Johnson,+Jen

New as of 12/4/2014: As there are always new debaters, I have chosen to add the following information about myself to help folks in having some reference points to place me in time and space and to learn more about me if they would like. Additionally, as this is a professional community, I have decided to include parts of my CV which is followed by my judging philosophy.

__Education __ PhD Candidate, English Education, Teachers College, Columbia University, May 2016 Masters of Arts in Media, Culture and Communication, New York University, May 2011 Bachelor of Arts in Ethnic Studies, University of California at Berkeley, May 2001

__Faculty Positions __ Adjunct Professor, Arts & Humanities, Teachers College, Columbia University, 2014-Present Adjunct Professor, School of Education, Manhattanville College, 2012-Present Research & Development Associate, Hip-Hop Education Center, 2014-Present

__Research Assistantships/Fellowships __ Graduate Research Fellow, Institute for Urban and Minority Education at Teachers College, 2011-Present Graduate Teaching Assistant to Dr. Ernest Morrell, Teachers College, Columbia, 2012 Hip-Hop Education Fellow, New York University, 2009-2011 Kids on Color Research Assistant to Dr. Charles McIllwain, NYU, 2011 International Youth Media Research Assistant to Dr. JoEllen, NYU, 2010-2011

__<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Debate Teaching Positions __ <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Instructor/Coach, ACORN Community High School, 2011-2014 <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Instructor/Coach, Metropolitan Corporate Academy, 2009-2011 <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Institute Instructor, National Debate Education Project, 2002-2007 <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Institute Instructor, Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle, 2006 <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Instructor/Coach, Richmond High School (California), 2001-2003 <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Instructor/Coach, John F. Kennedy High School (California), 1999-2001 <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Institute Instructor, Bates College National Debate Institute, 2003-2004 <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Institute Instructor, Stanford National Debate Institute, 1999-2003 <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Institute Instructor, California National Forensics Institute, 1998-2002 <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Institute Instructor, Southern California Urban Debate League, 2000 <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Institute Instructor, National High School Forensics Consortium, 1998-1999

__<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Executive and Administrative Positions __ Founding Director, Teachers College Columbia University Debate Institute, 2012-Present Executive Director, Seattle Debate Foundation, 2004-2009 Program Coordinator, Seattle Debate Foundation, 2003-2004 Program Director, Bay Area Urban Debate, 2001-2003

__<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Judging Philosophy __ <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Like Chuck D said about Hip-Hop: "come as you are". If I'm your judge, I believe the game is yours. You as debaters should determine the arguments, the procedures, and the framework of the round. I will listen to all arguments and modes of presentation and will vote for the arguments that are the most persuasive (by virtue of the way in which the debaters argue them) and for the team that best explains the criteria for and reasons why they should win (i.e. clearly breaking down the impact calculus, methodology, framework etc).

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Despite my love for critical arguments I will listen to anything; I do love a good rumble. When I debated, I could get down with kritiks, counterplans, topicality and disads (and if I was Neg they would often all be in the 1NC, but not the 2NR). I will vote on your argument if you win it: explain the warrants, significance, weight (in relation to your opponents' best arguments), and evidentiary support (this could be from a wide-variety of texts [audio, print, visual, dance, academic, organic, personal narratives, music etc.]; it's up to you to explain the qualifications and reasons to prefer your evidence). The bottom line is this is your game and I don't believe that I should be in the back of the room judging debates if my lens for the round privileges a particular argument, style, framework, advocacy, ideology, etcetera: this is a debate--your debate. At the same time, a blank slate is not really a reality. Judging is subjective and we all have a sociocultural location from which we come into this activity. If you have any specific questions, please ask prior to round. I will do my best to be fair and consistent in adjudicating. That said, my background will inform what lens I will use to adjudicate the round if you don't provide me with an alternate conceptual/theoretical framework. What this means is that I have a cultural studies epistemology and I find footing in critical theories of race, gender, class, and education, which would contend that education should be the practice of freedom.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">That said, here are some suggestions/clarifying points:

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">For those critical ("critical" is being used broadly here) teams that do pref me, here's something for y'all: your arguments are more persuasive when they are articulated with historical and temporally recent and relevant examples. If we are at tournament in the wake of a major event, I find it compelling when debaters incorporate those events into their analysis. The key here is to make your criticism come to life. In running arguments provide me with references to real-life situations/culture/movements etc....and perhaps pay homage to those who have inspired your argument...there are a lot of folks out there whom we forget have tremendously impacted our worldview and advocacy. If your work is derived from their work, perhaps pay homage and due respect, and I mean this to say it's beyond the evidence. Mind you I'm not asking for some kind of tribute album; but if you're unclear as to what I mean, please ask.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">New note: (As I edit this philosophy, I would be remiss not to mention how I am thinking about Tamir Rice and the lack of indictment in the Eric Garner and Michael Brown cases. To be sure, I do not think that these cases are anomalies, however, as they are preceded by a historical legacy of gratuitous racial violence and struggle.)

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">When debating framework or any procedural position, please provide and assess examples of cases, arguments, performances, ontologies, epistemologies etc. that are included or excluded under your interpretation or your opponents'.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Not all dropped arguments are winning arguments. Clearly you should capitalize on dropped arguments when they occur, but don't just assume that's a win and shadow extend. Extend the warrants and the significance of the dropped argument. If you don't debate line-by-line, you still need to be responsive to your opponents' arguments and tell me why I should view the round holistically or why certain arguments trump all others.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">2NRs & 2ARs: going for every offensive argument is not usually a wise strategy. Know what you are winning and go for it. I know sometimes people are afraid of putting "all their eggs in one basket", but often times teams go to the other extreme and can't adequately cover/explain any of their positions when they go for everything. I often find myself unable to vote Negative when the 2NR goes for everything.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Check out the acoustics in the room to see if this affects the sound/clarity of your voice. I suggest doing a mic check prior to the round. This mic check is also important if you are playing any audio.

Open cross ex, ins and outs, different use of prep time, are all okay with me. I don't take prep for flashing.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">In general, respect is important to me: respect for myriad cultures, literacies, and linguistics. Your argument can come from whatever socio-economic, political, or cultural perspective, but open and/or intentional disrespect will leave me feeling very uncomfortable and will be reflected in speaker points. That said, I do get irony, you don't have to be Cobert; just be really good at it. I fundamentally believe that debate is a site for us to feel safe to learn about the world around us, from multiple perspectives, experiences, linguistics, and forms of communication. We may disagree, but we can do it respectfully and compassionately. Basically what I'm saying is that I don't want anyone to feel that they have to check their cultures, indigenous knowledge, languages, and identities at the door in order to debate.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">One last caveat is that although I value all forms of "evidence" (personal, organic, academic) in terms of the personal, I don't expect you to put yourself on blast. You may speak from your social location, but not to the extent that you feel uncomfortable, or feel like your privacy is violated. You decide who gets to know what about you.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Lastly, I believe that we are all in this activity because we have love for it on some level. Let that show in your rounds and in the way you treat your opponents and everyone else at the tournament. I pledge to do my very best to be fair, respectful and to contribute to the education of all folks in the round. If you have any questions, just ask before the round.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Peace, love, & Justice,

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Jen