high school judging packet 2015

JUDGING HIGH SCHOOL DEBATE - BASICS

1

JUDGINGHIGH SCHOOL DEBATE


2

WELCOME Thank you for volunteering to serve as a high school debate judge. In this packet you will find all the information needed to judge debate effectively.

RESOLUTION (DEBATE TOPIC):Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially curtail its domestic surveillance.

YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES: MAINTAIN – proper debate round structure by ensuring the speech order/speech times are adhered to.

LISTEN – give students your full attention. Please refrain from texting, using the internet, or other distractions.

DETERMINE – based on arguments in the round and not personal opinion, which team better proved their position.

AWARD – speaker points and record them on the ballot provided.

EDUCATE & ENCOURAGE – students to help them improve by providing feedback on the ballot provided, as well as orally after the debate is finished.


3

MAINTAIN ROUNDSTRUCTURE

Prior to beginning the round, ask students for their sides and speech positions, and record this information on your ballot.

Ensure the speakers follow the proper speech order

Time the speeches to ensure fairness/maintain proper round structure

Keep track of prep time for each team


4

ROUND STRUCTUREEach team is assigned a side, either affirmative or negative. The affirmative (A) team presents arguments in favor of supporting the resolution, and the negative (N) team presents arguments against.

On each team, students are assigned speech positions of either 1 or 2. These positions determine the arguments they are responsible for. Prior to beginning the round, ask students their speaker positions (1A, 2A) and (1N, 2N) then record on your ballot.

As a judge, your job is to time the speeches as they take place and ensure they follow the order below:

KeyAC: Affirmative ConstructiveNC: Negative ConstructiveAR: Affirmative RebuttalNR: Negative RebuttalCX: Cross Examination

Speech Order1AC—8 minutes

CX by 2N—3 minutes1NC—8 minutes

CX by 1A—3 minutes2AC—8 minutes

CX by 1N—3 minutes2NC—8 minutes

CX by 2A—3 minutes

Prep Time: 5 minutes per team 1NR—5 minutes1AR—5 minutes2NR—5 minutes2AR—5 minutes


5

Constructive Speeches

The goal of the constructive speech is to build your set of arguments affirming or negating the resolution.

Rebuttal Speeches

The goal of rebuttals is to address and counter key arguments of the opposing side, as well as to assert why the judge should choose your side. During the first negative rebuttal (1NR), new arguments are allowed as long as their are in response to a new argument the affirmative made in the 2AC. During the first affirmative rebuttal (1AR), new arguments are allowed as long as they are in response to a new argument the negative made in either the 2NC or 1NR. In the final rebuttals, no new arguments are allowed.

Our advice is to keep a light touch in applying these guidelines, and only invoke them when one team seems to be abusing their privilege. For the most part, letting students make arguments includes letting them be the ones to argue that their opponents are being abusive.

Beginning debaters may go out of turn, mess up speech order, or speak very unclearly. While you cannot provide any comment about their arguments specifically, you can correct them if they mess up order, ask them if they want additional prep time, and ask for them to speak clearer– sometimes students need the extra support! If students ask to help their partner answer cross-examination questions, let them.


6

LISTEN Use cell phone only to time speeches and prep time Let students know you will be timing them on your phone. When timing rounds, please do not text, use the internet or other cell phone applications. Maintain your focus on the round, students will be able to tell if you are not paying attention to them.

Take detailed notes


7

MAKE A DECISION Evaluate the arguments presented

Record which team won on your ballot


8

As a judge, you are the decision maker in the debate round.

In making your decision, consider/determine: • Based on arguments in the round and not personal opinions,

which team better proved that their position is preferable to their opponents

• Which team better used and explained their evidence to support their ideas in the debate round

• Which team better analyzed the weaknesses in their opponents’ arguments

Record your decision on the ballot and include why you made the decision.

These comments will be viewed by coaches and will help them provide students with individual direction and support.


9

AWARD SPEAKERPOINTS

Assign each individual debater speaker points and record on your ballot


10

Judges are also responsible for awarding each individual speaker points.

Speaker Points Speaker points help differentiate between teams with the same number of wins. Assign each debater speaker points on a scale between 26 and 30. Multiple debaters can receive the same number of speaker points.

26 – D27 – C28 – B29 – A-30 – A+ 26 or 30 speaker points should be rare.


11

GIVE FEEDBACKAs a judge, you are there to help students improve! You will have five minutes to give feedback at the end of the round.

When giving feedback:• We encourage you to verbally give your decision.

• Focus on the content of their arguments and speech, not elements out of the student’s control or that have nothing to do with the debate such as a stutter or the way a student dressed.

• Balance criticism with positive observations of the speeches. Make sure to complement each student about at least one thing. Keep negative comments short and about things that students can fix.


12

Sample FeedbackThese are some sample comments that one could use when critiquing students. round.

• Very persuasive reading of the 1AC.

• You had great answers in the cross-examination about your affirmative.

• You did a good job extending and explaining the 2AC arguments in your 1AR

• Try to pace yourself in the 1AR because there will always be a lot to answer in a short amount of time

• Great analytical arguments in the 1NC

• You has some really interesting questions in the cross-examination of...

• Nice explanations of your arguments and extensions in the 1NR

• Try to fully explain the impacts to your arguments in order to answer the question, "why is the plan a bad idea?"

