Regier,+Susan

My name is Susan Regier. My husband is the head coach at Stockdale High School in Bakersfield, CA, and has over 15 years experience being a head forensics coach. I have been his assistant coach for over two years. My daughter, a junior this year, is quite talented in this world we call “Speech and Debate.” Our squad is the current reigning debate Valley Champions in our league.

I have been an educator for over 18 years, currently teaching 6th grade. I love judging/observing Interpretive Events. I have a Bachelor’s Degree in Psychology and a Master’s in Education. I have never been a speech and debate competitor and forensics is still very new to me.

__Speech – Prepared Events __

Much of my decision will be based on one question: “Did you move me?” I always ask this question whether the event is dramatic or humorous. If I am not moved, you may not be winning. Choose your material carefully. Interpretive competitors need to pick pieces/selections that, while impressive, are ones they can “knock out of the park.”

Your voice quality and physical characteristics may enhance or detract from your ability to do this. Don’t be afraid to create large characters; they read more easily to a large audience. Timing is everything in humor; make sure yours works for, not against, you. Pauses can be quite effective in any speech when used appropriately. Work, re-work, and re-re-work your piece to be certain you have no form breaks in your characters; breaks can destroy an otherwise memorable performance.

Follow the rules and watch the clock. I am forgiving if I think the amount of audience laughter/reaction extended the performance slightly beyond the time limit, but you should not rely on this during your preparation. Keep us laughing and don’t be afraid to make us cry, although I am a bit tired of hearing overly dramatic pieces on rape or rape culture. This topic is incredibly overused in our current speeches and in our daily news.

Speaking of news: Don’t be like Fox! (I don’t care what the fox said). I laugh loudly and cry easily. If you can do this, you are on the right track. I love the use of puns (but not overuse) and references to any pop culture during a performance. I am quite accepting of the use of offensive language when it adds to your piece or character(s). I look very hard at blocking and the popping in an out of characters. I am extremely critical in this area.

 I love the artistry involved in speech and have been so impressed by the top competing actors and orators. Overall, time and talent produce the technicalities that make a piece work; as judge, I recognize these things (or lack thereof).

__ Speech - Unprepared Events (Impromptu, IX, and NX) __

I really appreciate humor and use of puns in Impromptu Speeches, if applicable. I prefer all Impromptu Speeches to be quite organized. The speaker doe not need to state what his/her topic is; in fact, I prefer to “learn” what the topic is by how the speaker links his/her main points (I am most impressed when the speaker can give at least three main points linked in some creative way). What impresses me most is how a speaker takes a topic and makes that point comes “alive” with personality and originality. Think “outside the box.” I am impressed when a speaker chooses a topic he/she thinks no one else will choose and "own it.” Poignancy is any topic is preferred and saliency most important. Ha!

For Extemporaneous Events, I want my speakers to go beyond just saying what I expect he/she to say and not just answer the question, but compel/persuade me to believe/trust your thesis/ideas. Providing the judge with a clear thesis and direct organization to the topic will benefit each speaker. It is also expected he/she be as true to his/her files as possible. I expect each speaker to “know their stuff,” and certainly use relevant, reliable and trustworthy sources; providing current (within the last year) citations and know those citations (source and date). A truly experienced IX or NX competitor will state his/her thesis at the start of his/her speech, prove to the judge (me) that he/she has truly analyzed the topic, not merely rehearsed the details of a news story. Each competitor is expected to show his/her ability to research, analyze, and shape his/her ideas into an extremely cohesive speech. Speakers should provide sound reasoning or this judge will not accept his/her arguments. I expect all Extemporaneous competitors to provide me, as the judge, reasons to support his/her thesis on the given topic.

It is not wise for the speaker to make hasty generalizations for any topic - for any speech. Give me some fun and interesting points. I'll listen to them! Make smart choices about the whether or not you are proving a thesis or impacting from it. Be mindful of the verb in the question.