1705137457
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 Part FiveTeaching and Coaching Debate
1705137458
1705137459
Debate coaches are primarily teachers. They teach their own students during practice sessions and sometimes in classes; when the teacher-coach attends a tournament with his or her students, he or she will be a judge at the tournament. An effective teacher-coach, first and foremost, must be familiar with the principles of debate. One can become an excellent teacher even if he or she is not an outstanding debater and even if he or she did not participate in debate at all. So, the first things that a teacher-coach needs to do are to carefully review the materials in the first four parts of this text and review other books about argumentation and debating. Only then will the teacher-coach be able to impart these principles to his or her students.
1705137460
1705137461
Beyond the need to become familiar with principles of debate, a teacher-coach will almost certainly be called on to judge debates at tournaments that his or her students attend. Chapter 22 is about the subject of judging and evaluating debates. Some, but not all, teacher-coaches will be called on to help administer and conduct debate tournaments. Sometimes the tournament will be on the teacher-coach’s campus so he or she will be the primary tournament administrator. Other times, he or she will be asked by some other tournament host to help administer a tournament. Chapter 23 focuses on the skills needed to be an effective tournament administrator.
1705137462
1705137463
1705137464
1705137465
1705137467
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 Chapter 22Judging and Evaluating Debates
1705137468
1705137469
Una Kimokeo-Goes
1705137470
1705137471
Chapter Outline
1705137472
1705137473
22.1 Mechanics of Judging Worlds-Style Debate
1705137474
1705137475
22.2 Guidelines for Speaker Points
1705137476
1705137477
22.3 Judge as Educator
1705137478
1705137479
22.4 Summary
1705137480
1705137481
22.5 Terms and Concepts from Chapter 22
1705137482
1705137483
22.6 Discussion Questions for Chapter 22
1705137484
1705137485
The previous chapters outlined practical and conceptual ideas that help students become strong debaters. Since educational debate is a competition, it cannot take place without at least one judge. The judge makes sure that students adhere to the fundamental guidelines of the activity, and ranks the teams so that a winner can eventually be determined. Without the judge, students would have less incentive to address the topic, follow time limits, or engage one another; thus, the judge is of the utmost importance. Another important function performed by the judge is facilitating debates. Judges also serve a separate, crucial purpose—to educate debaters. Good judges not only help tournaments run on time, they help debaters improve, and, thus, can affect the quality of future debates. This chapter will explore the basic mechanics of judging and the role of the judge as educator. Included in this exploration will be some unique elements that complicate and enrich judging in Worlds-Style debate.
1705137486
1705137487
1705137488
1705137489
One of the unique features of Worlds-Style debate is that almost anyone can be a judge. Students, for example, are sometimes used as judges. Some judges are former debaters or debate teachers, and others hold university or community leadership positions. This variety works well for Worlds-Style debate partially because multiple judges are ordinarily assigned to adjudicate a single debate, with an experienced judge designated as Chair of the judging panel. Although many judges are current or former debaters, they should not think of themselves as being in a debate role. Instead, they should envision themselves as being in the role of a teacher. While judges need to help maintain order in the debate and rank teams to decide a winner, their most important roles are to give the debaters advice to help them improve their understanding of argumentation and their abilities, and to help students understand the decision that is made. In order for judges to be effective educators, they must first consider basic practicalities regarding the mechanics of judging.
1705137490
1705137492
22.1 Mechanics of Judging Worlds-Style Debate
1705137493
1705137494
Once the draw is posted and the topic announced, all judges should make note of the topic, look at the posted draw to see which debate they are assigned to judge, and keep track of when the debate is to begin. A Worlds-Style debate is usually adjudicated by a panel of judges rather than by a single judge. The panel consists of a Chair, usually the most experienced of the panel, and one or two other judges called panelists. So, a judging panel will consist of a Chair and one or two panelists. The Chair will then go to a ballot table to collect a ballot before the beginning of the debate; the other judges may or may not have one, depending on the tournament. Having collected the ballot or ballots, all judges should then go to the room assigned for the debate at the appropriate time. Once all judges and teams are at the room, the Chair of the panel will convene the debate.
1705137495
1705137496
The Chair has an important role above and beyond serving as one of the judges: the Chair’s role is to help conduct the debate. The debate cannot start until all of the debaters and judges are present. The Chair must make sure all four teams and all judges are present before starting the debate. The Chair must then mark on the ballot which debater on each team is speaking first and second, confirm that the correct teams are in the room, and make any necessary changes to correct spelling errors of the students’ names or institutions. Once everyone is ready, the Chair will also introduce the topic of the debate, and introduce each speaker prior to his or her speech.
1705137497
1705137498
One of the judges must keep time if a timekeeper is not provided. In Worlds-Style debate, the timer must knock on the table after the first minute of each speech and again before the last minute, indicating that the speaker is open to points of information from the speakers on the other side of the issue. If debaters are talking too loudly during someone else’s speech, or if points of information take longer than the allowable fifteen seconds, the Chair may interject a comment, because his or her responsibility is to keep order during the debate.
1705137499
1705137500
Just as the debaters need to take notes to help keep track of important arguments, judges should also write down the major ideas of each speech in order to fulfill their responsibilities as judges. Although no single method is the “right” way to take notes, judges need to have sufficient notes to allow them to recall the major claims that each speaker has made, indicate how those claims engage other ideas presented in the debate, and, whenever possible, keep track of suggestions they might have for specific speakers regarding their argumentation or delivery. Keeping sufficient notes will take practice. At the very least, when the debate has concluded, judges need adequate notes to help determine how the teams should be ranked, to determine individual points for each debater, and to provide constructive feedback to each of the debaters.
1705137501
1705137502
Through a process of deliberation, judges determine both the rank of the teams and each individual’s speaker points. Teams are ranked 1-4 (1 is the highest) and ties are not allowed. Each individual debater is awarded speaker points that are between 0-100 (100 being the highest) but, generally, the range is considered to be between 65 and 85. Only full points are allowed (no half points) with a score of 75 considered average. The total of individual speaker points of the two debaters on a team must correspond with their ranking. Thus, the highest ranked team must receive the highest combined individual speaker points. Two speakers can have the same number of points, but the total speaker points awarded to any team must be different by at least one point. Panelists should double-check the math to make sure it is accurate and that the speaker points correspond to the team ranks.
1705137503
1705137505
22.2 Guidelines for Speaker Points
[
上一页 ]
[ :1.705137456e+09 ]
[
下一页 ]