Harrow,+Chris

I am the head coach at Ardrey Kell High School.

I was a competitive orator and extemper for 4 years at but also coach debate events at the circuit level. I have seen a fair share of Circuit/TOC styles of LD in the last 4+ years, but don't assume I'm up to date on current case positions or jargon.

I think that a debate round should be clear both in terms of what is being said and how it is being said. I'd like to think that I can flow decently, but if you're going far too quickly I'll yell "clear" or give some sort of signal so you have an opportunity to slow down. I don't like more speed than 275 wpm, and on top of that, I expect you to be comprehensible and signpost.

Quite simply, I will vote off of what you tell me to vote for. You should make it very easy for me to sign the ballot--I shouldn't have to be doing the work for you. Yelling for me to extend a lot of cards without explanations will not win my ballot. I am more open to critical positions, but affirmatives should be topical and the negative should have some clear link to the resolution. In terms of more unorthodox case positions, theory, and the like, there should be solid justification if I'm going to vote in your favor. At its core, I think a round is trying to determine whether the resolution is true or false, but I'm not opposed to the atypical. I AM opposed to dense policy debate or philosophy jargon - anything I have to work hard to understand, I won't flow.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask before the round.