Rim2Rim
2021 — Twin Falls, ID/US
Judge Packets
THE SMART JUDGE - SPEECH
GENERAL JUDGING GUIDELINES
● Report to your assigned room 5 minutes before the time the contest round is scheduled to begin.
● Return your ballot immediately following each round to the ballot table to be reviewed and accepted.
● DO NOT confer with other judges about specific students/teams at any time during the tournament.
● NO FOOD during rounds, including judges.
ISSUES OF FAIRNESS & PROPER BEHAVIOR
● Fair competition requires not merely the absence of impropriety but also the appearance of propriety. Therefore, if you are affiliated with the student or school that you are judging in a way that would make you unable to be impartial. Examples include:
○ Judges who have a competitive or financial agreement - including coaching, consulting or discussion of strategies, arguments or evidence with students prior to competition.
○ Judges who socialize with students outside of the competition arena are considered to have a personal or social relationship with those students.
○ Judges who, for any reason, feel they are unable to fairly and impartially adjudicate the competition.
● Please notify the ballot table to prevent you from being assigned to judge schools for which you may be partial.
JUDGING SPEECH EVENTS
· Start the round in a reasonable time – if students do not arrive in a timely manner (or at all), contact the ballot table.
· Follow the posted order whenever possible; if contestants are not present, proceed to next one.
· If a contestant does not arrive by the end of the scheduled round, mark them as absent.
· After all contestants have been heard, they should be ranked. Do not rank them until they have all presented.
· Additionally, all contestants must be assigned rating points to allow for tiebreaking.
· The top rank is 1, and the last rank is 4. In rounds with more than five competitors, the lowest ranking students all will receive the 4 rank. For example, in a round of 7 competitors, the ranks would be 1,2,3,4,4,4,4
· The student with the 1 rank must have the highest rating out of 100 points. Ratings can be tied, but lower ranks cannot have higher ratings. For example, your ratings could be:
1, 95 | 2, 84 | 3, 84 | 4, 80 | 4, 69 | 4, 69 | 4, 65
GENERAL JUDGING GUIDELINES
● Duo Interpretation Time: 10 min maximum. Time signals not provided
Presentations will be form memory and without the use of physical objects or costumes. Selection must be a cutting from a single work of literature: one novel, one short story, one play, or one poem. Recorded material that is not printed and published is prohibited except where included in the NSDA interpretation source. Each of the two performers may play one or more characters so long as performance responsibility remains as balanced as possible. If the selection is prose or poetry and contains narration, either one or both of the performers may present the narration. During the presentation, the team must name the author and the book or magazine from which the cutting was made. Focus may be direct (performers may make eye contact with each other and/or touch each other) during the introduction, but must be indirect (no eye contact with each other and/or no touching each other) during the performance itself. Presentations must be an original interpretation including characterizations, block and an original introduction. Introductions must include the name of the piece and the author.
● Informative Speaking Time: 10 min maximum. Time signals not provided
An informative speech is an original speech designed to explain an idea, process, theory, person, place, or thing. A fabricated topic may not be used. Any non-factual reference, including a personal reference, must be so identified. It must be memorized. Audio/visual aids may or may not be used to supplement and reinforce the message. During the presentation, no election equipment is permitted. The use of live animals or any additional people as visual aids is not allowed during the speech. Items of dress put on and removed during the course of the presentation are considered costumes and may not be part of the contestant’s presentation. Visual aids may not violate law (weapons, drugs, etc.) The host school is not responsible for providing any facilities, equipment, or assistance in a contestant’s use of visual aids. Expedient set up and take down of visual aids is expected. If a visual aid displays published pictorial material, the source must be included in the work-cited page but does not need to be cited orally. Not more than 150 words of the speech may be direct quotation and such quotations must be identified orally in a printed copy of the speech supplied prior to registration.
● Extemporaneous Speaking Time: 7 min maximum. Time signals are provided
Draw Event Topics selected/prepared in draw room. Competitors will choose domestic or international news upon arrival. Topics will be chosen from those provided by the NSDA during the three months prior to State. The draw room will post three topics in each category (domestic and international) from which each speaker may choose. Additional sets of topics for each speaker will be posted every 7 minutes. He/she will have 30 minutes to prepare, and may use an index and research periodicals during this time. Resource materials will not be provided by the tournament. During the presentation, the contestant may use a 4 x 6 notecard written on one side. The topic will be handed to the judge before the contestant speaks and returned to the tab room by the judge at the conclusion of the round. The speech should be a synthesis of fact and opinion on the topic - not a memory test of any particular magazine.
