Stewart,+Nathan

Nathan Stewart Experience: B.S. Communication Studies (Illinois State University) Current Masters Student (Illinois State University)  4 years high school debate - Lincoln-Douglas (Pontiac Township High School, Il) 8 years high school judging - Lincoln-Douglas, Policy, and Public Forum (all divisions) 3 years high school coaching - Lincoln-Douglas and Public Forum (University High School) 2 years college debate - Lincoln Douglas (Illinois State University) 1 year college debate - CEDA/NDT (Illinois State University) 1 year college coaching – CEDA/NDT (Illinois State University) Rounds Judged On Nov.-Dec. Topic – 17 (including 3 out rounds)  General: My paradigm when judging debate is founded on principles of the tabula rasa approach. I avoid judge intervention like the plague. Specifically, I rely on the debaters to create and defend the framework in which they want me to vote. However, since this is a rhetorical communication event, I believe that the audience (me) is the most important component of the interaction. I definitely have preferences concerning the style and types of arguments that are run in a round. It is in your best interests to accommodate your style to me since I am the one that makes the ultimate decision. You will find my preferences below.  Speed: Speed is fine IF YOU CAN DO IT WELL! I think speed in LD is a PRIVALAGE. If you decide to use speed I will evaluate your speaking ability (speaker points) much more aggressively. I do this because, while I’m not completely opposed to speed in LD, I find that competitors utilize this tactic while sacrificing articulation and a persuasive tone. It is possible to articulate and be persuasive with speed, but most students do not retain these qualities.  Theory and Definition Debate: <span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">I do not like to hear extensive theory debate in LD rounds. I believe that there is not enough time in an LD round to have good, meaningful extension. I also do not appreciate theory debate at the expense of substantive debate. If it is ABSOLUTELY necessary that you run theory, make sure that you identify the issue, explain the abuse, if necessary explain how you don’t link to the abuse (specifically in definition debate), and impact the abuse to debate itself. In order to win a theory/definition debate you have to extend your impacts, and if appropriate, weigh your impacts against your opponents. Seem like a lot to do in 13-20 minutes? That’s because it is and why it should not be done in LD. <span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> <span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Kritiks: <span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">I’ll be very up front about this issue; I think kritiks SHOULD NOT be run in LD debate. At the bare minimum, kritiks are extra-topical. Since there is no status quo to uphold in LD debate, the burden of both Aff and Neg are unique. Applying the same burden to Aff and Neg that policy uses DOES NOT work in LD. The kritik destroys stasis that is established by the value claim in the resolution. This undermines the entire activity. That being said, I have voted for kritiks. I typically express my disgust in having to vote for a kritik, but I have voted for them. Despite my abhorrence for kritiks, I stay true to my non-interventionist philosophy. If you must run a kritik, make sure that you argue why your argument should take primacy over topical debate. What is the immediacy inherent in your position that requires me to evaluate your arguments instead of the topic? <span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> <span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">Value and Criterion/Standard Debate: <span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">If a more traditional framework is established for evaluation, the criterion is the threshold that you must achieve to have access to your value. Whoever can better establish and defend a clear method for determining how/when the criterion has been achieved, and can establish and defend the primacy of her or his value, will likely win the round. <span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> <span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">If you have any SPECIFIC questions, I’ll be more than happy to answer them before the round.