Judge Philosophies
Akhil Mandala - NHSWA
n/a
Amy McCormick - BHS
n/a
Amy Nichols - Interlake
n/a
Andrew Rowe - Interlake
n/a
Angela Thompson - Mt Si
n/a
Anne Lim - NHSWA
n/a
COREY TUCKNIES - BUDC
n/a
Carrie Walker - Kamiak
n/a
Casey Schoonover - NHSWA
n/a
Cathy Renner - Mt Si
n/a
Cindy Rittenhouse - Eastlake HS
n/a
Conner Rice - Seattle Academy
n/a
Derek Hanson - GPS
I competed in Policy from 2006 to 2010 and in British Parliamentary at the college level from 2010 to 2014. I've been judging since then, and am now coaching at Glacier Peak High School. I consider myself to be a Stock Issues judge, and when Stock Issues are fulfilled, I default to Policymaker. I tend to have a low tolerance for frivolous Topicality arguments, but am more than willing to consider most based on the quality of the link and argumentation presented. Be reasonable with what you're running and I'll be happy to accommodate it I have very low tolerance for Kritiks. Many of the K's I've seen have been strange collections of pseudo-intellectual crap that tend to have very little grounding in real-world argumentation, and are designed to confuse and exclude debaters rather than promote education and productive competition. If a K is run, there needs to be a compelling reason within the round, and it needs to be demonstrated and explained in order for me to value it. Policy debate should be about policy. I'm able to understand speed, but greatly prefer clear articulation and efficient use of arguments. I highly value a weighing mechanism in the round, and strongly encourage analysis on arguments made. Tell me how what you're saying is important in plain English at some point.
Don Garnand - Rainier Mustang
n/a
Doug Weinmaster - Mt Si
n/a
Elizabeth Young - Garfield
Ellen Schoonover - NHSWA
n/a
Emily Berreth - GPS
n/a
Emily Feder - Seattle Academy
n/a
Emily Huang - BHS
n/a
Emma Williams - Kamiak
n/a
Hank Roark - Mt Si
n/a
Helen Boyer - NHSWA
n/a
Herb Ong - BHS
n/a
Hoony Oh - BC ACADEMY
n/a
IAN DUNCAN - EPS
n/a
Ilanko Subramaniam - Interlake
n/a
Janice Rice - Mt Si
n/a
Janie Sun - Redmond
n/a
Jason Young - Garfield
Experience/Background: I debated policy for 4 years in high school (Centerville High School, OH), I did not debate in college. I started a policy team at Garfield High School, WA in 2014, and have been coaching them since then. As a debater I pursued a mix of policy and critical arguments, so I'm familiar and comfortable with a wide range of arguments. I am currently in a PhD program that is very much oriented toward critical theory, so my knowledge base for kritiks is reasonably extensive. I am a white, cis-gendered, heterosexual male that was educated and socialized within a Western context, which has likely produced certain subtle biases in terms of my epistemological view of the world.</br></br> Judging Framework: I believe that a debate should be about the debaters, not about me. I will therefore do my best to decide the round based on arguments made by the debaters, rather than based on my own beliefs. Be clear about how you think I should be judging, and there shouldn't be any big surprises.</br></br> Biases: Unless I am convinced to do something different, I will generally do/believe the following:</br></br> -I will flow the round, and will give weight to arguments that are not answered by the opposing team.</br> -I will protect the negative team from new arguments in the 2AR. This means that if I cannot connect an argument in the 2AR back to the 1AR, then I will likely give that argument less, or no, weight.</br> -In general, I do not believe that completely new arguments should be made in the rebuttals. I also think that it is difficult for the negative to introduce completely new off-case positions in the 2NC and then develop them completely. This isn't to say that the 2NC shouldn't be allowed to introduce new off-case positions... I just think that the negative has to do a lot of work to convincingly develop such arguments to the point where I will vote for them.</br> -I will vote for one team or the other.</br> -I am pretty skeptical of the open source movement that seems to have devoured the activity. While I see some benefits to open source wikis, etc., I am not certain that coaches and competitors have fully considered some of the ways in which open knowledge supports certain facets of neoliberal logic, and ultimately widens inequalities (despite rhetoric to the contrary). As the coach of a new team, I find it ironic that I most often and most loudly hear open source ethics being pushed by individuals from large, well-established, and well-resourced teams. While I suppose it is nice for our team to know what arguments other teams are running, we literally do not have the research power to prep for them or the network to get necessary evidence from others... particularly when compared with the large schools. All of this is to say that I don't find 'non-disclosure' or 'you should lose because you don't participate in the wiki' theory arguments to be particularly persuasive.</br></br> Speaking: Be clear! One pet peeve, especially at local tournaments in Washington: I really dislike it when debaters are only clear on tags. I'm listening to all of your evidence, not just the tag... so make sure I can hear everything! If I can't hear the evidence, then your tag was just an analytical assertion.</br></br> Finally, please feel free to ask me questions before the round! I'm happy to answer specific questions about my paradigm.
