Kerwin,+Noah

__**Practice Debate #8 - Aff vs. Jennifer/Niti - 07/25/2012 - Comments by Tate**__ --Make sure to follow paperless norms. There was way too much time after you stopped prep for the 2AC before the start of your speech. Your prep time does not end until you are ready to hand your flash drive over to the other team. Judges get annoyed if you appear to be stealing prep. --I think case should have been at the top of your roadmap - that is your offense so it should always go first. --Try to be more word efficient in your signposting - instead of saying "they only read one card...they said there is no coordination". Just say "1NC 1 - the barriers evidence". --Good job extending cards from the 1AC. I would like more warrants extended from your evidence. How does GPS sound for coordination? The 2AC should go a level deeper instead of just saying the 1NC arguments are not true. We probably had too many blippy 1AC extensions. You want to talk more indepthly about your Aff. Always give the why. --I thought your discussion on the drones debate was great. I stopped Noah to have more structure on the case debate. You need to reference each 2aC argument specifically. --This is minor but the trade is not an "add-on" if you read it in the 1AC. Just say that they dropped the trade scenario. Good pick up that the 1NC did not answer that. --I thought that your frontline to Capitalism was good. A couple of tweaks to make - you need to make a permutation on the flow before reading the McLean card that a perm is good. I would also argue that case turns the impact - if you win the economy advantage and free trade advantage, it disproves the K. Speak to a lab leader if you need assistance writing this. --You need a lot more on the Elections DA. I want you to try to add an analytical or two (i.e. election is too far way) and a link turn. --We also needed more on the CP - we need to perm it and we need to read theory. I am not sure where we lost all of the time in the 2AC. We likely spent a little too long on case and a little too long the cap K. I would suggest writing 2aC frontlines to key 1NC case arguments in the file so you can get through those case arguments faster.

__**Practice Debate #7 - Neg vs. Anja Beth/Isabella - 07/24/2012 - Comments by Rahim**__ 1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: Clarity 2) Recommended Drills: Clarity 3) Assess use of evidence in constructive and rebuttal: quantity, quality, and comparison: No evidence comparison was done, which is problematic on the UQ and link debate on politics 4) Strategic Choice and Execution of Block/1NR: The 1NR was waaaay too spread out, either take the CP or politics, not both. 5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: Make turns the case args, give UQ framing issues/reasons to prefer and read more evidence there, only go for one of the impacts and flesh it out a lot more

__**Practice Debate #6 - Aff vs. Aswin - 07/23/2012 - Comments by Zane**__ --good coverage (although it waso nly 2 off) --read fewer cards on case and make more arguments based off of the 1AC --use economy advantage to link turn elections---plan's boost is key to reinvigorate obama campaign and public faith in his economic policy

__**Rebuttal Redo from PD #5 - 07/23/2012 - Comments by Tate**__ --Noah redid a 1NR - in the debate, he extended Condo Good and Elections. For the redo, he is still extending both. The judge said that you needed to vary up your link arguments on Elections. Noah said he added more evidence. --It is fine to kick the CP. --We needed more on Condo Good - you need to state what your interpretation is. What should be allowed? We also needed more arguments - --Good to compare evidence - why does recency matter? If your card is one day newer, that does not mean much unless something happened in that day. Give me a reason why things changed in the date range from the Aff evidence to your evidence. --Good job building a wall against 2AC arguments on the Elections DA. --Pretty good job with the overview. Still try to structure your overview in the following way - "DA outweighs the case: (A) Magnitude...we have three nuclear extinctions...blah..blah..(B) Timeframe...yada yada...(C) Probability...yada...yada...(D) Turns the case....yada...yada... --We should never really have underviews...if there is time left, read more cards on a different section debate.


 * __Practice Debate #5 - Neg vs. Tiffany/Abby - 07/25/2012 - Comments by Linda__**
 * 1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: **Good speaking presentation – you are both loud and clear so the next step is to work on getting faster.