● Program of Oral Interpretation (POI) Time: 10 min maximum. Time signals not provided
POI is a program of oral interpretation of thematically linked selections chosen from two or three genres: prose, poetry, drama (plays). Unlike the other interpretation events, POI contestants must use at least 2 different sources, and may use more than 2. Competitors shall devote approximately equal time to each of the genres used. All selections must be verbally identified by the title and author in the introduction. The use of a manuscript during the performance is required. Common practices include the use of a binder or folder. Reading from a book or magazine is not permitted. The intact manuscript may be used by the contestant as a prop, so long as it remains in the contestant's control at all times. No costumes or props, other than the manuscript, are permitted. While introduction and transition material may be memorized, the contestant must address the script during the rest of the performance. Materials must be from a printed or published performance. Materials must be from a printed or published source with an ISBN number. Original source without an ISBN number may be used, provided it is published and available at the tournament or included in the NSDA interpretation source. Recordings or videos may not be used as the source. Changes to the script may only be used for the purpose of transition or to eliminate profane language. Transitions may be used to clarify the logical sequence of ideas. They are not to be used for the purpose of embellishing the humors or dramatic effect of the literature.
● Radio/Broadcast Journalism Time: 5:30-6:00 minutes. Time signals not provided
Draw Event Material is prepared in the draw room. All contestants use the same material provided by the tournament management. The contestant is allowed a 30-minute period to prepare a news broadcast from the material provided. This speech must include a minimum of three pieces of news. The speech will be a news broadcast with an original commercial of no fewer than 30 seconds and an editorial commentary about a news item covered in the provided material. The editorial commentary, which shall be an original extemporaneous editorial reflecting the opinion of the contestant on a news story used in the presentation shall consume between 1-2 minutes of the total speech and shall be presented in the last half of the broadcast. Students shall enter the room one at a time while other contestants wait outside. Contestants shall sit with their back toward the judge. Emphasis should be placed on the presentation of the new stories, commercial and editorial commentary. Note: this is not an interpretation event. Contestants may time themselves, but may not have another person assist with timing. Contestants must give the judge the news article that they use for their commentary after completing their speech.
● Retold Story Time: 6 min maximum. Time signals are provided
Draw Event Stories selected/prepared in draw room. Contestants will select a story from a group of three elementary level books provided by the tournament and, in 30 minutes, be prepared to retell the story as if they are presenting in front of an elementary-age audience. The story shall follow the basic storyline of the book being retold. The story shall be retold without notes, but does not need to be memorized. The same book may be presented only once by a contestant. Contestants will enter the round one at a time and hand the book to the judge before starting their presentation. The judge will return the books to the tab room after each round, but should not read the stories during the presentation.
● Panel Discussion Time: 40 min. Time signals not provided
Panel members do not make formal speeches, but remain seated and discuss the topic informally. Prepared notes or materials are not allowed, but notes may be taken during the discussion. Emphasis is on problem solving through working towards group consensus. Panelists should be familiar with the topic and be prepared to discuss facts and opinions. Panel competitors may only bring a pen or pencil to the round. The judge will hand each competitor a blank sheet of paper as they enter the room.
● After Dinner Speaking Time: 7 min maximum. Time signals not provided.
This event should imitate a professional banquet situation. The group being addressed (real or fictional) should be identified in the speech introduction. The intent of ADS is to develop a thesis, idea, or observation of some personal or societal importance through the appropriate use of satire, quipes, and humor. ADS is not intended to be an interpretive event with multiple characters. Material presented must be original. Delivery must be memorized. While humorous quips and jokes are appropriate, they must have purpose and fit the occasion.
● Dramatic / Humorous Interpretation Time: 10 min maximum. Time signals not provided
A serious or humorous program using material from one or more pieces of prose, poetry, or drama. Selections must be memorized. Materials must be from a printed or published source with an ISBN number. An original source without an ISBN number may be used provided it is published and available at the tournament or included in the NSDA interpretation source. Recordings or videos may not be used as the source. Props, makeup, costumes are not permitted. The contestants should be evaluated on poise, quality and use of voice, physical expression and especially the ability to interpret characters correctly and consistently. This allows full body movement (bending, kneeling, turning). Presentations must be an original interpretation including characterizations, blocking and an original introduction. Introductions must include the name of the piece(s) and the author(s).
