Rick+Ewart

Rick Ewart

I have been a high school social studies teacher (American Government, World, US and European History at all levels including AP) for 14 years and this is my second year as a debate coach at my high school. I enjoy the academic competitiveness of debate and look forward to solid arguments based on reliable evidence, well thought-out attacks and intelligent inquisition. My background and interests in political science and history certainly are important to consider when you argue in front of me. So, while opinions can be biased, facts cannot - so please don’t mix up the two. It is annoying. In short, and to no surprise considering my background, I consider myself a “ Policymaker” judge. A s such, I vote for the side that presents the best practical policy option. I tend to vote on thoroughness & comprehension of the plan vs. the DA’s/CP’s etc., and am considerably less likely to vote on K’s or T arguments all things being even. Be sure to provide framework, roadmaps (and follow them!), be prepared when time is called and be respectful - or you lose speaker points. I do not want to do a lot of work to determine a winner – the debate should do that or you haven’t done your job of telling me why you should win and backing that rhetoric up with performance. Finally, well supported and defended arguments always tend to have greater weight on my decisions. Specific: ** **Speed** – While spreading is part of policy debate and should be used to challenge your opponents during the round, I would strongly encourage speakers to clearly state your tags, authors and vital text. I will call “speed” repeatedly if you are incomprehensible. If you ignore it and continue I will ignore your speech in return. **T** – While a vital part of debate to address (and readdress if necessary) unless one team completely drops a major and valid argument here it is unlikely I will vote on it. Please don’t simply give me 20 definitions for the same word. I am not a philologist and I don’t want to spend the day looking at a dictionary. **K’s -** I have read, experienced and am familiar with a number of common K’s and generally have to say I find them hard to vote on especially if only used exclusively. If I feel a team is simply using a K to avoid the entire debate I begin to question their preparation. I know everyone has generic K files and it is smart to use them at times, but please don’t leave the perception with me that it is all you bring to the debate unless it a knockout type of punch. Note: I believe capitalism works in general so I find it puzzling that people think one hour can change my perception especially after I tell them this! **Time** – understand everyone is under the same restraints and you are expected to follow all rules regarding prep time, start time etc.. **CX –** I like open cx and a good but respectful clash. While I do not judge cx directly, I certainly am listening/hoping that good and strategic questions are asked, answers provided and basic strategy is developed through the use of cx. Confidence in your position is often exhibited clearly in a cx. It is a great time to preview an attack angle for me…but please don’t just let something said in cx completely go if your opponent made a mistake. **Cards** - I expect a competitive opponent to challenge cards and dispute evidence if appropriate as they have a better opportunity to view them. I'll only call for a card if it is contested and is relevant to my decision. Please indicate somehow when a card ends and analytics begin or you’re moving onto another card. **Speaker points** - My speaker points will likely range in the 26-30 range, where 26 is likely the lowest I will go (unless “unsportsmanlike”) and 30 is "the best speaker I'm likely to hear at this tournament."
 * Background: **
 * General: **