Index

Debating Home

2009 Debating Competition

Rules and Regulations

Area Debating Coordinators

Forms

Fifth Annual OPC Debating Competition

Ontario Student Debating Union

Canadian Student Debating Federation

Guidelines for Judges

Thank you for participating as a judge in the OPC Air Cadet Debating Program  As a judge, your impartial and fair evaluation of the debaters’ performances today will be critical to their ability to learn and have a great time.   The following has been prepared to assist you with your responsibilities.  Included are:

• Some general guidelines
• A copy of the pertinent rules
• A guide to scoring ranges

General Guidelines

• Please be sure to write down your name, the number of judges in the room, as well as the room number and round number in the places marked on the ballot.  Also be sure to get the number assigned to each debater and the Speaker of the House.  If you are not sure, please ask the Speaker to confirm the numbers and their positions (e.g., Prime Minister).

• Objectivity is the essential quality of a judge.  One must forget one’s personal opinions and feelings when judging.  This can be very difficult and when in doubt, please ask yourself:  “did the other team address this argument/evidence and is their argument convincing on its own without my adding anything from my preconceptions?”

• It is useful to take some notes.  Suggest a 4-square grid to jot down the back and forth arguments between the two teams.

• It you need more time between speeches, you can ask the moderator to wait.

• There is no penalty for a shorter speech, however, it will probably lack in context or refutation.  A concise speech is preferable to a repetitive one, where a speaker is obviously killing time.

• Please take the time to read the full copy of the rules attached.  In particular, we request that you are fully familiar with the following sections:

• 2.07:       Order of Speaking and Debating Roles
• 4.0:         Marking of Speeches
• 5.0:         Decision of Debate

• To help you formulate your final mark for each debater, the marks have been divided into three sections.  In addition, a guide to scoring ranges has been provided.  Please ensure that your marking aligns with this guide.  It will help us achieve consistency across the different judges.

2.07    Order of Speaking and Debating Roles

1)  Prime Minister’s (PM) Introduction                        5 minutes (prepared)/ 3 minutes (impromptu)                                                                                                                            

The Prime Minister must define the terms of the resolution and outline the Government’s case, giving necessary background information.  The PM is also expected to outline several points in detail and provide evidence to support them.

2)  First Member of the Opposition (MO) Speech      5 minutes (prepared)/ 3 minutes (impromptu)

The Member of the Opposition must do two things:

        i) Rebut all of the points raised by the Prime Minister. 

        ii) Summarize why the Government’s resolution must fail.

If the Opposition wishes to proposes a counter-plan it must be done at this time.  However, such a plan is not

required and there are no penalties for not introducing one.

3)  Minister of the Crown (MC)                                       5 minutes (prepared)/ 3 minutes (impromptu)

The Minister of the Crown must do three things: 

       i)   Rebuild the government’s case by reinforcing the points raised by the PM and rebutting the points

            raised by the   MO.

       ii)  Bring up one or two new constructive points for the Government’s case,

        iii) Summarize by explaining why the Government’s case still stands.

4)  Leader of the Opposition (LO)                                   7 minutes (prepared)/ 4 minutes (impromptu)

The Leader of the Opposition is the last speaker against the resolution.  They:

1)     Rebuild the opposition arguments against the resolution by rebutting arguments and evidence raised by the MC and reinforcing the rebuttal of the PM made by the MO.

2)   Summarizing why the Government’s resolution must fail.

5)  Prime Minister’s (PM) Rebuttal                                2 minutes (prepared)/1 minute (impromptu)

This is the final summary of the Government’s case and evidence.  The Prime Minister is expected to rebut arguments raised by the Opposition and summarize why the Government’s case must ultimately stand.  No new information can be introduced at this point, except in direct refutation to something brought up by the LO.  It is generally more effective to pick 2-3 main arguments in favour of the resolution and show why they still stand or critically undermine the arguments presented against the resolution by the Opposition rather than trying to hit everything in just 2 minutes.

Marking of  Speeches

4.01 Each speech will be marked out of 100, divided into three categories.

           Argument & Evidence                            40 marks

          Organization                                             40 marks

          Delivery                                                    20 marks

An average score is 75-80 marks. The main criterion for marking any speech is how persuasive it is in support of its side of the resolution, in the context of the debate and the role assigned to the speaker (see section 2 for a description of roles). The marking categories exist to assist judges with the evaluation of this.

