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?