kayflew
11-10-11, 06:58 PM
Academic Debate Background
• 4 years high school debate (policy/value) [1999-2003]
• 10 years judging/coaching at the high school level (PuFo/Parli/Policy/LD) [2001-present]
• 1 year as competitor in NPDA [2007-2008]
• Current assistant coach for PLNU
Educational/Personal Info
• B.A. in History/Political Science
• M.Ed. in Teacher Leadership
• High school teacher at High Tech High Chula Vista
Judging Philosophy
• Tell me why it matters. As long as you do that, I will vote for anything. Don't make me finish your arguments or fill in the blanks of your analysis, because I won't.
• If the other team runs shoddy arguments or drops args, point it out. I rely on you to actually demonstrate your intellectual superiority.
• After 13 years around this activity, I obviously am familiar with the jargon. That being said, "Turn!" is not a complete argument. Neither is "Non-unique." Use the vocabulary to make you more efficient, not more lazy.
• I have a bias towards traditional, clean, fun debate, where the resolution has implications in the round. Personally, I believe that the resolution is there to provide fair grounds for both teams. Topical counterplans, fiat abuses, and tautological interpretations do not make for good times. If you run those kinds of arguments, I will listen to you fairly, but deep down, I probably won't like you.
• Humor. Use it. If you're funny. If you're not funny, at least enjoy yourself. Debate is fun. Or at least, it's supposed to be. I don't like voting for angry, frustrated debaters.
• Regarding T, K, D/As, CPs, RVIs, & other abbreviations: Yes, I will vote there, if you tell me why it matters. As I said before, finish your arguments, don't blip things out and expect it to win the game.
• Finally, FYI, I flow quickly and succintly, and typically do not write down every single thing you say.
• 4 years high school debate (policy/value) [1999-2003]
• 10 years judging/coaching at the high school level (PuFo/Parli/Policy/LD) [2001-present]
• 1 year as competitor in NPDA [2007-2008]
• Current assistant coach for PLNU
Educational/Personal Info
• B.A. in History/Political Science
• M.Ed. in Teacher Leadership
• High school teacher at High Tech High Chula Vista
Judging Philosophy
• Tell me why it matters. As long as you do that, I will vote for anything. Don't make me finish your arguments or fill in the blanks of your analysis, because I won't.
• If the other team runs shoddy arguments or drops args, point it out. I rely on you to actually demonstrate your intellectual superiority.
• After 13 years around this activity, I obviously am familiar with the jargon. That being said, "Turn!" is not a complete argument. Neither is "Non-unique." Use the vocabulary to make you more efficient, not more lazy.
• I have a bias towards traditional, clean, fun debate, where the resolution has implications in the round. Personally, I believe that the resolution is there to provide fair grounds for both teams. Topical counterplans, fiat abuses, and tautological interpretations do not make for good times. If you run those kinds of arguments, I will listen to you fairly, but deep down, I probably won't like you.
• Humor. Use it. If you're funny. If you're not funny, at least enjoy yourself. Debate is fun. Or at least, it's supposed to be. I don't like voting for angry, frustrated debaters.
• Regarding T, K, D/As, CPs, RVIs, & other abbreviations: Yes, I will vote there, if you tell me why it matters. As I said before, finish your arguments, don't blip things out and expect it to win the game.
• Finally, FYI, I flow quickly and succintly, and typically do not write down every single thing you say.