Jay Yang - NHSWA
n/a
Jay Busch - NHSWA
n/a
Jennifer Giolitti - NHSWA
n/a
Jenny Zhang - BHS
n/a
Jesse Draud - NHSWA
n/a
John Janakiraman - Interlake
n/a
Jonah Kolar - Ingraham
n/a
Kai Daniels - Kamiak
n/a
Karen Rossman - Redmond
Kavya Srikanth - Interlake
n/a
Keanan Taute - Garfield
n/a
Ken Nichols - Interlake
n/a
Kevin Diegel - Mt Si
n/a
Kitty Zhang - Eastlake HS
n/a
LAURA LIVINGSTON - BUDC
n/a
Lawrence Kuok - Interlake
n/a
Liang Yu - Interlake
n/a
Lisa Weber - Interlake
n/a
Liz Glinski - Garfield
Lulu Szezerbajan - GPS
n/a
MANJEET PARMAR - BUDC
n/a
Marcus Avery - Interlake
n/a
Maria Yepes - Mt Si
n/a
Marissa Magana - BHS
n/a
Mayumi Willgerodt - Seattle Academy
n/a
Megan Wu - Interlake
n/a
Michael Trask - Seattle Academy
n/a
Michelle Glasser - Seattle Academy
n/a
Mike Fitzgerald - Kamiak
n/a
Monica Connell - Interlake
n/a
Muhan Zhang - Interlake
n/a
NAYANDEEP PARMAR - BUDC
n/a
Navya Garg - Interlake
n/a
Nico Roshau - Garfield
n/a
Olga Hall - Eastlake HS
n/a
RACHAEL BROWNELL - BUDC
n/a
RACHEL WILLIAMS - BUDC
n/a
Rhishma Murugan - Redmond
n/a
Robert Rutherford - EPS
n/a
Robert Bergin - Bishop Blanchet
n/a
Ryan Choi - BC ACADEMY
n/a
SARAH NAYLOR - BUDC
n/a
Stephen Thornsberry - Redmond
<p>The following is roughly taken from the NFL LD judging guidelines.</p> <ol> <li>Communication should emphasize clarity. Accordingly, I will only evaluate those arguments that were presented in a manner that is clear and understandable. Throughout the debate, the competitors should display civility as well as a professional demeanor and style of delivery.</li> <li>Remember that the resolution is one of value, which concerns itself with what ought to be rather than what is. This value is prized for being the highest goal that can be achieved within the context of the resolution.</li> <li>The better debater is the one who proves their side of the resolution more valid as a general principle.</li> <li>Logos and ethos are equally considered. It should be noted that ethos is quite often ignored in LD. I don't ignore ethos and will often vote for the debater who expresses better confidence in delivery.</li> <li>There must be clash concerning the framework and contentions. Cross-examination should clarify, challenge, or advance arguments.</li> <li>Any case reliant on much theory will need to carefully define key terms. Common terms like "self" and "other" will need to be defined if they are used in a manner that is not part of common usage.</li> </ol>
Sterling Yun - Interlake
n/a
Steve Rowe - Interlake
n/a
Steven Helman - Kamiak
n/a
Susan Truong - Redmond
Todd Bohannon - Eastlake HS
n/a
Tyler Julian - NHSWA
n/a
Zach Maghirang - Ingraham
n/a
Zoe Burstyn - Seattle Academy
n/a
ingrid Elliot - Seattle Academy
n/a