2024 National Online Forensics Championship - College

National Online Forensics - Mar 22-24 | Status: Completed | 2:29 AM Pacific

Profile Image
Tournament Time: 2:29 AM Pacific
  Home   Contact Tournament   Schedule   Registration   Entries   Squad Room   Postings   Break List   eBallots   Results

Judge Philosophies

Aaron Weinstein - CSUF

n/a

Aaron Ford - Lewis & Clark

n/a

Alessandro Leal-Romero - Miramar

n/a

Alexandra Smith - Tourn Judges

n/a

Alice Gilman - Tourn Judges

n/a

Amaia Ham - BGSU

n/a

Amanda Nobra - Tourn Judges

n/a

Amber Joiner - Nevada

I debated and did IEs in high school and was a nationally ranked debater in college. I went on to teach speech and debate courses at multiple universities and served as a DOF in the Northwest region. I hold a PhD in Public Policy and am a former state legislator who loves debate in all its forms, real world and academic.

For more public debate formats, I like the debaters to give me their best ideas as if I were a lay person. If you try to persuade an audience in the real world, you wont know their biases or lenses. I want competitors to be creative and not be worried about what they think I want to hear.

Amy Hileman - NOVA

For IPDA debate I do not want a jargon-filled round where students attempt to speak so quickly that the competition and judge won't notice the flaws in their logic. I do not believe that IPDA should look/sound like other types of debate. Give me the politeness/ettiquete at the start of the constructives. Focus on the quality of your argument vs speed. If I put my pen down when you are speaking, you are speaking too quickly. I am looking for sound arguments with clear structure and supporting research.

Anju Vriksha - Tourn Judges

n/a

Ashley Hines - NIU

n/a

Ashton RIos - TxState

n/a

Athena Rodriguez - IVC

n/a

Athena Rodriguez - Tourn Judges

n/a

Autumn Miller - Harding

n/a

Ben Walker - SMSU

n/a

Ben Pyle - UA

n/a

Ben Mann - Lewis & Clark

n/a

Brenna Bretzinger - NIU

n/a

Brent Mitchell - UA

n/a

Caden Haustein - Harding

n/a

Cassy Stierns - St. Cloud State U

n/a

Christina Smith - IVC

n/a

Clare Frances Kennedy - UA

n/a

Collette Blumer - CSUF

n/a

David Trumble - STA

n/a

Derious Braswell - Tourn Judges

n/a

Eli Ballowe - Tourn Judges

n/a

Elizabeth Berthold - Nevada

n/a

Emmy Rains - Jeff State

n/a

Ethan Arbuckle - LEE

n/a

Inderpreet Mushiana - Tourn Judges

n/a

Inderpriet Mushiana - IVC

n/a

Jake Garlock - UA

n/a

Jay Villanueva - Nevada

n/a

Jeff Harkleroad - Tourn Judges

n/a

Jeffrey Stein - Tourn Judges

n/a

Jeremy Hodgson - NOVA

Interpretation:I believe in communication that is respectful. Trigger warnings are welcome but not required. I focus on clear argumentation in interpretation events as well as exigency, developed characters, relationship development and nuanced performance choices. I welcome all types of literature and unique topics as well as breaking convention and taking risks while still respecting the events rules. I appreciate humility, heart and humanity. Clean delivery and time matter in tough rounds. Above all I want genuine human connection. I judge rounds from the second you walk in the room and therefore, I believe good communication is more than just the debate, presentation or performance at hand.

Platform & Limited Prep:I pride in ethos, pathos and logos. Relevancy, solid structure, and impact are all critical. Practicality and accessibility in persuasion is paramount. Lofty proposals should be avoided. Relatability is not always a deal breaker. Timing weighs on my decision heavily. Value your own prep time- please use it. Speaking sooner does not dictate better scoring. I welcome diverse topics and ideas and pride in inclusive language and sensitivity to ones audience. Be boldly yourself up there. I judge rounds from the second you walk in the room and therefore, I believe good communication is more than just the debate, presentation or performance at hand.

