here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University

Amundsen, Allen
Humboldt State University
Background of the critic:
Currently coaching & judging parliamentary debate for Humboldt State University
2005—present
I teach the Introduction to Argumentation course at Humboldt State University (which
includes academic debate as a major assignment in the syllabus.)
Coached & Judged parliamentary debate as a graduate student (and later as a volunteer
coach) for San Francisco State 1998—2002
Competed in parliamentary debate (albeit on a spontaneous basis) as an undergraduate at
San Francisco State University for two years.
Approach of the critic to decision-making (for example, adherence to the trichotomy,
stock-issues, policymaker, tabula rasa, etc.):
I am tabula rasa to the core. The Government team must explain to me what I am voting
on and establish the weighing mechanism clearly through case, claims, warrants, and
reasoning. Since more often than not Government teams are going to link a policy case to
the resolution then stock issues are indeed paramount. Likewise, the Opposition needs to
do their heavy-lifting and either refute/turn the case or provide fully constructed
disadvantages (with links, brinks, and impacts) or a fully constructed counter-plan for me
to consider as a viable alternative. Don’t make me work too hard on the flow. Show me
where either plan/solvency/advantages outweighs or the terminal impacts from the disads
is the most important thing in the round, etc.
I will consider procedurals like Topicality only if the violation/ground loss story is fully
articulated and argued by the LO. In the case of kritiks, I will also consider them only if
the in-round language analysis is fully realized and argued as a legitimate meta-debate on
the implications in the round in terms of race, gender, sexuality, etc.
Relative importance of presentation/communication skills to the critic in decision-making
:
I am between the old school parli and the new school parli when it comes to this question.
On one hand, I can handle speed; on the other hand, I am annoyed by speed. Basically, if
you are going to talk fast, then do so in the name of efficiency (i.e. by using it not as a
3