BG Vette City Junior Virtual Speech Tournament
2021 — NSDA Campus, KY/US
In an effort ensure fairness in judging practices, KHSSL has standardized the point values given to student performances. Please use the following rubric in order to assign point values to each student performance. Students may not receive the same point value. Students may not receive more points than an individual more highly ranked. Judges are strongly encouraged to justify the reason for the rating on the ballot.
Excellent performance: Student/s demonstrated a great command of the performance and understanding of the material. Excellent use of speech habits (eye contact, gestures, vocal clarity, very few stumbles, etc.). “I really liked this! I would definitely watch it again.”
Good performance: Student/s demonstrated a good command of the performance and understanding of the material. Good use of speech habits (eye contact, gestures, vocal clarity, a few stumbles, etc.). Student/s may lack a bit of energy or emotional variety. “Hey, this is pretty ok. I would watch this again.”
Average performance: Student/s somewhat demonstrated a command of the performance and understanding of the material. Some observation of speech habits (eye contact, gestures, vocal clarity, a few stumbles, etc.). Student/s lacks some energy or emotional variety. “I enjoyed this, but I bet it would be even better with a bit more practice. I would love to see the performance again in the future.”
Performance needs some improvement: Student/s demonstrated a little command of the performance and understanding of the material. Growth needed in basic speech habits (eye contact, gestures, vocal clarity, etc.) and/or quite a few stumbles. Student/s lacking energy or emotional variety in performance. “Definitely putting forth effort but needs a bit more practice. I would like to see this later in the season.”
79 and Below
Needs significant improvement: Student/s did not demonstrate a command of performance or understanding of the material. Good speech habits not practiced (little or no eye contact, lack of memorization, few or no gestures, vocal clarity problems, many stumbles, etc.). Student/s may have behaved inappropriately (inattentive, on phone, deliberately distracting, etc.). Student/s lacks energy or emotional variety. “I feel that this performance would benefit from additional coaching and/or the student/s may need some more time with the material.”
DECLAMATION—Junior and Senior Divisions
In this event, each competitor delivers a speech which was written by another person, presented in a public forum by a person other than the contestant, and taken from a published source. The maximum time is ten minutes, including a required introduction. There is a thirty second grace period, after which the student must be dropped in rank/rating. Time signals may be given at the request of the competitor. No violation of the grace period in Regional/State Quarterfinal, Semifinal, or Final rounds may result in disqualification. No performance violating the grace period may receive ‘1’ in the round.
The speech must be memorized and must have been written by another person, presented in a public forum by a person other than the contestant, and taken from a published source.
The introduction should reveal the background and the author's intent; the Intro. has no time limit.
A lectern may not be used.
This event is open to all Junior division competitors, but only 9th and 10th grade competitors in the Senior division.
The selection must be a self-contained unit. The speech may be edited to fit the time constraints so long as the presentation accurately reflects the author's intent. The intro has NO required length of time.
The introduction should provide suitable background (e.g., the circumstances under which the speech was originally presented). No time limit is placed on the introduction.
No particular style should be demanded of the orator; rather, the speaker should feel free to select and develop his/her own style and then be judged according to the degree of perfection he/she has attained and his/her effectiveness in influencing the audience.
Movement and/or gestures should be natural and dictated by the material.
The suitability of the material to the maturity level of the performer should be considered.
Criteria for Judging
Did the student provide suitable background (e.g., the circumstances under which the speech was originally presented) so that the author’s intent was understood? Was the length of the Intro. appropriate to the speech?
Did the speaker display attributes of effective speaking such as poise, quality of voice, effectiveness and ease of gestures, emphasis, variety, and enunciation? Did the speaker interest and hold the attention of the audience? While any style of delivery which the speaker adopts should be judged in light of the purpose of the speech, did the speaker show effectiveness in influencing the audience rather than artificiality? Since this is a speaking event rather than an acting event, did the speaker emphasize communication rather than dramatization?
Recreation of the Spirit of the Original Presentation
Did the speaker convey the message in a sincere, honest, and realistic style in an attempt to recreate the spirit of the original presentation? Did the speaker carry his/her interpretation over to the minds of those who heard him/her?
Is the selected material suitable for the maturity level of the student?
.Note for judges about script selection:
The suitability of the material to the maturity level of the performer should be considered” with the following: “Students will perform material that may be controversial to some audiences, but that’s an important part of growing and learning and engaging in important dialogue in our communities. Therefore, students should never be punished for tackling difficult or controversial topics. However, it’s certainly possible that the student who is tackling that controversial topic is not adequately conveying the message in a believable way. This could be due to maturity level.