1705137491
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132545]
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
1705137504
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132546]
1705137505
22.2 Guidelines for Speaker Points
1705137506
1705137507
Speaker points do not just represent a speaker’s delivery, style, or mastery of language; they represent the quality of the debater’s arguments and their verbal and non-verbal skills. Individual speaker points represent an equal combination of the manner in which debaters speak and the content of their speeches. Speaker points help show the relative position of debater as well as the quality of that debate when compared to other debates. Thus, judges must think carefully about the points that each speaker receives and should try to be consistent in how they evaluate debaters. A speaker who receives an 85 should be very engaging, well organized, and have sound organization. Such a speaker is a one who the judges believe would be in elimination rounds; 85 is a score that should generally only be awarded in rare situations. A speaker who receives a 65 is considered poor—perhaps he or she was disorganized, lacked support for his or her arguments, and/or did not speak for the complete seven minutes.
1705137508
1705137509
The two tables below, prepared by Professor Eric Barnes, provide more specifics regarding awarding speaker points.
1705137510
1705137511
Table One Guidelines for Speaker Points
1705137512
1705137513
GUIDELINES FOR SPEAKER POINTS
1705137514
1705137515
1705137516
1705137517
Individual points are not as important as team rankings, but they are important in running a fair tournament, and they can only do their job if all the judges at a tournament assign points in a similar way. Frequently, there is a problem of a few judges giving many very high points to the debaters they judge, and this makes the points almost meaningless as a tool for running a fair tournament. The chart below should help you decide what points to assign:
1705137518
1705137519
1705137520
1705137521
1705137522
1705137523
1705137524
1705137525
1705137526
1705137527
1705137528
1705137529
Table Two Speaker Point Range and Frequency
1705137530
1705137531
The range of points is 50-100, but in practice the points are almost never outside the 55-95 range. In fact, about 99% should be in the 60-90 range, and about 95% will be in the range of 65-85. So, that means that you should hesitate for a moment before awarding speakers points under 65 or over 85. Avoid giving extremely high or low points (outside the 65-85 range) unless all the judges are very confident that it was an exceptionally good or bad speech. The average points given at a tournament should be 75, so if the points that you are personally awarding to speakers is averaging more or less than this, there might be a problem. (Of course, some judges will be lucky enough to see more above average debaters and some will end up seeing more below average debaters, so it might be okay that you are awarding more high or low points.)
1705137532
1705137533
1705137534
1705137535
1705137536
1705137537
1705137538
1705137539
1705137540
After the debate, the Chair should dismiss the debaters and have them wait outside while the judges discuss their decision. One aspect that distinguishes Worlds-Style debate from other varieties of debate is that judges make decisions by consensus. In rare situations, only one judge adjudicates a debate. However, more often, two or more judges must agree through consensus on the rankings of the teams and the speaker points for each individual speaker for the debate. Taking good notes is important for judges to make their cases for particular rankings. To facilitate the consensus process, the Chair should lead a discussion to determine each team’s appropriate ranking.