|
2003 -2004
LD Judge Philosophies
Home Page
Judge Name:
Yoly Muller
Coach:
Yes
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 4
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 0
Philosphy:
Values and philosophy are most important
Rate_of_Delivery:
3
Value_Premise:
4
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 4
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
2
Use_of_Evidence:
3
Focus_on_Debate: 3
Persuasive_Communication: 4
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Delivery
General_Comments:
___________________________________________________________________________________
IF THIS IS YOURS, PLEASE SEND YOUR NAME!!
Judge_Name:
Coach:
Yes
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Yes
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 12
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 42
Philosphy:
Values and philosophy are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
5--Very important
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 4
Approach_to_Resolution: 2
Use_of_Example:
4
Use_of_Evidence:
3
Focus_on_Debate:
3
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Appropriate elocution
General_Comments:
"Road maps"
___________________________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Rob Alvarez
Coach:
Yes
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 0-1
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 2
Philosphy:
Direct clash/line-by-line debate is most important
Rate_of_Delivery:
3
Value_Premise:
3
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 3
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
4
Use_of_Evidence:
4
Focus_on_Debate:
2
Persuasive_Communication: 3
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Clear systematic communication. Tell me where you are going and follow
your path. Attack the arguments not the person. When you are up
against a novice show compassion.
General_Comments:
___________________________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Justin Bangs
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
Yes
LD_in_HS:
Yes
College_Debater:
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community: Yes
Number_of_Years_Judging: 3
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 40+
Philosphy:
Direct clash/line-by-line debate is most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
5--Very important
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 5--Very Important
Approach_to_Resolution:3
Use_of_Example:
5--Very important
Use_of_Evidence: 3
Focus_on_Debate: 2
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
N/A
General_Comments:
N/A
___________________________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
David Reed
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
Yes
College_Debater:
Yes
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 1
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 40 b/c of doub. fl.
Philosphy:
Values and philosophy are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 2
Value_Premise:
5--Very important
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 5--Very Important
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
5--Very important
Use_of_Evidence:
5--Very important
Focus_on_Debate:
5--Big Picture
Persuasive_Communication: 4
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Rate of speech, confidence level, character displayed through pitch, fluency,
correct use of grammar, overall approach, but not particularly in that order
General_Comments:
As long as I and the competitor can fully understand what is being said, I don't
look down on competitors who have a fast rate of speech. I just understand what
it was like, through my past experience, to go into a room and
be blown away because what is being said is barely understandable.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
David Reed
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
Yes
College_Debater:
Yes
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community: Yes
Number_of_Years_Judging: 1
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: about 40 b/c of doub. fl.
Philosphy:
Values and philosophy are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 2
Value_Premise:
5--Very important
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 5--Very Important
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
5--Very important
Use_of_Evidence:
5--Very important
Focus_on_Debate:
4
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Rate of speech, argumental organization, character that is revealed through the
use of tone and pitch, confidence, correct use of grammar, but not particularly
in that order
General_Comments:
As long as both the competitor and I can understand what is being said, and
constructive arguments are made I have no "real" paradigm. I do pay attention to
how knowledgeable and prepared each competitor is about the resolution.
Don't be close minded to allow your though process to except only what is
stated in your case. I feel that LD is as much a learning experience as it is a
competition.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Steven A. Rissman
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Yes
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 1
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 12-15
Philosphy:
Speaking skills are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
3
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 3
Approach_to_Resolution: 5--Pragmatic
Use_of_Example:
5--Very important
Use_of_Evidence:
5--Very important
Focus_on_Debate:
4
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Good analysis, examples and preparation.
General_Comments:
___________________________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Dean Rhoads
Coach:
Yes
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 20
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 40
Philosphy:
Select one of the following
Rate_of_Delivery:
1--Slow and deliberate
Value_Premise:
3
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 5--Very Important
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
3
Use_of_Evidence:
3
Focus_on_Debate:
5--Big Picture
Persuasive_Communication: 3
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Clarity, lack of abuse, impact
General_Comments:
Summer sunsets and long walks on the beach, or that not being available, clear
clash, focused argumentation on a handful of important points, and a clear
understanding about what they matter.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Steve Karlovic
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Yes
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 2
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 5
Philosphy:
Direct clash/line-by-line debate is most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
5--Very important
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 5--Very Important
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
3
Use_of_Evidence:
5--Very important
Focus_on_Debate:
2
Persuasive_Communication: 4
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Eloquence, logic, strength of cross examination (including leading questions),
not dropping points.
General_Comments:
I enjoy philosophical arguments, but seldom find a well constructed value
premise and criterion that are logical and related to the point. Without
this, philosophy is irrelevant. I then focus on the strength of the
evidence and the
clash and response.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
John Thorsen
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Yes
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 1
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 15
Philosphy:
Speaking skills are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
4
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 4
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
3
Use_of_Evidence:
4
Focus_on_Debate:
2
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
The debaters should speak clearly and persuasively. Covering the flow is
very important. Road maps are appreciated.
