judges briefing will take place here
DESCRIPTION
Judges Briefing Will Take Place Here. So You Want To Be a Judge? A Judges Briefing For Debate . A Comprehensive Introduction To Judging Debate. We couldn’t do it without you!. Thank You for Judging!. First and Most Importantly. So you want to be a Judge. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Judges Briefing Will Take Place
Here
So You Want To Be a Judge?
A Judges Briefing For Debate
A Comprehensive Introduction To Judging Debate
Thank You for Judging!
First and Most Importantly
We couldn’t do it without you!
SO YOU WANT TO BE A JUDGE
This Brief Presentation Will
Cover Five Talking Points That Will Train You To Be
Great Judges
Style of Debate
Role Of Each Team
Role of Each Debater
Important Aspects of Debate
Your Role as a Judge
Style of The Debate
Canadian National
Style
The rules of this style of debate were established
at the Nationals in 2003. The objectives
were to blend
Canadian Parliamentary Style and the style at the World Schools
Debating Championsh
ip. It is a unique
blend of rules.
Issues do not need to have a Canadian theme
The level of debate can be brought up to an international level.
THE ORDER OF THE DEBATE…
Understanding the proceedings of the debate is key to understanding how to judge the debate. The basic structure of all debates remains consistent, and is very simple.
1st Proposition8 Minutes 1st Opposition
8 Minutes2nd Proposition
8 Minutes 2nd Opposition
8 Minutes.Reply
Speeches4min. Each
side
First two rounds will be debated on the prepared topic is: This house believes that capitalism is beneficial to the world.
The next 4 rounds as well as the quarter and semi finals will be impromptu resolutions.
Those impromptu resolutions have been picked by a motion committee composed of University debaters from across Canada.
The Room
Judge1
Judge 2
Judge 3
Role of Each Team
PROPOSITION Proposes a motion Defines the terms of the motion
“THBT terrorism can be justified” “THS genetic screening by health
insurance companies” Watch out for slanted definitions, or
possible definitional debates Gives Reasons to pass the motion In Canadian National style, the
proposition has a burden of proof (But unlike previous styles… So does the
opposition!)
OPPOSITION Opposes the Motion If Necessary counters definitions
This should only occur if the definitions are clearly wrong or give a very unfair advantage to the Prop
Themed Resolutions give room for open definitions
Gives Reasons against passing the motion (opposition should focus on moving their own case as well)
Role of Each Debater
1ST PROPOSITION 1. Introduction 2. Clearly states the definitions 3. Model (If used) 4. Theme/Case line (“what we will prove to you
is…”} 5. Proposition Arguments 6. Conclusion Example of the 2008 (Carbon Tax) http://www.youtube.com/user/MartinPoirier1#p/u/17/x2l
eRfdEs24 (notes: sounds if off for the first 27 seconds of the
speech, the sounds starts at 1:42)
1ST OPPOSITION1. Introduction2. Counter Model (if they wish) 3. Outline “the split”4. If necessary, attack definitions Most teams will accept the terms as defined (no time,
place, set) Can challenge the terms if unreasonable If this happens, judges decide which terms are more
reasonable (still possible for Prop. to win)5. Opposition team’s these/caseline 6. Clash with Proposition arguments7. Explain arguments for opposing the resolution8. Conclusion Example:http://www.youtube.com/user/MartinPoirier1#p/u/16/ek4A60_spfM
2ND PROPOSITION Clashes with all of the opposition
arguments presented thus far Finishes off the case for the government Example: http://www.youtube.com/user/MartinPoirier1#p/u/15/ZSh
Kf7OtQM0
2ND OPPOSITION Last word from the Opposition on
constructive material 1. Introduction 2. Continue attack on Proposition 3. Outline team’s case approach 4. Further arguments against resolution 5. Conclusion Example: http://www.youtube.com/user/MartinPoirier1#p/u/14/
YwH9IhphD7k
REPLY SPEECHES Both teams: Take a step back and summarize the debate Distill the debate into themes and clash on the major
ideas of the debate Leave the judges with a clear reason for your side
winning the debate Approach should be thematic rather then systematic. Example (both side have 4 min each) http://www.youtube.com/user/MartinPoirier1#p/u/13/GPe
iZiJEcyI
Other Important Aspects of
Debate
POINTS OF INFORMATIONMODELSSIGNPOSTINGS.E.E.