 * 2) Recommended Drills: **Speed drills!


 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">3) Assess use of evidence in constructive and rebuttal: quantity, quality, and comparison: **
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">You need to read evidence on their advantages. Don’t just cross-apply the spending disadvantage – this gets repetitive and is easily accomplished by a negative block overview on the disadvantage later in the debate.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">Your 1NC politics shell seems a bit too long and redundant – for example, you read 3 extra cards that seem to be repeats of what you already read.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">Make sure to do more evidence comparison in the 1NR on politics.


 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">4) Strategic Choice and Execution of Block/1NR: **
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">Overview – you need to do impact calculus at the top of the politics disadvantage about how it turns case and takes out their impacts.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">You need to spend much, much more time on the politics disadvantage – you dropped a lot of arguments, and you need to go more in-depth on the uniqueness and link debate.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">Impact calculus
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">Don’t just read cards – extend your 1NC cards and indict their evidence


 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: **
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">Give your rebuttal with the above suggestions.

__**Comments Debate #3**__ __**C**__

__**Rebuttal Redo from PD #1 - 1NR - 07/14/2012 - Comments by Tara**__ <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">--Noah is regiving a 1NR that was an extension on the Elections DA. The primary feedback from the judge was that Noah needed to extend more and use more time. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">--I am glad that we have an overview, but we want to do more with this. The first 2-3 sentences should be an explanation of the story of the DA (Obama will win in November now, etc)...the next few sentences should be impact calculus. Give 1-2 sentences each on magnitude, timeframe, probability, and DA turns the case. I am glad you mentioned those terms but we want to know how the DA outweighs on magnitude, etc. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">--One thing you should do to get more out of your extension is to make sure to extend 1NC cards and discuss those cards. For example, you needed more on the uniqueness debate. That tends to be one of the most card intensive portions of any debate. You read one card for their one card. I would have liked for you to read 1-2 more than what you did. I would also like for you to have extended the 1NC uniqueness card here. You did this type of extension on the link debate. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">--At the end, you mentioned some of the warrants for impact calculus - I would move that up to the overview. You don't really want to have an underview.

__**Practice Round #2 - Aff vs. Ruth - 07/13/2012 - Comments by Linda**__
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Your speed is alright, but you should work on clarity in the text of your evidence.


 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">2) Recommended Drills: **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;"> Do speed drills and clarity drills for an extended period of time to build up stamina.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">- You are missing two major things in your 2AC against the kritik. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">- You contradict yourself in the 2AC when you read a card that says “resources are finite and countries will fight over them” and then a card that says “resources are infinite and innovation solves.”
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">3) 2AC—technical skill and coverage for case and off-case arguments: **
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">First, is the permutation! You always need to make a permutation when you are affirmative, to be able to mitigate and even solve for the kritik impacts while at the same time accessing your case.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Second, you need to leverage your case as offense against the kritik. You briefly mention that the other team has conceded your case impacts, but you need to extend those impacts specifically, and when extending your economy impacts, explain how these economy impacts are offense against the kritik because they prove that the alternative to capitalism (economic collapse) is extremely violent.


 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">4) Assess use of evidence in constructive and rebuttal: quantity, quality, and comparison: **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Good job picking the right evidence to read in the 2AC against the capitalism kritik.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">- I think you have an interesting argument, about how capitalism is inevitable because humans are always driven by self-interest. But I think you need to articulate it better and more concisely. This argument would also be more persuasive if you backed it up by extending some 2AC evidence. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">- You need to answer framework – because Ruth makes a “prior question” argument that prevents you from weighing your case if you don’t answer it.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">5) Strategic Choice and Execution of 2AC/2AR: **

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">- Your 2AR needs to be a lot more organized <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">- If you are not talking about your plan in the 2AR, you will lose. The problem is that the negative has cleverly shifted the debate away from the plan completely, so by the last rebuttals everyone has completely forgotten that your plan is high speed rail. So you need to remind the judge of your plan, and talk about your case.
 * <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">6) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: **