General_Comments:
The debaters should maintain a courteous attitude at all times. I am okay
with some speed in the rate of delivery if understandable. I may not be
able to keep up with the concepts if debaters are spreading.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Melody Tarro
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community: Yes
Number_of_Years_Judging: 1
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 60
Philosphy:
Direct clash/line-by-line debate is most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
5--Very important
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 5--Very Important
Approach_to_Resolution: 2
Use_of_Example:
4
Use_of_Evidence:
4
Focus_on_Debate:
3
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Lincoln-Douglas Debate is a communication event. Persuasiveness is a
necessity!
General_Comments:
In general, debates must focus on the core values. One card or a single
example will not win a round. Focus on the line-by-line, but be able to
bring the argumentation together so that you persuade me of your stance.
Values and crystallization are key, but don't drop the bigger arguments that
provey your points.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Alan Rubin
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
Yes
College_Debater:
Yes
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 1 year
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 4
Philosphy:
Speaking skills are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 2
Value_Premise:
5--Very important
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 5--Very Important
Approach_to_Resolution: 5--Pragmatic
Use_of_Example:
3
Use_of_Evidence:
5--Very important
Focus_on_Debate:
5--Big Picture
Persuasive_Communication: 4
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
When it comes to speaker points I base my decision on both analysis,
argumentation, and style of the speaker.
General_Comments:
I am judge who will come into the round unbiased on any resolution. If a
competitor makes claim they must have evidence to back it up. I do flow, but if
a competitor drops a minor argument I do not immediately give them the loss. I
do not make arguments for debaters, instead I base my decision on the arguments
made by the competitors.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Theresa Price
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Yes
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 1
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 20+
Philosphy:
Values and philosophy are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 2
Value_Premise:
2
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 5--Very Important
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
4
Use_of_Evidence:
5--Very important
Focus_on_Debate:
3
Persuasive_Communication: 4
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Converage of all arguments that are important to the standard, speaking skills,
and knowledge of topic matter.
General_Comments:
___________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Jackson Mumey
Coach:
Yes
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Yes
Parent:
Yes
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 6+
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 35
Philosphy:
Direct clash/line-by-line debate is most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 4
Value_Premise:
2
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 2
Approach_to_Resolution: 4
Use_of_Example:
4
Use_of_Evidence:
5--Very important
Focus_on_Debate:
2
Persuasive_Communication: 4
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
quality of the analysis; ability to strategically debate the round (go for
important arguments and knowing what to drop)
General_Comments:
I'm a former policy debater and now as a debate coach I find myself in more L-D
rounds than I ever expected to hear. The thing that is most difficult for me as
a judge is to hear competing oratory with little clash or an undefined value
premise/criterion on which I am asked to make a decision. I tend to favor the
more technically proficient debater in a round where there is no clear calculus
for a decision.
___________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Paul L. Gaba
Coach:
Yes
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 4
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 5
Philosphy:
Values and philosophy are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
3
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 3
Approach_to_Resolution: 5--Pragmatic
Use_of_Example:
4
Use_of_Evidence:
5--Very important
Focus_on_Debate:
2
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Too often I've heard LDers totally "miss the boat" in CX or rebuttals, with the
end result being poor argumentation and lapses in logic and reasoning. To me,
this is often where the debate is won or lost (and yes, many more have been LOST
then WON), because you ignore the obvious lapses in logic and philosophy.
I know judges are not supposed to make decisions independent of the information
and arguments presented in rounds (and hopefully we don't), but we are able to
penalize you for those lapses.
General_Comments:
Logic backed up by evidence is a selling point; your AC/NC arguments should be
well-conceived and researched. While I indicated above that "values and
philosophy are most important," that was only because I had to choose an option;
I believe that LD is a communications event, and that speaking skills plus
nonverbal skills - eye contact, body language, confidence, etc. - are all
equally vital.
___________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Emelson
Coach:
Yes
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Yes
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 10 +
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: none
Philosphy:
Speaking skills are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
4
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 4
Approach_to_Resolution: 2
Use_of_Example:
3
Use_of_Evidence:
2
Focus_on_Debate:
4
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
More speaker points should be awarded to the student who presents fully
developed arguments which focus on the implications of the speaker's
conclusions and his ability to employ critical thinking skills during cross
examination.
General_Comments:
Speakers who use persuasive language in a highly
articulate manner,at a reasonable rate,make this event enjoyable. Students who
are able to develop sound arguments to support their position make the process
worthy of the time.
___________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Jason Crespo
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community: Yes
Number_of_Years_Judging: 0
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 0
Philosphy:
Speaking skills are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
3
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 3
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
4
Use_of_Evidence:
3
Focus_on_Debate:
3
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Clear, articulate, eloquent
General_Comments:
__________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Dan Lewis
Coach:
Yes
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community:
Assistant
Principal
Number_of_Years_Judging: 4
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 30
Philosphy:
Direct clash/line-by-line debate is most important
Rate_of_Delivery:
5--Very rapid
Value_Premise:
3
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 3
Approach_to_Resolution: 5--Pragmatic
Use_of_Example:
3
Use_of_Evidence:
5--Very important
Focus_on_Debate:
3
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Understandable, common sense approach supported by evidence and arguments.
