here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University

Swan, Andrew
United States Air Force Academy
Background of the critic:
I competed for four years at Willamette University. I wasn’t especially successful. I now
coach at the United States Air Force Academy. My academic work is in the fields of
international relations, corporate law, and airline economics.
Approach of the critic to decision-making (for example, adherence to the trichotomy,
stock-issues, policymaker, tabula rasa, etc.):
I try to be as tabula rasa as possible in evaluating rounds. My default preference is
policy, but I am sympathetic to trichotomy argumentation. I think that policy action can
be an effective and sufficient manner by which to argue that a purported fact or value is
valid.
Relative importance of presentation/communication skills to the critic in decision-making
:
Low. Manner and style of presentation does not influence my determination of the
winner of the round. It does, however, factor into my speaker point calculus. I
accommodate (within rationality, I suppose) any style of delivery that best allows a
debater to convey the substance of his or her case. I do not mind if debaters choose to
debate while seated. Manner of dress doesn’t influence my decisions. Brisk delivery is
acceptable.
Relative importance of on-case argumentation to the critic in decision-making:
Not required but often very effective. I think an opp team can win strictly off-case, but
mitigating/turning on-case material can reduce the burden on the off-case.
Openness to critical/performative styles of debating:
170