● Impromptu Speaking Time: 7 min maximum (includes prep). Time signals are provided
Draw event topics drawn/prepared in contest room. Contestants will draw three topics, choose one, and may use a total of 7 minutes between preparation and speaking, with the contestant choosing how much for each. The contestant may take notes during the preparation time, but may not refer to the notes during the presentation. Topics will be news items for one round, abstract words for one round, and quotations for one round. In semi and final rounds, the contestants will receive one news item, one quotation, and one abstract word.
● Communications Analysis Time: 10 min maximum. Time signals not provided
The contestant will present a non-original speech, portions thereof, or cuttings of various speeches by one “real life” speaker. The intent of this event should be the analysis (not interpretation) of the oratory or speech. The speech should not be from fiction, but from an actual address by a person of significance either past or present. The contestant will analyze the oratory selection(s) for approximately 50% of the presentation. The speech may be presented from memory or by use of a text.
● Original Oratory Time: 10 min maximum. Time signals not provided
This is an original, memorized persuasive speech. A maximum of 150 words of quoted material may be used in the oration. The purpose of original oratory is to persuade in order to accomplish a response of feeling, belief, or action.
● Sales Speaking Time: 3-7 minutes +2 min questioning by judge only. Time signals not provided.
The purpose of this event is to sell a singular, legitimate product and may include variations of that product. Contestants must identify brand. “Services” are not considered legitimate products. The actual product (not a model) must be displayed and/or demonstrated. Presentation may be memorized. Notes on one side of a 4 x 6 card may be used, but texts are not permitted. Video/audio aids are optional. In order to demonstrate the function of a product, that product may be put on as the demonstration begins and then removed following the demonstration. The contestant may not wear the product into the room, nor leave it on once the demonstration of that product is concluded. Additional items of clothing that might serve to enhance the visual effect of the product are considered costuming and are prohibited.
THE SMART JUDGE - DEBATE
GENERAL JUDGING GUIDELINES
● Report to your assigned room 5 minutes before the time the contest round is scheduled to begin.
● Return your ballot immediately following each round to the ballot table to be reviewed and accepted.
● DO NOT confer with other judges about specific students/teams at any time during the tournament.
● NO FOOD during rounds, including judges.
ISSUES OF FAIRNESS & PROPER BEHAVIOR
● Fair competition requires not merely the absence of impropriety but also the appearance of propriety. Therefore, if you are affiliated with the student or school that you are judging in a way that would make you unable to be impartial. Examples include:
○ Judges who have a competitive or financial agreement - including coaching, consulting or discussion of strategies, arguments or evidence with students prior to competition.
○ Judges who socialize with students outside of the competition arena are considered to have a personal or social relationship with those students.
○ Judges who, for any reason, feel they are unable to fairly and impartially adjudicate the competition.
● Please notify the ballot table to prevent you from being assigned to judge schools for which you may be partial.
JUDGING DEBATE
Debate Ballot Completion
● Before the round:
○ Ask the debaters for the exact wording of the resolution.
○ The affirmative/pro side should be listed on the left side of the ballot.
○ The negative/con side should be listed on the right side of the ballot.
○ Record each debater’s code and side - check your codes carefully and make sure the codes on your ballot are the students in your room.
● During the round:
○ Keep track of arguments by writing them down
○ Evaluate the round based only on the arguments that the debaters make and not on your personal opinion or on arguments that you would have made.
● After the round:
○ Decisions SHOULD NOT BE influenced by your preconceived notions on allowable arguments or personal preferences on debating style prejudices, unless that style is stated within your paradigm prior to the round.
○ Decisions SHOULD BE based on the following:
■ Skills in analysis
■ Use of evidence
■ Validity of argument (claim with support)
■ Clarity of organization
■ Effectiveness of delivery and presentation
○ Please completely fill out the ballot and return it promptly to the ballot table.
Idaho High School Activities Association (IHSAA)
RESPONSIBILITIES AND ETHICS IN JUDGING DEBATE
Professionalism
1. Be professional in appearance and actions.
2. Bring judging materials including timer, paper, writing implements, and judging material.
3. Arrive on time and attend scheduled pre-tournament meetings.
4. Review rules and judging procedures prior to each tournament.
5. Do not eat during the round.
Assignments
1. Avoid judging students you know personally (especially those from your school). If you are assigned to judge someone you have judged previously in the tournament or someone you know, notify the ballot table immediately.