• Your answers were well organized and numbered

• Your cross examination did a great job of clarifying some difficult points

• Great explanation of the disadvantages and how the impacts weigh against doing the plan.

Other comments could include:• You were clear• Good eye contact• Great speech• Keep your head up• Be louder

• You were very convincing in your speech

• You were a persuasive speaker• You answered all the questions in

Cross Examination


13

THE BASICS OF POLICY DEBATEThere are a lot of ways to think about debate. This document focuses on the traditional form, where we talk about whether the government should change what it is doing. The AFFIRMATIVE (or AFF) side of the debate says the government should make a particular change. The NEGATIVE (or NEG) explains why the Aff’s change is not a good idea.

What does the Aff need to say?

The Aff starts the debate by discussing one or more things that are bad in the world right now. In policy debate, these things are called HARMS. It is important to show that there are harms, because if nothing is going wrong right now, there is no reason to do anything different.

Then the Aff talks about why these harms won’t be solved if the government keeps doing what it is doing. This is called INHERENCY. It is important to show inherency, because if the government is already in the process of solving the problem, there is no reason to do anything different.

Next, the Aff describes a specific change that they want the government to make. This is called the PLAN. It is important to have a plan, because the Aff’s whole job is to explain how the government should act differently.

Lastly, the Aff explains how their plan will fix the harms. This is called SOLVENCY. It is important to have solvency, because if the plan doesn’t actually fix the harms, there is no reason to do it.

Harms, inherency, plan, and solvency make up the Aff’s CASE. The Aff must make a complete case in their very first speech.

What can the Neg say?

The most obvious thing for the Neg to do is show why the Aff’s harms, inherency, and solvency arguments are incorrect. Attacking the Aff like this is called going ON-CASE, because the Neg explains why the Aff’s case is incorrect.


14

All the following arguments are called OFF-CASE because the Neg explains why the Aff’s plan is a bad idea.

The Neg can argue that the plan will cause a problem. This is called a DISADVANTAGE (or Disad or DA). A disad has three parts. The first part describes the way the world is now. This is called UNIQUENESS. The second part explains logically how the plan somehow disrupts the way things are right now. This is called the LINK. The last part explains why the disruption is bad. This is called the IMPACT. The uniqueness and link work together to show that only the plan (and not something else) cause the disruption. The impact is important because if the plan’s disruption is not bad, then there’s no reason to reject the plan.

The Neg can argue that instead of the plan, the government should make a different change. This is called a COUNTERPLAN. The Neg needs to show that their counterplan is better than the Aff’s plan. That is called the NET BENEFIT, but that isn’t enough by itself. They also need to show that the counterplan is COMPETITIVE. Competitive means the counterplan is a reason to not do the plan. If doing both the plan and the counterplan together is a good idea, then the counterplan isn’t competitive.

Lastly, the Neg might question an assumption the Aff is making. This is called a CRITIQUE (or KRITIK or K). Like a disad, a kritik has a link. A kritikal link shows how the Aff is making a particular assumption. Also like a disad, a kritik has an impact that explains why that assumption is bad. Instead of uniqueness, a kritik has an ALTERNATIVE (or ALT). The alt describes how we should think differently, in order to avoid making that harmful assumption.

So who wins the debate?

The Aff will say that the plan will do a lot of good. The Neg will say that the plan will not do much good, or won’t do much good compared to a counterplan. The judge weighs the arguments and decides how much good the plan will do.

The Aff will also say that the plan will not cause problems. The Neg will say that the plan will cause problems. The judge weighs these arguments and decides how much harm the plan will do.

If the judge decides the plan causes more problems than it solves, the Neg wins. But if the judge decides the plan solves more problems than it causes, the Aff wins. If the judge decides it’s a tie, the Neg wins.


15

S P E E C H C H E A T S H E E T

Speech

What the Debater Should Be Doing

Time (min) �

1AC

1st Affirmative Constructive

1AC reads the pre-written affirmative argument. This introduces a problem and the affirmative’s plan for fixing it

8

Cross-Ex

2N cross-examines 1A

3

1NC

1st Negative Constructive

1NC presents arguments that exposes problems with the 1AC’s argument, and explains why affirmative’s plan is flawed

8

Cross-EX

1A cross examines 1N

3

2AC

2nd Affirmative Constructive

2AC responds to every argument that negative made against the affirmative’s case

8

Cross-Ex

1N cross examines 2A

3

2NC

2nd Negative Constructive

2NC chooses some of problems with affirmative to focus on more deeply, as well as answering any affirmative responses to argument.

8

Cross-Ex

2A cross examines 2N

3

1NR

1st Negative

Rebuttal

Similar to 2NC, but covers more negative arguments and focuses on specific arguments

5

1AR

1st Affirmative

Rebuttal

1AR responds to all the arguments made against the affirmative case during the negative constructive and rebuttal

5

2NR

2nd Negative

Rebuttal

2NR summarizes the arguments that matter the most and provides clear evidence why the negative argument is more sound

5

2AR

2d Affirmative

Rebuttal

2AR summarizes affirmative arguments that are most important and provides clear evidence why the affirmative argument is more sound

5


16

SAMPLE


17

SAMPLE


18

THANK YOU FOR VOLUNTEERING TODAY

MINNESOTA URBAN DEBATE LEAGUECampus Box 262211 Riverside Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55454 612-330-1730 [email protected]

augsburg.edu/urbandebateleague

high school judging packet 2015

Documents