kissmycls
11-29-06, 12:54 PM
This is from the 2006 NPDA.
Katie Hatfield - Creighton University
I have 6 years judging experience in Lincoln-Douglas Debate and Individual Events. I have very limited
experience in Parliamentary Debate. I have judged all parli debate all of this year (6 tournaments). I have adjudicated in
about 12 rounds of parli in the previous years. So basically, you can think of me as a novice parli judge.
That being said, while I am new to parli debate, my experience with other forms of debate is more extensive. As
an undergraduate, I competed in NDT, Lincoln-Douglas debate, and Individual Events.
I believe that this is a communication event. And while many of you may be shuddering at this statement, I want
you to be able to truly articulate your position to me. Thus, the delivery of your arguments should be clear, well thought
out, and persuasive. *Note to all: Please do not mistake my experience with NDT debate as an invitation for you to speak
at a rate that you are not comprehensible. Unfortunately, too many debaters across the debate genres think they can
speak fluently at an increased pace when in fact they cannot. Although, I will admit that I have found this typically is not
a problem in parli debate. My policy is: if I cannot flow your arguments because of fluency and/or speed, I will verbally
ask you to correct the problem-if we are in preliminary rounds of competition. After that, it is your responsibility to adapt.
IF, we are in elim rounds…I will not interrupt the flow of the debate for other judges, thus you will receive no verbal
warning.
I am pretty much willing to listen to anything in the round. I would say that I prefer policy oriented cases, but I
am not opposed to value cases if they are debated well. I definitely expect the debaters to do the work in the round. I do
not want to intervene. So please do not put me in a place where I feel compelled to do so. You need to tell me how to
weigh the round and how your arguments function on my ballot. Please avoid excessive use of jargon in the round. New
examples can be offered in the rebuttals but you may not offer new arguments.
You should all know that I am the ADOF at Creighton University and my main responsibility is working with the
individual events side of our program. So, I will tell you exactly what I tell my own kids who debate. I like pretty
speakers! But more seriously, I expect you to think about your delivery and how it can either enhance or hinder your over
all effectiveness as a debater. While I completely understand that there are certain times and certain rounds that may
compel a debater to focus less on the delivery aspect of the presentation and more on the substance (ie, trying to get
everything in), remember that an eloquently delivered and engaging argument is much more effective than one with no
style or grace. Finally, I have very little tolerance for rudeness in the round. Not only will you probably hear it from me at
the end of the round, but you will see it on the ballot as well. There is no reason to be rude to each other in this activity.
If you have any questions about my philosophy, please don’t hesitate to ask.
Katie Hatfield - Creighton University
I have 6 years judging experience in Lincoln-Douglas Debate and Individual Events. I have very limited
experience in Parliamentary Debate. I have judged all parli debate all of this year (6 tournaments). I have adjudicated in
about 12 rounds of parli in the previous years. So basically, you can think of me as a novice parli judge.
That being said, while I am new to parli debate, my experience with other forms of debate is more extensive. As
an undergraduate, I competed in NDT, Lincoln-Douglas debate, and Individual Events.
I believe that this is a communication event. And while many of you may be shuddering at this statement, I want
you to be able to truly articulate your position to me. Thus, the delivery of your arguments should be clear, well thought
out, and persuasive. *Note to all: Please do not mistake my experience with NDT debate as an invitation for you to speak
at a rate that you are not comprehensible. Unfortunately, too many debaters across the debate genres think they can
speak fluently at an increased pace when in fact they cannot. Although, I will admit that I have found this typically is not
a problem in parli debate. My policy is: if I cannot flow your arguments because of fluency and/or speed, I will verbally
ask you to correct the problem-if we are in preliminary rounds of competition. After that, it is your responsibility to adapt.
IF, we are in elim rounds…I will not interrupt the flow of the debate for other judges, thus you will receive no verbal
warning.
I am pretty much willing to listen to anything in the round. I would say that I prefer policy oriented cases, but I
am not opposed to value cases if they are debated well. I definitely expect the debaters to do the work in the round. I do
not want to intervene. So please do not put me in a place where I feel compelled to do so. You need to tell me how to
weigh the round and how your arguments function on my ballot. Please avoid excessive use of jargon in the round. New
examples can be offered in the rebuttals but you may not offer new arguments.
You should all know that I am the ADOF at Creighton University and my main responsibility is working with the
individual events side of our program. So, I will tell you exactly what I tell my own kids who debate. I like pretty
speakers! But more seriously, I expect you to think about your delivery and how it can either enhance or hinder your over
all effectiveness as a debater. While I completely understand that there are certain times and certain rounds that may
compel a debater to focus less on the delivery aspect of the presentation and more on the substance (ie, trying to get
everything in), remember that an eloquently delivered and engaging argument is much more effective than one with no
style or grace. Finally, I have very little tolerance for rudeness in the round. Not only will you probably hear it from me at
the end of the round, but you will see it on the ballot as well. There is no reason to be rude to each other in this activity.
If you have any questions about my philosophy, please don’t hesitate to ask.