2. Do not trade ballots with other judges.
3. Be available and ready to accept new judging assignments when necessary.
When you enter the contest room
1. Control the room setting - be aware of observers and their actions.
2. Review competition procedures (see “ground rules” for debaters).
3. Check codes - but do not ask speakers where they are from.
4. Review your judge paradigm (see “Judge Paradigm”)
Judging
1. Listen - pay attention - take notes
2. DO NOT INTERRUPT A SPEAKER to ask questions or make comments
3. Render a fair and objective decision of each contestant. Avoid favoritism and keep personal preference (including style and subject) out of the judging decision.
4. Fill out the ballot with all required information.
5. Do not disclose your decision or give oral critiques.
6. Return ballot to the ballot table promptly and wait for the ballot to be checked. Do not keep ballots during a following round or leave the tournament with a ballot.
7. Report rules infractions to the tournament officials and make appropriate notations on the ballot.
When you have questions
1. Take good notes.
2. After all presentations are complete, bring questions / concerns to the tournament desk.
Flights of Debate
Some events are scheduled to have two sequential debates per round. Students should be judged in the appropriate flight (first or second) - with the competitors listed on the ballot. However, if the first flight is not present when the round is to start and both second flight teams are present, start the 2nd flight debate.
The goal should be to keep the tournament on-time. Don’t delay the round waiting for the first flight, just to go in order. However, be careful not to mix the teams within a flight or fill out the wrong ballot for a flight. Always verify competitor codes before starting the round to insure that you have the correct teams. A bit of extra time getting started saves lots of grief later.
Typical Competitor Questions
“What is your judging paradigm?”
Paradigm: a theory or a group of ideas about how something should be done, made, or thought about. A judge’s philosophy.
The competitors are asking, “What do you, as a judge, look for in a quality debate?”
Even if you have never judged, you should choose certain things that you are going to be looking for throughout the round. We have a list of examples that you may choose from below if you feel uncomfortable making your own:
1. Looking for good arguments that make sense.
2. Explain everything to me, almost like I am a little kid.
3. If you speak so quickly that I cannot take notes, that is a BAD thing. I don’t like speed talking.
4. Looking for QUALITY arguments, not quantity arguments.
5. Convince me. I am a blank slate.
6. Show me how your side wins. Spell it out. Explain it to me.
You can use any or all of these. After judging a few debate rounds, you’ll know exactly what you are looking for and can answer this question with your own paradigm.
“How do you feel about speed?”
The student may also ask about ‘speed’. Basically, how fast you can listen. The average speaking rate is 150 words per minute...normal conversation. Debaters, when on a roll, can double that...or more. It would be like listening on fast forward. This is up to each judge individually. If you can handle it, tell the debaters. If you don’t appreciate it, tell the debaters.
Debate Event Guidelines
Policy Debate
Policy debate is a two-on-two debate where an affirmative team proposes a plan and the negative team argues why that plan should not be adopted. Some things to look for (not all affirmative cases will have all of these):
Stock Issues Affirmative Case
● Significance- Is there a significant reason to do this plan? Reason to spend the money?
● Harms- What is the problem? Why do we need this plan?
● Inherency- Is it necessary? Are we okay without this plan?
● Topicality- Do they stay within the boundaries of the resolution?
○ Plan- Is it feasible? Does it make sense?
● Solvency- Are the harms taken care of by the affirmative’s plan?
Net Benefits Affirmative Case
● Plan – action to improve the current world (status quo)
● Advantages- Extra perks that happen if the affirmative’s plan is adopted.
Negative Arguments:
● Counter evidence to stock issues
○ Turn (the opposite of the aff. argument is true)
○ Mitigation (the aff. argument is not as impactful)
● Disadvantages- Unintended consequence of the plan
● Counter plan – a proposed action that is mutually exclusive to the affirmative, yet solves the harms presented by the aff.
● Critique (Kritik) – argument challenging the theoretical underpinnings of the affirmative case demonstrating that there can be no solvency on the issue.
This is a public policy debate about communication and quick thinking. There can be NO new arguments in the rebuttals but there can be new analysis or evidence extensions that either support or strengthen the attack of a previous argument.
Policy debate is a very research-intensive activity. Unlike traditional writing where the author may briefly quote or paraphrase evidence, Policy Debate relies on the use of cards, or pieces of evidence directly quoted word-for-word from the source.
When filling out the ballot, make sure you are clear on the reason for your decision. Make sure that no preconceived notions or prejudices are involved. Be honest and fair. Pay attention to the skill of their analysis, use of evidence, and clarity of communication. These are very important in Policy Debate. Tell them exactly which arguments swayed you the most. If they do something great, tell them!
