FTN - Judge Philosophies

Judge Philosophies

A Free Judge For Writing Extemp Topics and Being Imprisoned in Extemp Prep - Gonzaga Prep

Aidan Burgeson - CDA

n/a

Alayna Becker - Ferris

n/a

Alek Balasz - Mead

Alexis DeSanza - Central Valley Hig

Amanda Eastbrooks - Rogers

n/a

Andie Chapin - Ferris

n/a

Andre Cossette - Gonzaga Prep

I've been judging Policy, LD, and now Public Forum for 30 years or more.  I hate Kritiks that are used just to win rounds, unless they're Kritiks criticizing the state of debate these days.  They have to be read slowly for me to understand them, though: philosophy read at 400 words per minute just goes over my head (I have enough trouble understanding philosophy read at 100 words per minute).  As I advance in age, my ability to process information at a rapid rate diminishes, so if you can boil the round down to a few simple principles, then I become a thinking judge instead of a judge who merely connects points on the flow.  I like to hear evidence being read, so sometimes I'll slow down debaters when they read their cards so I can understand the warrants and not just mindlessly write down the taglines.  I have a decent knowledge of theory because debate theory rarely changes over the years (sometimes the names of the arguments change but the logic stays the same), so if you use words like "conditionality" and "permutation" and "reciprocity", I'd know what you were talking about.  And, I usually don't disclose (except for Novices who might benefit from some education), and I don't like shaking hands with the debaters after the round.

Andrea Benson - U-High

n/a

Andrew Myers - Mead

Ashley Alexandrovich - CDA

n/a

Bill Wagstaff - Mead

Brian Clemetson - Moses 2

n/a

Cara Langsfeld - Mt Spokane

n/a

Carolyn Petek - LC Tigers

n/a

Chris Regan - CDA

n/a

Chuck Hamaker-Teals - Southridge WA

I am the coach for Southridge High School in eastern Washington.  I competed in high school debate in the 90s.  I've been coaching for 18 years.  Each topic has lots of ground, find it and bring the arguments into the round.  Be polite and kind.  Rude debaters almost never win.  I can flow relatively quickly but will punish debaters’ speaks if they are unclear or unprepared.  I try to vote on the flow, although I don't like Topicality run without forethought.  I am not a fan of the kritik but I will vote for one.  I don't mind theory arguments, I just need to be clearly told how the impact relates to what is happening in the round.   I vote on issues where I can clearly see the impact in the round.  I like clear, fast, well organized debates with lots of good arguments and lots of impacts.  When I sit on out round panels, my decisions are very similar to those of current college debaters, not communication judges.   Arguments about sources are tiresome and I am more persuaded by rationale or meta-analysis.

Collin Mertens - Southridge WA

Dalton Deatrich - Mead

Daniel Cavnar - Moses 2

n/a

Daron Fredericks - Central Valley Hig

Dave Carlson - Wenatchee

n/a

David Spivey - Mead

David Smith - U-High

n/a

Don Hendrixson - Ephrata

n/a

Dylan Adamson - Ephrata

n/a

Elliny Hiebert - CDA

n/a

Ericka Hills - CDA

n/a

Gabrielle Zigarlick - Republic

n/a

Grant Montoya - Central Valley Hig

James Heath - Gonzaga Prep

JoAnn Flaherty - NC HS

n/a

Joe Phipps - Rogers

n/a

Jordan Welter - U-High

n/a

Karen Dirks - Ephrata

n/a

Kari Steele - Ephrata

n/a

Kate Laswell - Ferris

n/a

Kathleen Schrader - Gonzaga Prep

Kathy Helman - Ferris

n/a

Kevin Kimball - Oaks Christian

n/a

Lani Ghirarduzzi - CDA

n/a

Laryssa Lynch - Mt Spokane

n/a

Lindsay Oden - Lake City

n/a

Liz Bremner - Republic

n/a

Lori Cossette - Gonzaga Prep

Marissa Owen - Lake City

n/a

Matt Ockinga - Wenatchee

n/a

Mike Page - TEC

n/a

Missy Stephens - Mt Spokane

n/a

Nick Corr - Ferris

n/a

Pat Simmons - Ephrata

n/a

Patrick Mayer - Lake City

n/a

Paul Dillon - Ferris

n/a

Paul Chapin - Ferris

n/a

Phletha Wynn - CDA

n/a

Rachel Rice - CDA

n/a

Randy Brown - U-High

n/a

Ronique Padda - Lake City

n/a

Sally Conner - Central Valley Hig

I have judged debate events for about 15 years, most frequently congress, with occasional LD and PF. I enjoy rounds that stay away from excessive jargon and debaters focus on clear communication. I think that the value is important in a LD round, and I think that evidence is important in a round, but that it is an even more important skill to focus on deciding what evidence is important to include in a round, and to explain the relevance of this information. I do not enjoy speed.

Sam Neff - Lake City

n/a

Sam Normington - U-High

n/a

Sam Normington - Saint George

<h2> <span style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'serif'; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-ansi-language: en-us; mso-fareast-language: en-us; mso-bidi-language: ar-sa"><span style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'serif'; font-size: 12pt; mso-fareast-font-family: calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-ansi-language: en-us; mso-fareast-language: en-us; mso-bidi-language: ar-sa">I competed in policy debate in high school and have been coaching all forms of debate the past ten years.  I traditionally judge policy debate, so often find myself preferring its trappings. Speed, topicality, kritiks, are all fine by me, use them or don't, doesn't bother me.  I will do my best to evaluate the round using the framework the debaters put forth.  I like clash, and I like impact calculus.  </h2>

2011 Feline Frenzy