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">- Both teams really, really, REALLY need to work on flowing. This will prevent you from dropping major arguments on the flow, and help you organize your roadmap. Your roadmap needs to be “x flow, y flow, and z flow,” otherwise it’s impossible for the judge to follow your arguments. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">- Debaters from both teams have the problem of speaking into their computer screen – you all should slightly move your computer away from you, and make sure not to position it right between you and your judge.
 * __<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 16px;">General comments __**

1) Speed/clarity issues with constructive or rebuttal: Clarity is mostly fine – make sure to vary your tone between tags and cards so that it’s easier to distinguish. Could be faster. 2) Recommended Drills: Practice reading at full speed for 10 minutes or more to improve endurance+speed. 3) Assess use of evidence in constructive and rebuttal: quantity, quality, and comparison: Highlight down your 1NC evidence – the length of the off-case cards hurt your coverage on case. Read 1 or 2 solvency cards on states in the 1nc – it’s more efficient to wait and read more cards in the block to answer their specific solvency arguments. Read more evidence on elections in the 1nr – as a rule you should read a bunch of cards on uq and link debates when extending elections or politics. 4) Strategic Choice and Execution of Block/1NR: Use all your 1NR time! Watch for 2AC strategic errors – they have double turned the disad, so point that out and concede the disad they’ve read against themselves. Add an overview on elections where you briefly explain your impact and why it outweighs theirs. Improve line-by-line on elections – you need to answer each of their arguments in order – you dropped a link turn and some of their link arguments. Don’t go back to solvency – your partner extended these arguments, so it’s inefficient to reiterate them – use the saved time to improve your coverage on elections. 5) Rebuttal Re-do suggestions: Add an impact overview on elections, work on more careful and complete line-by-line, and see if you can read more evidence
 * __Practice Debate #1 - Neg vs Niti/Trisha - 07/11/2012 - Comments by Connor__**

__**Elections DA - Block Extension Speeches - 07/10/2012 - Comments by Tara**__ --Students were asked to create a five minute Negative block speech to extend an Obama Good Elections DA. Students were given the 1NC shell and a file of potential cards they could use for their extensions. They used their own 2ACs from the night before as the 2AC to answer when they gave the extension speech. --I am glad that you are extending cards from the 1NC - I would like to see us do this more fully - extend the 1NC card by cite AND explain why it answers or is better than the Affirmative card that was read. --You have good volume and presence. Your speed is fine for a sophomore but it will get better due to camp. We will be doing speaking drills during the last 15 minutes of each night lab session. --For every off-case argument we extend in the block, we want to have a local overview at the top (before you get to the line-by-line) that gives a 2-3 explanation of the DA story and then an impact calculus - how does the DA outweigh and/or turn the case? You should talk about --I want us to think about sharpening up our signposting a bit. Make sure when you are moving to a different argument on the flow to answer that you are clearly signaling that to a judge. You want to say, "Now, 2AC #2, they say "no link"...and then give your answers. --The clear strength of this speech was how evidence intensive it was and how much of "building a wall" you did. You did a very nice job giving lots of arguments to each one of the Affirmative arguments. --Make sure to use all of your time! You could have read some additional impact scenarios, like the CTBT external scenario.

__**Elections DA 2AC Block - 7/9 - Evan**__ --Very good speed and clarity. You can probably be faster and not have to sacrifice clarity, so work on pushing yourself to be faster. --I like that you read both "Romney leading on econ" and "econ key to election" and "plan solve econ." This means you've created a very coherent uniqueness argument AND link turn. It's also super efficient. --It's not necessary to explain the economy link turn analytically to the judge after you've read the cards - this is useful in the 1AR but not necessary in the 2AC. --You were smart to point out that the 1AC also has a warming impact - the next step is to say that this means case solves the disad. --Add some analytics - they're quick but require a lot of response from the 2NC.