Lincoln-Douglas Debate
Lincoln-Douglas debate is designed to center on a proposition of value. A proposition of value concerns itself with what ought to be instead of what is. A value is an ideal help by individuals, societies, governments, etc. Debaters are encouraged to develop argumentation based upon a value’s perspective. In LD debates, a plan is defined by the NSDA as a formalized, comprehensive proposal for implementation. Debaters may offer generalized, practical examples or solutions to illustrate how the general principle could guide decisions.
The hallmarks of LD include:
● Value and Criterion- The value is what the competitor is valuing in the round like Justice or the welfare of society. The criterion is how they uphold their value or how it is achieved. The value and criterion debate is important in the round but not so important that a competitor should lose just because they didn't have a good one.
● Argumentation- The competitor needs to attack every contention or point that their opponent has and defend every attack on their case. If they don't then it is called a dropped point and it is up to their opponent to say that they dropped their point. Watch out for debaters claiming this and it not being true. Usually this is a huge determining factor in the round as a dropped point means that they have a solid point and we should look towards their side.
● Cross Examination- This is where one side asks their opponent questions about their case or the resolution. Only one person asks questions during their time and the other only answers the questions. The person who asks questions is allowed to interrupt their opponent as it is their cross ex time. You’re not supposed to judge on cross ex but you can take into account of the opponent doesn't know how to answer or their answers keep flow towards the other side.
● Effective Delivery- they should speak clearly and well. Usually competitors talk fast, so if a judge can't understand speed, I suggest you tell the competitors before the round so they know to go slow.
Public Forum Debate
This is a team event that advocates or rejects a position posed by the monthly resolution topic released by the NSDA. The clash of ideas must be communicated in a manner persuasive to the non-specialist or “citizen judge”, i.e. a member of the American jury. The debate should display solid logic, lucid reasoning and depth of analysis. It should also utilize evidence without being driven by it. There will be a clash of ideas that should be communicated with clarity, organizations, eloquence, and professional decorum.
The round begins with a coin toss. The winner will choose EITHER the side they will argue OR the speaker order. The loser will determine the other, unpicked option. Competitors are expected to provide a coin. The teams will then take turns presenting information, building up their cases, challenging their opponents cases, and responding to attacks directed at their own cases.
Judges evaluate teams on the quality of the arguments actually made, not on their own personal beliefs, and not on issues they think a particular side should have covered. Judges should assess the bearing of each argument on the truth or falsehood of the assigned resolution. The pro should prove that the resolution is true, and the con should prove that the resolution is not true. When deciding the round, judges should ask, “If I had no prior beliefs about this resolution, would the round as a whole have made me more likely to believe the resolution was true or not true?” Teams should strive to provide a straightforward perspective on the resolution; judges should discount unfair, obscure interpretations that only serve to confuse the opposing team. Plans (formalized, comprehensive proposals for implementation), counterplans and kritiks (off-topic arguments) are not allowed. Generalized, practical solutions should support a position of advocacy.
Quality, well-explained arguments should trump multiple, poorly-explained arguments. Debaters should use quoted evidence to support their claims, and well-chosen, relevant evidence may strengthen - but not replace - arguments. No new claims can be brought up after the first rebuttal speech, only new evidence.
Clear communication is a major consideration. Judges weigh arguments only to the extent that they are clearly explained, and they will discount arguments that are too fast, too garbled, or too jargon-laden to be understood by an intelligent high school student or a well-informed citizen. A team should not be penalized for failing to understand his or her opponent’s unclear arguments.
Congress
In Congressional Debate, judges preside over a room of students as they simulate a session of Congress. A typical Congress session lasts longer than rounds for other Speech and Debate events, and rounds are usually divided into morning and afternoon session. As students debate proposed bills and resolutions, judges evaluate each speech that is given during the round.
At the beginning of each session, each house will elect a Presiding Officer (PO), a competitor who will abstain from speaking in order to orchestrate the proceedings. The PO will do things like keep time, call for speakers, count votes, etc. Because the PO doesn't give any speeches, judges are given a special ballot to evaluate the PO, which should be done at the end of the session. At the end of the session, judges should compile all their ballots and return them to the ballot table.
Your role as a judge is to both evaluate the quality of the speeches given by the Representatives as well as insure that decorum is maintained during the round. Competitors that are speaking out of turn, ignoring the PO, acting without decorum, etc. should be asked to leave and are disqualified from the round.