here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University

dynamism. I have no tolerance for arrogance, sexist/racist/homophobic language, or
boring speakers. A speech without dynamism is like a well-written letter getting lost in
the mail. If it doesn't get delivered, it never mattered what was said in the letter (or in the
debate).
Relative importance of on-case argumentation to the critic in decision-making:
Clash is what debate is all about. I find topicality to be a necessary evil. I see its
importance but i find debaters run T too often. Off-case is fine as long as the team also
clashes on-case.
Openness to critical/performative styles of debating:
I am open to critical styles of debating as long as the debaters know what they are
arguing. Too often, i find students running their coaches' critiques without a real
understanding of what they are trying to say. Please do not use theorists unless you are
familiar and well-read with said theorist.
Any additional comments:
Points of information can be important but I see debaters overuse them all the time. Do
NOT ask a POI just to take time from opponent.
Cobb, Travis
Oregon State University
Background of the critic:
I am a former NPDA debater, and competed in Impromptu, Extemp, and Persuasive as
well. Currently I am an assistant coach at OSU, and teach courses on argumentation. I
am working on my Master's degree in communication and political science.
Approach of the critic to decision-making (for example, adherence to the trichotomy,
stock-issues, policymaker, tabula rasa, etc.):
Stock issues are critical to me. As the government team, when presenting a plan it is not
enough to tell me why your plan is beneficial. You also need to provide the reason for
32