General_Comments:
I like clash in debate. I like well researched rounds.
__________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Lawrence Steinberg
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Yes
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 4
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 10+
Philosphy:
Speaking skills are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
5--Very important
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 3
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
3
Use_of_Evidence:
5--Very important
Focus_on_Debate:
3
Persuasive_Communication: 3
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Clear speaking voice, not too fast, intelligently presented. I pay particualr
attetnion to the quality of questions asked on the cross-exam.
General_Comments:
_________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
James Ferraro
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
Yes
College_Debater:
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 3
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: >20 ?
Philosphy:
Select one of the following
Rate_of_Delivery: 2
Value_Premise:
4
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 5--Very Important
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
3
Use_of_Evidence:
3
Focus_on_Debate:
Select one of the following:
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
General_Comments:
_________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Andrea Shwayri
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
Yes
College_Debater:
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 4
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 30+
Philosphy:
Select one of the following
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
3
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 5--Very Important
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
3
Use_of_Evidence:
3
Focus_on_Debate:
Select one of the following:
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
General_Comments:
_________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Bills
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Yes
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 1
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 1
Philosphy:
Speaking skills are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
3
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 3
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
3
Use_of_Evidence:
3
Focus_on_Debate:
3
Persuasive_Communication: 3
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
speaking skills
General_Comments:
I respect all professional speaking styles and approachs to Lincoln-Douglas
debate and do not see a need for judge adaptation in this event.
_________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Heinemann
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Yes
Volunteer_or_Community: Yes
Number_of_Years_Judging: 3
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 0
Philosphy:
Direct clash/line-by-line debate is most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 2
Value_Premise:
2
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 3
Approach_to_Resolution: 4
Use_of_Example:
5--Very important
Use_of_Evidence:
2
Focus_on_Debate:
4
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Logic and clarity of points made in case and argument and solid communication
skills (e.g. presence, enunciation, audibility, self-assurance)
General_Comments:
Respect is given to debaters who listen well and respond to points made in
opponent's case. Of course, presentation of a solid insightful constructive is
also essential.
_________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Ashley Steinberg
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
Yes
College_Debater:
Yes
Parent:
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 3
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 12
Philosphy:
Direct clash/line-by-line debate is most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
5--Very important
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 5--Very Important
Approach_to_Resolution: 5--Pragmatic
Use_of_Example:
2
Use_of_Evidence:
1--Not necessary
Focus_on_Debate:
3
Persuasive_Communication: 4
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Coherency and fluidity of speech, while important, are not as important as
substantive argumentation. I like to hear crisp, concise refutation to
demonstrate that the debater has actually listened to the contentions of his
opponent. I am suspicious of frequent jargon usage if it cloaks the crux of the
argument -- jargon should be a helpful tool, not a substitute for debate.
________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Jeffrey Perelman
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Yes
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: one
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 4
Philosphy:
Values and philosophy are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
3
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 3
Approach_to_Resolution: 3
Use_of_Example:
4
Use_of_Evidence:
4
Focus_on_Debate:
4
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
Delivery, organization, construction, efective cross examination, summation
General_Comments:
________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Dave Larsen
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Yes
Volunteer_or_Community: Yes
Number_of_Years_Judging: 2
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 10
Philosphy:
Direct clash/line-by-line debate is most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 3
Value_Premise:
3
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 4
Approach_to_Resolution: 4
Use_of_Example:
4
Use_of_Evidence:
5--Very important
Focus_on_Debate:
2
Persuasive_Communication: 5--Very important
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
1. Content - Concept formulation
2. Content - Logical thought flow
3. No spreading
4. Minimal hemming and hawing ("um")
General_Comments:
Obvious preference will always be for the Debater who addresses all of his/her
opponent's points, who has irrefutable points of his/her own, who speaks
clearly and calmly, and who shows respect to his/her opponent.
________________________________________________________________
Judge_Name:
Edward Gray
Coach:
Assistant_Coach:
LD_in_HS:
College_Debater:
Parent:
Yes
Volunteer_or_Community:
Number_of_Years_Judging: 1
Number_of_Rounds_This_Year: 8
Philosphy:
Values and philosophy are most important
Rate_of_Delivery: 2
Value_Premise:
2
Use_of_Value_Criteria: 2
Approach_to_Resolution: 4
Use_of_Example:
4
Use_of_Evidence:
4
Focus_on_Debate:
4
Persuasive_Communication: 4
B1:
Submit
Speaker_Points:
The speaker believes (at least appears to believe) in what they are saying.
They are passionate about their philosophy and provide realistic and valid
(with examples) support for their philosophy.
General_Comments:
Strict adherence to a 'canned' format is not valuable to me. They need to
desmonstrate they understand the topic and have good reasoning in their
philosphy.
|