Debate:I expect, respect. Attacks or petty banter will lose a competitor the round. Debating one another does not mean judging the round for me, telling me how someone failed to uphold a rule, or telling me why I should vote someone down is not energy well spent. Spend your time justifying your own side of the debate. Competitors should courteously bring flaws in argumentation to the table-not the rules. I will judge you on the merit of your research and argumentation in comparison to your opponent. Speed holds no weight to your rank. I care about emphasis, control, and logic. Students must remain on topic and clearly articulate the tenants they bring forth from the beginning of the debate. Late arguments should be avoided. Anything off topic from the debate itself should be avoided. Weighing mechanisms are appreciated and staying on top of timing is critical. Levity is also appreciated and welcome in modesty. I judge rounds from the second you walk in the room and therefore, I believe good communication is more than just the debate, presentation or performance at hand.

Above all, have fun up there and be supportive of one another.

Jeremy Williams - IVC

n/a

Jess Tischmacher - Harding

n/a

Joe Gantt - Lewis & Clark

 

John Mikolajcik - TCC

n/a

Joshua Roden - Harding

n/a

Judy Santacaterina - NIU

n/a

Justin Wiley - Mt. Hood CC

n/a

Kaitlyn Gonzalez - Mt. SAC

n/a

Kaylee Tegan - Nevada

DEBATE

My debate philosophy is quite simple, I prefer clear, structured arguments about the resolution. I dont enjoy spending the entire round hearing arguments about framework and definitions unless ABSOLUTELY necessary to the round. I also prefer quality arguments over a mass quantity of arguments. I prefer speeches that are slow and easy to understand rather than overloading your opponent and judge with fast arguments. I tend to not vote on dropped arguments unless it is absolutely necessary in the round. With organization, signposting contentions and on-time, brief road maps are preferred.

Most importantly, I expect all competitors to be respectful and civil when debating. I will not tolerate rude competition.

IE

For individual events and speeches, organization is very important. All parts of a speech should be easily identifiable. I am listening to the content of a speech as well as the delivery. Is there eye contact with the judge and audience? Do you know your speech well? Speeches should not be over the time limit.

Ken Ogden - IVC

n/a

Kristella Muvunankiko - IVC

n/a

Kyle Duffy - COC

Ive been judging for the past 8 years and mainly judge I.E. events. Thus, I look for a few key things when it comes to debate:
- Do NOT Spread. I dont consider this a sign of a well thought out argument. More information rarely helps. Choose the best sources and arguments you have. You wont always have time to say everything and thats ok.
- Do NOT speak quickly. A normal, conversational rate is always the most appropriate.
- Absolutely no personal attacks against your opponent. Be respectful.
- Do your best to signpost your topics and follow a logical structure. I do have difficulty following along at times, especially if pacing is quick. So help me out.
- No need for complicated theory positions.
- If you can insert humor into your debate, go for it!
- Please time yourselves. This allows me to focus on your arguments and not the clock.
- Most importantly, have fun and relax! Im friendly and I love to joke around.
At the end, I primarily judge based on two key areas: how well you convinced me that your argument is the correct one via your logic and evidence (how credible do you sound?), and second, your ability to persuade me via your emotional connection to the topic (they really moved me).

Luke Edwards - NIU

n/a

Mackenzie Mattila - NAU

Marianne Vanderbeke - BGSU

n/a

Matt DuPuis - NIU

n/a

Megan Thompson - Tourn Judges

n/a

Mekena Bennett - Fullerton College

n/a

Mike Gray - Troy

n/a

Mishaal Said - Tourn Judges

n/a

Naomi Andrews - TCC

n/a

Natalie Hedberg - UA

n/a

Pam Secklin - St. Cloud State U

n/a

Philip Miller - Harding

n/a

Philip Sharp - Nevada

Phil Sharp- University of Nevada-Reno

I have been a DOF for 15 years. I have coached national champions in a number of different formats. I really enjoy good argumentation and strong clash. A good debate will include two sides being respectful of each other and the audience while battling over the resolution provided. While your delivery and decorum are important aspects of persuasion, your arguments will be the center of my evaluation.
I like it when debaters guide me to the decision they want to read on the ballot rather than being mad that I didn't vote the way the wanted me to. Focus on the criteria dn do ballotwork in the debate, especially in the last speeches.

Rachel Pollock - NIU

n/a

Ric Studer - St. Cloud State U

n/a

Rigo Ruiz - LEE

n/a

River Mishow - Tourn Judges

n/a

Ryan McDonald - PHC

n/a

Scott Wells - St. Cloud State U

n/a

Travis Cornett - Tourn Judges

n/a

Tyler Cole - TxState

n/a

Victor Pantaleoni - Nevada

n/a

Will Jackson - Jeff State

n/a

Zoe-Raven Wianecki - CSUF

n/a