Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Proposition: Khasim Lockhart (Binghamton University) vs. Opposition: Samson Widerman (Binghamton University)

Judge: Emme Davis (Waterman Elementary School)

Resolution: RESOLVED: Sugary drinks should not be sold in primary and secondary schools.

  • Khasim Lockhart
    Khasim Lockhart
    vs.



    Samson Widerman
    Samson Widerman
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at February 19, 2014 11:54:27PM EST by Khasim Lockhart

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at February 20, 2014 11:44:49PM EST by Samson Widerman

    Citations

    Show

    Fletcher, Jason M. and Frisvold, David E. and Tefft, Nathan, Can Soft Drink Taxes Reduce Population Weight?. Contemporary Economic Policy, Vol. 28, Issue 1, pp. 23-35, January 2010. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1540795 or http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7287.2009.00182.x

    http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2012/08/08/peds.2011-3353.full.pdf+html

    http://news.uga.edu/releases/article/sugar-boosts-self-control-uga-study-says/

    Posted at February 21, 2014 11:38:28PM EST by Khasim Lockhart

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at February 22, 2014 11:00:04PM EST by Samson Widerman

    Citations

    Show

    http://www.rrstar.com/x2096602077/Rockford-schools-soda-strategy-trades-wealth-for-health
    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/04/health/04soda.html

    Posted at February 23, 2014 11:25:36PM EST by Khasim Lockhart

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at February 26, 2014 10:40:47AM EST by Emme Davis

    Category Khasim Lockhart Samson Widerman
    Use of evidence: 3.5 5
    Delivery skill: 3.5 5.2
    Coherence of arguments: 4.8 5.1
    Responsiveness to opponent: 4.2 5.2
    Identification of key points: 4.1 4.9
    Comments: You start out very strong. I think you do a great job using specific examples and specific pieces of evidence. You also do a very good job responding to your opponents arguments.

    The biggest place for improvement is to work on focusing down issues at the end of the debate. In your last speech you are still adding too much new information without doing a great deal to condense down the debate.
    Excellent job. You have a great use of evidence and you are really strong when it comes to refuting you opponents arguments.

    The decision is for the Opposition: Samson Widerman

    Reason for Decision:

    I vote for the opposition. I think the argument that students need to be able to make choices in a safe environment and that those choices should include sugar drinks (especially those without corn syrup) is persuasive to me.

    I think that the proposition would have been better off focusing on the decision making ability of younger children as this seems to feed directly into the argument that choices early on must be monitors. I felt as if the proposition started to make this argument several times, but just fell a bit short.


    Add Comment

    Please Create an Account or Log-In to post comments.

    Connect with Binghamton:
    Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

    Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by:

    PHP MySQL SUIT