Haglin,+Kathryn


 * Background:** I debated at Forest Lake High School in Minnesota for three years, graduating in 2009. I debated mostly on the local Minnesota circuit and attended national circuit tournaments as well. I have a BA in political science from the University of Minnesota and will be pursuing my PhD in political science at Texas A&M starting Fall 2013. I currently coach at Roseville Area High School.


 * Framework**: I want to hear some sort of weighing mechanism that sets up the round for me. I tend to think most values collapse down into both sides trying to achieve something “good” and I generally get bored listening to debaters talk about values. Just give me a way to weigh things and then actually weigh arguments in the round! Don't make me have to weigh for you...that's judge intervention and I will avoid it if at all possible. Rounds where I am forced to intervene make me mad.

I listen to **K's, counter plans, DAs, theory, plans,** whatever you want to run. While I have done a good bit of reading on some philosophers/thinkers and, accordingly, will be more familiar with their writing, it's worth noting that I have yet to find the time in my life to read all the philosophy that exists, study certain significant philosophers and thinkers in depth, and/or read all the theory back-files written. This means that you will probably have to slow down a bit. __I don’t vote on things I don’t understand, so the more dense the literature, the slower you should go.__ HOWEVER, you should also know that I am not stupid. Over time, I've found that people interpret "I haven't read all the philosophy" or "I didn't run theory myself" to mean "I can't understand theory/philosophy, don't like it, and will instantly drop you the moment you approach the subject." Just because I won't necessarily be reminiscing about how I felt when I first read your author's book/ground-breaking article does not mean I can't understand anything they wrote. Just dial the speed back a little bit and I will happily listen to the argument. I enjoy hearing new, clever, and interesting positions over the same stock cases I've heard a million times before, so feel free to do something different. It's also important to know that shouting things like "PICs bad!" will not be followed by me filling in the blanks for you. While I know what your argument is, that does not mean you don't have to do the work of actually making and justifying the argument. This goes for all arguments you make in the round.


 * Speed**: I can handle most speed, but am not the best flower. Be sure to slow down for tags and authors. I will yell clear or slow once, maybe twice, but if I still can’t understand you, I’ll just put my pen down and look bored. It’s your job to regulate your own performance. If you look up at me and I appear confused and have ceased flowing, you might want to do something different. I'm pretty expressive, so it's to your advantage to look at me for feedback.

In your **final speech**, I want to hear specifically labeled and //prioritized// voters where you tell me how I evaluate the arguments. Layering the round makes things much more clear. Debaters that can effectively go "big picture" in the last speech are becoming more and more rare, so doing actual crystallizing makes me happy.


 * Pet peeves:** I'm getting more and more annoyed with how debaters make extensions. The first word of any speech should not be "extend"...especially when there are responses to the argument! I will not extend an argument or card until you have sufficiently responded to the arguments made by your opponent against that particular part of the case. These responses should be made as pert of the extension or before the extension. This means you should not say extend and then answer the arguments...take out the ink first, then extend. To me, extending when there are clearly arguments specific to that evidence on the flow without first answering said arguments is extending through ink and I will not make those extensions.


 * Speaker Points:** I usually fall between 27 and 29 on points. 30’s are only given to exceptional rounds and/or debaters...I probably only give out about three per season. I will hack away at your points if you are blatantly offensive and/or rude to your opponent.


 * Other FAQs:** I don't care if you sit, use your phone as a timer, or read off a laptop. If you are completely paperless, make sure your opponent has access.

Remember to have fun and feel free to ask any questions before the round!