here - College of Arts & Sciences - Bethel University

Any additional comments:
If you make statements of fact that I know are nonsensical it will be hard for me to take
you seriously.
Klinger, Geoff
DePauw University
Background of the critic:
Background: Policy and LD debater for four years in high school. NDT and CEDA
debater for DePauw University (1984-1988). M.A./Ph.D. at the University of Iowa.
Director of Forensics at Hanover College (1995-1999) (NEDA debate). Director of
Forensics at the University of Utah (1999-2003) (NPDA debate). Director of Forensics at
DePauw University (2003-Current).
Approach of the critic to decision-making (for example, adherence to the trichotomy,
stock-issues, policymaker, tabula rasa, etc.):
To be sure, parliamentary debate has evolved fairly quickly over the last few years. I
celebrate the various forms and manifestations of parliamentary debate. The strongest
debaters are those who blend elements of argument with performance. These days, I
hesitate to be too prescriptive in terms of the debate I like to see. Its up to individual
debaters to find a style that best suits them. Nevertheless . . . I like debates where there is
a certain amount of 'resolutional fidelity.' I like teams to argue the resolution, not morph
it beyond recognition. I like all types of arguments and am especially drawn to those that
are more unique, sophisticated, and intellectually engaging (e.g. a well-developed kritik
is often more compelling than a generic political disad with weak links). I especially like
arguments that seem authentic and sincere. Final arguments that engage in comparative
analysis (recognizing that both teams have ground upon which I can vote and explaining
to me why your arguments are preferable) are always nice. Above all, I hope that you
enjoy and treasure this activity. gk
Relative importance of presentation/communication skills to the critic in decision-making
:
see above
Relative importance of on-case argumentation to the critic in decision-making:
see above
96