Roberts,Kevin

Kevin Roberts

School: Northland Christian School

Background: I did policy debate in both high school and college. I've been the head coach of Northland Christian School in Houston for nine years. Given my policy background, I tend to prefer arguments that are empirical in nature as opposed to solely philosophical.

Philosophy:

In addition to offering a standard through which to view arguments, I think the best debaters are those who not only extend and talk about their own arguments but those who are able to be comparative throughout the debate and explain which arguments they are winning, which arguments they are losing and then explain ultimately why they are winning the debate. If the debaters do not compare arguments, judge intervention is inevitable, as I have to make comparisons between arguments that weren't made in the debate. Please make sure you extend the warrants of any evidence you want me to evaluate.

I will accept theory if a clear violation exists. But do not vote for theory when it is simply used as a strategic ploy. I will accept RVIs to help check against poorly constructed theory arguments and to ensure that theory is not a no-risk issue.

I think any debate round requires clash. I've watched many 1ARs refuse to answer the negative case and then act surprised when they were on the losing end. You have to make sure that you engage all major argument in the round. Simply asserting they are not important or that your arguments outweigh is not persuasive.

The 1NR/2AR should spend at minimum the last minute giving voting issues. These voting issues should explain which standard should be used to evaluate arguments. Additionally, comparing your strongest argument against your opponents strongest arguments demonstrates a strong understanding of how arguments function in the round.

Most importantly, please ask any and as many questions as you need to before the round begins. If you are unsure whether I'll be receptive to a certain strategy or argument, just ask before the round.