Zeigler,+Eric

Experience: Eric Zeigler has coached LD and PF Debate at Shikellamy High School for eight years. He did LD in high school all four years. He has judged at the Yale invitational as well as both CFL and NFL Nationals. He attended both Susquehanna and Wilkes Universities. He has judged for eight years and averages well over 50 rounds every year.

Personal Philosophy: Topicality is crucial in debate, while a debater may bring up a creative point or piece of evidence, that doesn't mean it will weigh in the debate round if it is not topical. While I abhor terms like "offense" and "defense" I recognize that a debater should not only defend their case, but put out evidence refuting their opponent. In LD debate we are dealing with a values based debate so, we should have **evidence besides emphircal facts** and figures and a debater would do __well to use philopshy__ to show why something "ought" to be a certain way. Performance is a part of debate. Debaters should __be able to communicate effectively__ and **not just speed thru a round**. It is the __quality of the evidence, NOT the amount of evidence__ that wins a debate case. I do not support the use of counterplans in LD. A critique could work in LD, BUT I have seen very few supported effectively, so this should be done with extreme caution. Avoid using jargon, in the real world people don't use "cards" they use evidence. Speed should be like you were giving a speech, not selling at an auction. Debaters who use philsophy in LD have the advantage because they can prove what is suppose to be and not what merely is in the real world.