi, I'm Julia, but you can call me Jules or Jae. I use any/all pronouns so knock yourself out.
I've done debate for six going on seven years. I'm mainly an LD debater but have done PF and CX in the past. I started out as a traditional debater, so that's something I am well versed in, but Larp is what I'm the most comfortable with. With that being said, here are my preferences.
1) Larp/Theory
2) Trad.
3) Non-traditional K's/Trix/Phil
Speaks: I'm pretty laid back when it comes to speaks. I grade on the (25-30) scale. If you spread and/or run any sort of progressive content without my or your opponent's permission you will get an automatic 25, no questions asked. Same thing with any kind of sexist, racist, or homophobic slur or anything of that nature. I'm fine with cursing, as long as it's in your card. Cursing at either me or your opponent will result in an automatic 25. If you manage to make a Taylor Swift reference sometime in round, I'll give you at least 28 speaks.
Spreading: Spreading is fine, just please send me a speech doc if you plan to do so.
My email is juliayangfb@gmail.com
Other notes: Tech>Truth. Don't just tell me I should vote for you because you won a specific thing. Tell me how and why you won it. Extensions are incredibly important, but please don't try to bring up already dropped arguments for me to extend, I won't count them. In other news, I like clash. Clash is good and I will vote off of it. But please don't try to be purposefully aggressive to create clash. Don't try to defend your whole case throughout the entire round. Collapsing to only one or two arguments is perfectly fine. I will not vote off the framework debate alone. Please impact weigh!!!!! Finally, please be mindful of who your opponent is. You forfeit your right to complain about a loss the minute you spread or run progressive on a novice.
My discord is acreamcolouredteacup#5631 if you need to contact me or have any other questions.
With all of that said, good luck and may the odds forever be in your favor.
Sonia Yarbrough
Bishop Kelley High School
None
Vera Yirsa
Grove High School
None
Joey Zitzman
Tulsa Washington
None