Heart Of Texas District Qualifier

for the 2022 National Tournament

Judge Information

Interested in Judging at the HOT NSDA District Tournament? Fill out this form:Judge Interest Google Form

Judge Pay Rate:
$200 Congress Only (Friday morning AND Friday afternoon, only)
$150 Saturday Only
$250 Friday Night and Saturday (available to judge every round with the exception of Congress)
$350 Congress plus Friday and Saturday

Judge information

A judge must recuse themself from judging a student under the following conditions:

1. The judge and the student may be perceived to have a competitive or financial agreement that may bias thejudge’s impartial evaluation of the round. Examples include but are not limited to:

A. The student attends a school (or a collaboration of schools) that the judge attended, coached for, orcompeted with. NOTE: Two potential exceptions to this guideline would be that if a designated committee orombudsperson felt that enough time has passed since that judge’s attendance at the school to resolveconcerns of impropriety. In addition, if both coaches felt comfortable with a judge that graduated from aschool of one of the competitors, the tab room may allow that judge placement.

B. The judge has a paid or unpaid coaching, consulting, or judging relationship with the student or schoolduring the same academic year. NOTE: Serving a tournament-hired judge does not constitute a conflict ofinterest.

C. The judge has received or provided expressed or implied offers to provide future coaching, consulting, orjudging to a school or student.

D. The judge has provided exclusive pre-round preparation to a student either before or during a tournamentthrough any method including electronically, verbally, or through the transfer of resources. NOTE: Sharing ofinformation does not constitute preparation, but the discussion of strategies, arguments, evidence, etc.,would constitute preparation. If such preparation is provided during a tournament, the judge shouldimmediately (before pairings are released) recuse themself from judging the student they prepared for therest of the tournament. If practice rounds before or during the tournament has occurred between schoolsthat a judge is fulfilling obligations for and could potentially judge, that would be defined as preparation andall parties should consider that a conflict.

2. The judge and the student may be perceived to have a personal or social arrangement that may bias the judge’simpartial evaluation of the round. Examples include but are not limited to:

A. The judge and the student may be perceived to have had a personal relationship that may bias the judge’simpartial evaluation of the round.
B. The judge and the student are or have been in a familial, physical, or emotional relationship.
C. The judge and the student have communications of a personal nature over email, telephone, or the internetincluding social networking sites that goes beyond casual exchanges. For example, communications that areextensive and/or repetitive may create a conflict. Judges who socialize with the student outside of thecompetition arena are considered to have established a personal or social relationship with that student.

3. The judge does not believe they are able to fairly and impartially adjudicate a competition involving a particularstudent for whatever reason.

Judges may choose to recuse themselves from adjudicating a student under the following conditions. (If these conditionsexist, it is the affirmative duty of the judge to make such information publicly available prior to the round beginning.)
1. The judge shares transportation and/or lodging with the student’s team on a regular basis.
2. The judge has a personal, financial, or familial relationship with the student’s coach or member of the student’sfamily.
3. The judge is an administrator of, currently employed by, or anticipates employment from a forensic-relatedenterprise with whom a financial or advisory relationship exists or is sought with the student.

NOTE: Theseguidelines do not prohibit lab leaders/institute staff from judging their lab students; however, if those lab leadersmaintain consistent contact with those students and/or engage in personal relationships with them, they shouldrecuse themselves from judging those specific individuals.

The expectation of competitors, judges, and coaches is to engage in the highest levels of professionalism and integrity.While the responsibility is on judges to aid transparency, the responsibility exists for coaches and student competitors aswell. It is the affirmative duty of all coaches and debaters to assist efforts in transparency. No decisions will be modified asa result of disclosed information.