Hernandez,+Sari

I’m a former high school policy debater from Whitney M. Young. And I am currently the assistant coach and English teacher for U Chicago Lab High School. This will be my fourth year teaching, but first year coaching. I was a K debater my varsity years, though I became much more flexible/policy (on the aff) my senior year. So I don’t really have any prejudices towards any type of argument.
 * background: **

As mentioned above, I don’t have any arguments that you should “avoid” while I’m judging. I will vote and listen to anything. It’s all up to you to persuade me (and crush the other team). I will admit though, that as a teacher, I do have a biased belief that participating in debate provides education (and education is good). So if you’re arguing edu bad, make sure you explain why this type of debate is problematic for the type of education we gain and why I should care. With that said, I REALLY enjoy hearing arguments that criticize and question policy debate itself (e.g. role of the ballot, satire affs, identity affs, etc.). My speaker point range is 27-30, with a median of 28. Please put me on the email chain, even if I’m just observing: ms.sarihernandez@gmail.com  Also, please don't spread your blocks the same way you spread the rest of your cards.
 * Approach: **

I really enjoy performance and kritik debates. I like well-done k overviews, with a developed link analysis (the more specific the better). Please make sure you’re telling a consistent story throughout your K. I should know what the K is before the 2nr; if I don't understand it until the last speech, that's probably not good for your team. Also, please do not simply use jargon terms/phrases without any explanation. Depending on the K/author my understanding of the terms you use will vary. And you want me to be as informed as possible in order to be make a sound decision. If I am unfamiliar with the argument you are making, I will prioritize your explanation (it is up to the other team to challenge it).
 * kritiks, etc. **

I’ll vote on either. But, if you plan on going for T or theory, I strongly suggest making that a significant portion of your 2nr, rather than just a snippet of it. If you are going to do something other than the “traditional” type of debate, you should be ready to defend it through framework and explain why the education you provide is better. With regards to theory, ideally I'd like for you to present a persuasive in-round abuse story, or explain why setting this precedent is bad for debate. I do vote on theory, just give me pen time if you want me to vote on it.
 * topicality/framework/ theory **

Just like the K, you have to have a good story and impact analysis. PICs are fine, so long as you make it clear why it's significantly different from the aff.
 * disads/cps **

Paint a picture! Make it clear how these events connect and what the world would be like under the K, Aff, CP, etc. A good impact analysis goes a VERY long way! And don't forget confidence (ethos)
 * how to win my ballot: **