Grimm,+Natalie

=** Natalie Grimm – Roosevelt High School Sioux Falls, SD **= I’m a high school teacher who began working with debate as an assistant coach for individual speech events and public forum last year (2010-2011); this is my first year as a judge in policy debate. I have additional debate experience in Mock Trial as a competitor, judge, and coach.

As an auxiliary coach for our program, I’ve read and discussed a lot of the literature related to the current topic (development/exploration of space); I feel aware of most scenarios likely to be introduced in the policy rounds this year. That being established, I am not able to engage well in rounds that are jargon-heavy.

** How I Evaluate Policy Rounds **
As someone who is new to the policy debate world, I believe I am open-minded about the types of argumentation you can incorporate in a round; I’m too new to be married to any particular style of speech or argumentation. Whatever you do, do it well, and make sure it’s educational. Read on for more specific guidelines on speaking and argumentation.

** Argumentation **
Ultimately, it is my goal to restrict my judging solely to the arguments of the round. I believe in fairness, but I won’t penalize anyone for being well-prepared. I appreciate it when teams provide a solid framework and lots of warrants for their evidence. In the end, I want to reinforce a world where debate is a place for students to conduct, analyze, and apply topic-specific research. If you want to pick up a ballot from me, incorporate the following into your round:
 * In rebuttal speeches, I don’t believe that you must close on one argument; I typically prefer for a team to close for two or three substantial arguments.
 * It often comes down to quality vs. quantity; you don’t have to close for EVERY argument you’re winning--it’s my job as a judge to be aware of this, but just remember to highlight your dominance in the round.
 * Provide clear warrants for your argumentation; I appreciate a quality link story, reasoning for why I should prefer a definition, and well-articulated refutations and analyses of your opponent’s major contentions as a few examples of what this means to me.

** Speaking Skills **
What you intend to say matters to me, and you may have to go a little more slowly for me to hear it all; it will be to your benefit to take your rate of speech from a ten to a five. Use this adjustment in rate of speech to enhance your clarity and emphasis of key ideas. Overall, just keep the following in mind:
 * Stay away from jargon.
 * Signpost and roadmap like there’s no tomorrow.
 * Speak clearly and—most likely—at a rate that you perceive to be incredibly slow.
 * Word economy = good.

** How I Evaluate Public Forum Rounds **
In public forum rounds, depth of argumentation matters. You only have time for a few arguments, so make them great. Provide clear definitions, warrants for your evidence, and continued reinforcement for your side of the debate. As the debate progresses, be aware of a balance between countering the oppositions contentions and providing ever-deepening analysis of your arguments.

Since I have a Mock Trial and Oral Interp background, strong speaking skills in this event are always a bonus. However, since I am a teacher, it’s paramount that you don’t assume that a passionate speech is more relevant to my decision than argumentation; always be considerate of the fact that I value the educational goals of this activity.