4.02        Argument & Evidence - Marks will be awarded for the ability to present logical and evidence based arguments that directly support the case being presented.  A substantial portion of the mark is the ability to rebuild the case after it has been attacked by the other team.

4.03        Organization – Relates to the coherency of the presentation, the logic of the order in which arguments are presented and the ability to bring it all together into a tight conclusion

 4.04       Delivery – is the effectiveness of the debater’s style and includes elements such as eye contact, cadence and rhythm of the presentation, overall confidence and appropriate use of tonal variations, hand gestures and humour.

5.0         Decision of Debate

5.01 The organizers prior to each round will allocate the adjudicator(s) of each debate.

5.02 Each adjudicator will record her or his scoring of the speeches in the debate on the form provided by the organizers.

5.03 Once the debate is concluded, judges shall independently score the debate.  After all judges have completed their marking, the Head Judge in the room will collect the scoring sheets. The Head Judge is then responsible for making sure that they are delivered to the central scoring location once the debaters have been dismissed and within 20 minutes of the debating being concluded.

5.04 Judges shall not confer with each other while they are marking the debate.

5.05 The results of the debate (win/loss) shall NOT be announced by the judges, with the exception of the final round which will be announced by the Chief Judge.

5.06 Judges may, at the discretion of the Head Judge in the room, make general construction comments regarding the debate.  However, they may not express personal opinions regarding the resolution or engage in debate by disputing any of the arguments or evidence raised.

5.07 The ranking of teams, with the exception of the top two who will participate in the final round, will be determined on the basis of cumulative team scores through the rounds of debate.  The ranking of the top two teams will be determined by their team scores in the final round.  

5.08 The Chief Judge, whose decision will be final, will decide any dispute concerning the interpretation of theses rules. 

Debating Tournament Scoring Range*

50 – 59 (very rare): This speech was quite poor. A debater who makes an honest effort should not receive a score this low. This score should only be given to someone who is offensive, seriously violates the rules and/or generally ruins the nature of the debate. You must be able to justify this score.  The Chief Judge will request justification of this score and can override it raising the score to 60% at their discretion.

 60 - 69 (about 5% of speeches): This speech was poor. Stylistically it was weak and from the perspective of matter brought very little if anything to the round. Most debaters who receive this score will not have filled their time. There was an honest attempt made to debate, but it was generally ineffective and lacked any real structure. Scores in the higher end of this range will show some attempt to deal with the issues and the actual topic, but was still a poor speech. 

70 - 75 (about 15% of speeches): This speech was below average. Although the debater may have filled most of their time, there were significant gaps in both style and logic that detracted from the speech. While the debater had an understanding of the issues in the round, he/she did not do a great job addressing them.  

75 - 80 (about 30% of speeches): This speech was average. The debater was competent and generally managed to identify the major issues in the debate, both in constructive arguments and in refutation. He/she presented sufficient matter that was generally well organized. Stylistically he/she was not brilliant but at least easy to listen to. The debater will likely have filled time, and generally did all they were supposed to do.

80 - 85 (about 30% of speeches): This speech was generally very good. A score of 80% is the benchmark for someone who did everything they were supposed to, and did it reasonably well. The debater filled all of their time, constructed relevant arguments in a logical and organized manner, refuted all arguments adequately, was stylistically excellent and/or had interesting and thought provoking analysis. This debater did what they were called on to do and it was generally a polished speech.

85 – 90 (about 15% of speeches): This speech was outstanding. The debater had excellent style and charisma, and brilliant analysis. He/She brought up arguments that were insightful, creative, relevant and well developed. All arguments were refuted systematically and thoroughly. A debater who averages these scores over all of their rounds should win, or come close to, the top speaker award. Awarding this score means that you think there is a good chance this will happen.  

90+ (about 5% of speeches): This was one of the most brilliant speeches you have ever heard. Stylistically it was flawless. The argumentation and analysis were far beyond what one would expect from a high school student. You might see one or two of these speeches over the course of an entire season, and even if you do, 91 or 92 is as high as you should go. This person was a joy to listen to and you were sad when his/her time elapsed. You should be prepared to justify this score and the Chief Judge has the authority to reduce the score to 90% at their discretion.  A score of 100% is not possible. 

*adapted with thanks from the Ontario Student Debating Union