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: Teresa Nuckolls (University Middle School) vs. Opposition: sid singh (Homeschool)

Judge: Arturo Feliz (Colegio Bilingüe New Horizons)

Resolution: Finals Week: This House Believes that Animal Testing Should be Banned.

  • Teresa Nuckolls
    Teresa Nuckolls

    sid singh
    sid singh
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at May 25, 2020 09:00:18PM EST by Teresa Nuckolls



    Posted at May 26, 2020 09:29:16AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz



    None available for this speech.

    Posted at May 27, 2020 05:53:46PM EST by Teresa Nuckolls



    All of the Previous ones and

    Posted at May 29, 2020 06:04:09PM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz



    None available for this speech.

    Posted at May 29, 2020 08:07:58PM EST by Teresa Nuckolls




    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at May 30, 2020 11:22:23AM EST by Arturo Feliz

    Category Teresa Nuckolls sid singh
    Use of evidence: 3.4 1.5
    Delivery skill: 3 1.7
    Coherence of arguments: 3 1
    Responsiveness to opponent: 3.4 1
    Identification of key points: 3.5 1.2
    Comments: Teresa I think you made a very clear case (economic, human rights, diversity), and carried it on during the round. I recognize that your opponent's lack of responsiveness to your case made it a challenge for refute, but I think you did it quite well. Good job overall.

    Sid There are some problems with your case that I can observe.

    I see you point out that receiving refugees leads to conflict but the conflict you describe seems a bit inane and tone deaf. The argument that people that come from places being bombed will not get used to peaceful and silent places and not understand what is going on will not fly with many judges. As a professional debater I've been trained to not take offense to any argument, but I can advise that many judges in many tournaments will find that kind of argumentation offensive.

    I'm not offended. The argument simply makes no sense to me. I think Teresa takes down any case you might have with the diversity argument.

    I think you should make better use of your time. You're leaving LOTS of time in your speeches that could be used to make your cases way more robust and better supported.

    Stay strong. This is a skills that's learned through many many rounds. But it will teach you some amazing life skills.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Teresa Nuckolls

    Reason for Decision:

    RFD Opposition does not respond to the proposition case (economic, human rights, diversity benefits)

    The argument ran by opposition of possible harms of conflict is addressed and countered with the diversity benefits argument.

    Opposition does not propose any real counterplan.

    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: