2024 CX State Judges
Numerical ranking questions — Judges were asked to rank the following on a scale of 1-5:
- Qty. Arg. (Quantity of Arguments) — 1 = Limited, 5 = Unlimited
- T (Topicality) — 1 = Rarely Vote On, 5 = Vote On Often
- CP (Counterplans) — 1 = Unacceptable, 5 = Acceptable
- DA (Disadvantages) — 1 = Not Essential, 5 = Essential
- Cond. Arg. (Conditional Arguments) — 1 = Unacceptable, 5 = Acceptable
- Kritiks — 1 = Unacceptable, 5 = Acceptable
- 2NC (2nd Negative Construct) — 1 = Unacceptable, 5 = Acceptable
Experience (See legend below)
- A = policy debater in high school
- B = coach policy debate in high school
- C = coach policy debate in college
- D = college NDT debate
- E = college CEDA debate
- J = college LD debate
- K = college parliamentary debate
Communication skills and resolution of substantive issues — Judges were asked which best describes their priorities in judging policy debate:
- Comm. Skills = Communication skills are more important than resolution of substantive issues.
- Res. Issues = Resolution of substantive issues is more important than communication skills.
- Equal = Communication skills and resolution of substantive issues are of equal importance.
Communication skills and resolution of substantive issues — Judges were asked which best describes their philosophy concerning evidence in policy debate:
- Quanity = Quantity of evidence is more important than quality of evidence.
- Quality = Quality of evidence is more important than quantity of evidence.
- Equal = Quantity of evidence and quality of evidence are of equal importance.
Debaters may ask any judge for a brief explanation of their judging philosophy prior to the round.
A PHP Error was encountered
Severity: Warning
Message: Invalid argument supplied for foreach()
Filename: libraries/Functions.php(689) : eval()'d code
Line Number: 160
1A - 3A Judges
A PHP Error was encountered
Severity: Warning
Message: Invalid argument supplied for foreach()
Filename: libraries/Functions.php(689) : eval()'d code
Line Number: 244