Judging

We are always actively looking for judges but are also committed to ensuring an experienced and well-rounded judging pool. There will be a very active emphasis on recruiting talented and experienced judges. We would like to have as many experienced judges have as many ballots as possible. Current and former NDT-CEDA debaters will be prioritized in the higher calibre divisions and actively encourage NPDA/NFALD debaters to contact us to reserve ballots of their choosing.

This may mean that your teams may have “dirty” experienced judges in preliminary rounds although we will attempt to avoid this practice. All judges will be marked “clean” in elimination rounds.

If you know of any current or former college debater that would like to give back and volunteer to judge in Aaron's memory, please contact me.

Judging Anti-Harassment Clause

All judges who actively participate in the Aaron Thomas Memorial Invitational at Andover Central are agreeing to be a crucial part of the education process of young people. As such, judges ought to view their participation as part of a process of meaningful pedagogy that is free of explicit bias and discrimination. By accepting a ballot, judges are agreeing to abstain from decisions and commentary that are racist, classist, misogynist, homophobic, transphobic, ableist, or are in any other way expressly problematic. This includes observations or remarks about the physical appearance and attire of students that are disparaging or intended to harass someone’s affiliation as a member of a protected class.

Judges who fail to adhere to this policy will be immediately removed from the pool and their school will be subject to a $50 fine.

Disclosure of Decisions and Oral Critique Policy

The Aaron Thomas Memorial Invitational at Andover Central serves as both a competitive and educational forum for debaters, coaches, and judges. As such, the tournament encourages judge-debater interaction by making decision disclosures and giving oral critiques. Oral critiques are not mandatory and competitors should abstain from requesting feedback – critiques will happen naturally or not at all. Teams are expected to be respectful and free of hostility to judges regardless of a decision or risk disqualification.

Judges: please submit your ballot online or to the ballot table before giving any post-round feedback.

Please limit oral critiques to no longer than 5 minutes.

Novice Judging

Any third or fourth year debaters may judge in the Novice division. After the Varsity division’s advancing bracket is announced, any third or fourth year debaters from non-clearing teams may register as a judge for the Novice division elimination rounds.
Experienced debaters serving as Novices judges are subject to the Anti-Harassment Clause.
Current debaters serving as judges are not permitted to give oral critiques.

Forfeit Policy

Any team arriving later than 15 minutes after the posted start time will be at the risk of forfeit imposed at the exclusive discretion of the event tournament staff. Judges should alert the tabroom once the 15 minute mark has passed without both teams present. Forfeiture necessitates a loss and 0 speaker points. Any team experiencing what they believe to be a legitimate delay should make every attempt to communicate with the tab room if they are going to be late.