here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University
here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University
here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Carver, Randy<br />
Texas State <strong>University</strong><br />
Background <strong>of</strong> the critic:<br />
I have been judging and coaching for the past year at Texas State. Our team has mostly<br />
traveled a regional and local circuit so my exposure has been limited by that travel<br />
schedule. My experience as a competitor is primarily in individual events.<br />
Approach <strong>of</strong> the critic to decision-making (for example, ad<strong>here</strong>nce to the trichotomy,<br />
stock-issues, policymaker, tabula rasa, etc.):<br />
I use the critic <strong>of</strong> argumentation paradigm when judging debate rounds because it best<br />
meets the educational and competitive purposes <strong>of</strong> debate. While some my say that they<br />
are tabula rasa, I don’t believe they are completely accurate. Tabula rasa is a means to an<br />
end and I will leave as much <strong>of</strong> my personal feelings out <strong>of</strong> the debate as I evaluate your<br />
arguments.<br />
Relative importance <strong>of</strong> presentation/communication skills to the critic in decision-making<br />
:<br />
Communication skills are very important to me. My background as an individual event<br />
competitor leads me in that direction. NPDA grew as a reaction to the noncommunicative<br />
aspects <strong>of</strong> policy debate so I uphold the rhetorical tradition <strong>of</strong> this format<br />
as opposed to a faster and un-kinder delivery.<br />
Relative importance <strong>of</strong> on-case argumentation to the critic in decision-making:<br />
Debate in the trenches and the line by line case debate appeals to me. The pre-flowed<br />
generic disads or <strong>of</strong>f case positions are not strategic for me. Topicality run on open<br />
motions is just plain dumb. Kritiks, like disads, are just generic positions that you run<br />
when the on case knowledge is not t<strong>here</strong>. Not a fan <strong>of</strong> these. Counterplans do provide a<br />
viable option in a policy debate if the competition standards are clear and t<strong>here</strong> is a<br />
definite net benefit.<br />
Openness to critical/performative styles <strong>of</strong> debating:<br />
I did interp events as an IE competitor. That’s w<strong>here</strong> performance/critical arguments<br />
belong. While they may be becoming more popular, they move away from the<br />
argumentative paradigm that I ad<strong>here</strong> to, so you would not be wise running one in front<br />
<strong>of</strong> me.<br />
Any additional comments:<br />
28