BG Vette City Junior Virtual Speech Tournament

2021 — NSDA Campus, KY/US

• Invite
• Pairings
• Live Updates
• Results

Humorous Interpretation

Event Description:

********Judge Notice********

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.

Point Value

Description

100-95

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.”

94-90

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.”

89-85

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.”

84-80

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.”

HUMOROUS INTERPRETATION-- Senior and Junior Divisions

Judge Instructions

Summary of Rules

1. In this event, each student performs a published piece of humorous literature, which may be a monologue or dialogue. 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.

2. The scene may come from a published play, short story, novel, TV, or movie.

3. The selection must be memorized. The cutting may be a monologue or dialogue. If transitions are used, no more than 10% may be narrative. Offstage focus must be employed when one character speaks to another character; however, if the speaker is supposed to address the audience, he/she may make eye contact.

4. Limited movement is permissible in the introduction and during the selection. Limited movement is defined as movement within an area of ten feet in diameter. The area may be used for actions including bending, stooping, turning, and pivoting. When a "teaser" taken directly from the script is used in the introduction, this is considered part of the selection and movement is therefore restricted as above. There are no properties.

Hints for Judges

1. The introduction should include enough background information to establish the selection with the audience. Delivery should be interpretation rather than acting. Character delineation should be clear. If you close your eyes, the vocal characterization should be very evident and appropriate to the character. Physical delineation (i.e., facial expression, gestures, and suggestive bodily delivery) should be evident.

2. The cutting should be a self-contained unit, including a beginning, middle, and an end. The performance should emphasize interpretation skills (internalization) rather than techniques and mechanics. Characters may address each other and/or the audience.

3. The suitability of the material to the maturity level of the performer should be considered. Base your decision on the performance, not your taste in literature.

Criteria for Judging

I. Introduction of Selection

Did the student provide necessary information to prepare the audience to listen? Did the student establish the mood and/or meaning of the selection? Innovative introductions should not be discouraged.

II. Presentation of Selection

Was the student in control of the performance and the audience? Was there an empathic response? Did the

student demonstrate good speech habits as they would pertain to the student's interpretation?

III. Characterization and Character Delineation

Did the student clearly and correctly develop and define characters in the selection? While this is not an

exercise in acting, did the student develop character posture, muscle tone, facial expression, and limited

gestures appropriate to The selection?

IV. The Selection

Did the student retain the essence of the material from which the cutting is taken? Did the cutting itself

possess a unity of its own which built to a natural climax and conclusion? 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.