Shields,+Jharick

Hello, my name is Jharick Shields and I am the assistant debate coach at St. Andrews #|Episcopal School, Ridgeland, MS. I have debated 4 years of #|Policy/LD in high school (I couldn’t decide). I also have coached Policy in #|Wisconsin and currently coach LD. LD in Mississippi is quite conservative/traditional; however understand that I am not that way. If I had to classify myself as a judge, I would call myself a judge of argument. I avoid calling myself tabs because I do believe that my experiences matter, and there are some things I just cannot tolerate. I will listen to anything that isn't offensive and do my best to keep an open mind when I evaluate. You just have to make sure that you do your job and persuade me that your argument matters. Claim, data, warrant. Simple as pie. I evaluate your arguments based on how much work you put on them. Blips and spikes that aren't extended with reasoning or evidence do not resonate well with me. I will hear them, and vote for them. However, you will work for it. I do believe that if I find the argument weak, far-fetched, or blippy, minimal work from your opponent can sway me. However, if no work has been done by the opponent, I will grant it(to what degree shall be at my discretion).

I am a fan of explanations. I can deal with speed to a degree, however you should be communicating what your arguments mean and how they impact the debate. If you are going to read philosophy or critical literature, you should be able to contextualize how the evidence functions in the debate round. Extensions are very important to me. When you extend, explaining how that evidence gains offense or mitigates offense of the opponent is really meaningful in my evaluation. Logos is critical, but your ethos as a debater should also be important. Debaters who miscut, misinterpret, and don't comprehend their evidence lack credibility with me. Finally, comparing impacts is HUGE!! I get it, global war is bad. I also get that oppression is awful. However, I do think that you need to sell me on why I should not risk your opponent's impacts. Long term vs Short term is important. I will risk long term conflict, if I can get a short term benefit that outweighs. Do that sort of work better than your opponent and the ballot is yours.

On speed, I will say #|clear one time. Then look and see if I am flowing. If the pen is down, you slow down. I'm not big on theory debates, mainly because I lack #|experience debating them. I would say that you have to show some level of abuse in order to go for theory with me.

Speaks: I award speaks based on clarity, ability to #|handle the flow in an organized manner, wit/charisma, fun cross-x, and my ability to take something meaningful away from you as a debater. I will #|start at 26 and go up based on the work you do. If I go under 26, then your behavior in this round needed to be brought to your(and your coach's) attention. My ballot will explain those details. I love fun in debate, I even have a high threshold for a lot of things that make debate "fun". However, there is a point where we are all representatives of quite a distinguished group of young people and should act accordingly. I look forward to judging your rounds!

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask. Good luck and have fun!!