here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University

Hoag, Andrew
San Diego Christian College
Background of the critic:
I competed in debate for 6 total years, 2 in high school NFL LD and 4 in parli for Point
Loma Nazarene University. I have coached and judged some form of debate for the past
five years, including acting as Director of Forensics for San Diego Christian College for
the past two years. I am currently working on my MA in American Literature and am
relatively well read on literary theory.
Approach of the critic to decision-making (for example, adherence to the trichotomy,
stock-issues, policymaker, tabula rasa, etc.):
I will adopt whatever means of decision-making the teams ask me to adopt. That means
of decision-making is always up for debate, so feel free to engage in
framework/procedural debates. If neither team is willing/able to tell me how to decide
the round, I will default to net benefits, policy-maker paradigm as that tends to be the one
most commonly expected by debaters. However, different types of argumentation (such
as narratives, performance, micropolitics, etc.) do change the nature of the game and the
nature of my position as a judge. If you are going to make any of these arguments, please
do put some work into how I fit in as a decision-maker. As for the order of deciding
certain types of positions, if no argument in made otherwise, I will first evaluate
topicality (or a kritik of topicality if one exists), then kritiks, and then case/disads/cps. Of
course, that order is up for revision in each round if arguments are made to that effect.
On the trichotomy, I believe that there is no necessary connection between the words in
the resolution and a certain type of case. Also, I personally think that all three types of
debate case either contain the other two or tend toward the direction of the other two. To
argue that fact, value, and policy cases are wholly distinct arguments seems to me to be
artificial and unnecessarily limiting of the discussion. That said, if you want to make a
trichotomy argument or present a fact or value case in front of me, you can. Just like any
other argument, you must be willing to defend it against any attack the other team makes.
Relative importance of presentation/communication skills to the critic in decision-making
:
While presentation and communication are important to a certain extent for my allocation
of speaker points, these elements do not factor into my decision. I vote on warrants and
impacts.
Relative importance of on-case argumentation to the critic in decision-making:
The case is as important as the debaters make it in the round. If it's still there at the end
of the round, it will definitely factor into my decision, just like any other argument. I do
80