POINTS OF INFORMATION
• Points of information are an IMPORTANT aspect of this debate
• During unprotected time debaters from the other team can rise to propose a question (POI)
• The speaker can choose to accept or reject the POI. Once accepted the floor is opened up for one short question.
• Questions should be kept short, to the point and relevant to the debate!
POINTS OF INFORMATION
• The golden rule is give 2 POIs and take 2 POIs per speech.
• However POIs should be reflective of the pace of speech. If a speech is fast then giving more POIs is acceptable. If a speech is slow then too many POIs can become harassing.
• POIs should be used to puncture holes in the other team’s case and support their own.
• POIs are part of strategy points.
MODELS Models or plans are used to determine
how the team is going to take the action they are advocating
Not always necessary Can be useful in defining the pragmatics
of the case Does not need to address
Funding Timelines Legislative information
Only deals with how in an ideal world the Government would follow through (as the example in the video)
SIGNPOSTING Provides a clear and concise road map
of their case for the judges (and other debaters)
Helps reinforce their points (because the judges can write down what these points are)
Should be done at the beginning, the middle and the end of every speech
Tell the judges what they are going to say, say it then remind the judges what you just said
IMPACTING STATEMENTSS tatementE xample E explanation
A basic construction of arguments
Role of a Judge
Your role asa judgerevolvesaroundsome simple,core aspects
Your Role as a judge
Speaker Points
The Choice
Feedback
SPEAKER POINTS Your Primary Function as a Judge in this
tournament is to award speaker points to each individual debater
Scores will be on a Point Scale
70-90
An arbitrary scale, due to tradition set by the British and Australians… Seriously!
SPEAKER POINTS Manner (28-36)
How the debater delivered his address Persuasiveness Style
Matter (28-36) What the debater brought to the round
Content Analysis
Strategy (14-18) How the debater used content, order of
arguments structured arguments, and used Points of Information
SPEAKER POINTS Manner + Matter
28 Work Needed
30 OK 32 Average 34 Excellent 36 Exceptional
Strategy 14 Work
Needed 15 OK 16 Average 17 Excellent 18 ExceptionalScores Should Be Within 70 - 90
28 + 28 + 14 = 70 32 + 32 + 16 = 8036 + 36 + 18 = 90
SPEAKER POINTS Total Scores (Half-points are allowed)
70 Incredibly Poor (Any Scores Lower than 70 will be raised to 70) this is the Nationals! Debaters went through a selection process to get here!
72 – Poor 75 – Below average, Work Needed 78 - Average 81 – Bench mark for the tournament:
Good 83 – Excellent 87 – Exceptional 90 – Flawless, Perfect (Any Scores Higher
than 90 will be dropped to 90) This scale will be at the back of the ballot.
Canadian National Debate Ballot Adjudicator name: _________________________________ Resolution: ____________________________________________________________ Round: ________ Room: __________________ Proposition Team: ___________________________________________________ Name Style / 40 Content / 40 Strategy / 20 Total / 100
Grand Total / 200
Opposition Team: ___________________________________________________ Name Style / 40 Content / 40 Strategy / 20 Total / 100
Grand Total / 200
The winner is: ________________________________________ Comments:
The statistician will only look at the individual score and the team scoreThe statistician will not look at each criteria, those boxes are there for your own use only.
THE CHOICE Depends on the balance that occurs at
the end of the debate. No Such thing as an automatic win, or
automatic loss Holistically comparing cases
In Canadian National Style the team points must be aligned with the “winning team” (No low point wins) Who had the best manner (40%) Who had the best matter (40%) Who had the best strategy (20%)
FEEDBACK Occurs after the round has completed,
after ballots have been completed, and handed to the chair for delivery
Is the most valuable tool for debaters Centered around why the round was one or
lost What they can do individually to make
themselves better debaters Keep it short! We are on a very tight
schedule!
Questions?