Halpern,+Caitlin


 * Caitlin Halpern**
 * LD Coach, Stuyvesant High School**
 * W.T. Woodson High School class of 2006**
 * Columbia University class of 2009**

I debated for four years at W.T. Woodson High School in northern Virginia. I competed on the national circuit sporadically during my sophomore and junior years and extensively my senior year. I was always a fairly traditional debater and ran primarily positional cases, but I occasionally ran critical positions and theory arguments. Since graduating from high school, I have worked at Victory Briefs for two summers and have coached at Stuyvesant High School for the past three years.

I don’t really care what you run as long as you are clear. That works on two levels: First, I’m fine with speed, but I need to be able to process your arguments as well as literally understand the words coming out of your mouth, so slow down if you are running something confusing or aren’t articulating sufficiently clearly. Second, make the decision calculus explicit. You are welcome to run a case with a traditional value criterion or burden, a priori issues, a kritik, a counterplan, a performative position, or whatever else you can come up with, but I need to you to tell me how to evaluate the round and why your prioritization of arguments/layering is correct. For example, do I look to your kritik/a priori overview/counterplan/topicality arguments before I look to the AC? Why?

Though I am open to voting on any argument, I do have a higher threshold for topicality because I tend to find topicality debates less enjoyable and less substantive. It is easy for me to vote on topicality if you prove real, in-round abuse. It is harder for me to vote on topicality if it is premised on the potential for abuse or the general merit of the affirmative position – in other words, I prefer not to vote on “unnecessary” topicality arguments. I have and will vote on “unnecessary” topicality arguments, but it needs to be very clear and well developed.

As a final note, please be civil. This may sound silly, but I hate how rude and mean debaters sometimes are (i.e. laughing out loud while your opponent is speaking, making snarky comments/faces/gestures to me or to observers, refusing to shake hands, etc.). If you are rude to me or to your opponent, I will tank your speaks.