What are paradigms?
At the very beginning of the round, a student may ask you, "do you have a paradigm." Don't panic, they're just trying to figure out what kind of judge you are to make the round as successful as possible. A paradigm is a mindset or preconception you bring into the round, specifically debate rounds. This paradigm can change after you've judged multiple rounds. If this is your first time judging you can just say: "This is my first time judging this event," and that'll give them all of the information they need. However there are some common things said that you might consider such as: I don't like spreading (which is speaking really fast), I'm not likely to vote on _type of argument.
Interested in forming a more complex paradigm? Some of the most common are listed below:
Interested in forming a more complex paradigm? Some of the most common are listed below:
Stock Issues Paradigm
This paradigm specifically deals with policy debate, or CX. Someone with this paradigm believes that the affirmative has a burden to fulfill all of the stock issues. Those stock issues are: Inherency, Harms, Solvency, Topicality, Significance. If the negative can prove that the affirmative doesn't fulfill one or more of these issues then the judge votes negative. These judges like a lot of on topic debate that is clear and to the point. This is generally considered to be a more traditional form of debate.
Policymaker Paradigm
These judges judge as if they are a policy maker, weighing the benefits and disadvantages of the affirmative plan. These judges like on-case debate along with disadvantages and counterplans, kritiks and topicality typically aren't voted on.
Tabula Rosa Paradigm
These judges are a clean slate generally allowing anything, however it may be imperative to clarify what they like instead of just assuming.