UIL: CX Debate State Meet Qualifiers - Required Judging Information

2009 CX Debate State Meet Qualifiers - Required Judging Information

IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS (Please read entirely before beginning!):

All schools are required to provide an experienced judge for each debate team that qualifies for the state meet by the deadline prescribed or risk disqualification. If you qualify two teams, you must provide two judges and fill out a separate form for each judge. Contact Jana Riggins well in advance if you have questions.

The final deadline for this form to be completed and properly submitted to the League office for each obligated judge is Thursday, Feb. 19, 2009. PLEASE DO NOT WAIT UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE! We will ensure that our web site is working properly, but we cannot do anything about technical problems on your end that cause you to miss the deadline.

Fill in all requested information. Blanks marked with an asterisk (*) are REQUIRED; you will not be able to submit your form without completing them. Please DO NOT type in all caps or all lowercase; type using normal case only. Be sure to review your information carefully.

After you have completed all requested information, you must click the "Submit" button in order for your information to be sent to the UIL state office. Hit the Submit button only once, and then wait for your confirmation page.

The confirmation page states specifically that your form has been submitted, and lists the date and time of submission. If you do not see this confirmation, we have not received your form - please try again.

If you see a page with "Error" at the top, this means we have not received your form. Most likely, you have omitted some required information. Hit your browser's "Back" button, and review all required information.

IMPORTANT
Print a copy of the confirmation page for your records.

Judge Information

First Name*	Last Name*
Address*
City*	Zip*
Daytime Phone*	Evening Phone
Mobile Phone	Fax
Preferred E-mail Address*
Alternate E-mail Address

School/Team Information

UIL District Number*	Conference* School City*
School Name*
Names of Debate Team	First Name Last Name & First Name Last Name

Please specify whether you are the coach for this school or only fulfilling judging obilgations.*
Coach Fulfilling Obligation

Coach Contact Information (If judge is not the coach.)

First Name	Last Name
School Phone	Evening Phone
Mobile Phone	Fax
Preferred E-mail Address
Alternate E-mail Address

CX Debate Experience
Please summarize briefly your CX experience in the box below.*

Specific Experience (Please provide specific details of your debate experience where applicable.)

Policy debater in high school at	When?
Policy debater in college at	When?
Coach policy debate in high school at	When?
Coach policy debate in college at	When?
Judge policy debate often	Yes
Number of CX tournament rounds judged this year on this topic*	Number of tournaments judged CX this year*
List at least 3 tournaments where you have judged on this CX topic:*

CX Debate Judging Philosophy* (All philosophy information is required.)
In the space below, please provide details of your CX judging philosophy. This description should cover specific details of the criteria you use to evaluate CX debate rounds; it should not merely be a restatement of the checklist items further down the page. Also, please do not include style and delivery preferences in the philosophy box; use the separate box provided. IMPORTANT NOTE: The comments you submit will be made available to tournament participants, so think carefully about what you write and proof for typing errors!

Philosophy Statement (Please be concise - 300 words maximum.)

Style and Delivery Preferences (75 words maximum)

Questionnaire

1. Which best describes your approach to judging policy debate? (check only one)
Policymaker
Stock issues
Tabula rasa
Other

2. Which best describes your priorities in judging policy debate? (check only one)
Communication skills are more important than resolution of substantive issues.
Resolution of substantive issues is more important than communication skills.
Communication skills and resolution of substantive issues are of equal importance.

3. Which best describes your philosophy concerning evidence in policy debate? (check only one)
Quantity of evidence is more important than quality of evidence.
Quality of evidence is more important than quantity of evidence.
Quantity of evidence and quality of evidence are of equal importance.

4. Indicate your preference toward the following items (check one number for each item):

A. Preferred quantity of arguments:	1 2 3 4 5
(Range - 1=Limited quantity, 5=Unlimited quantity)

B. Topicality arguments:	1 2 3 4 5
(Range - 1=Rarely vote on, 5=Vote on often)

C. Counterplans:	1 2 3 4 5
(Range - 1=Unacceptable, 5=Acceptable)

D. Disadvantages:	1 2 3 4 5
(Range - 1=Not Essential, 5=Essential)

E. Conditional arguments:	1 2 3 4 5
(Range - 1=Unacceptable, 5=Acceptable)

F. Kritiks:	1 2 3 4 5
(Range - 1=Unacceptable, 5=Acceptable)

List any schools or teams you should not judge due to current or prior affiliation (within 5 years).
If none, enter "none."*

IMPORTANT: Please scroll back through and verify that you have entered all information correctly AND completely BEFORE clicking Submit. You will not be able to make further changes after you click Submit. Please click Submit only once.