Kempner High School Annual Invitational TFA Qualifying Tournament Judge Instructions & sample ballots Page 0 Kempner High School TFA State Qualifier Texas Forensic Association Sample Ballot Contestant’s Name: Will Round: Prelims Topic: Shakespeare School Code: 5 Section: 4 Speaker Number: 3 Will Henry 5.0 be successful this year? Time: 5:37 Judge’s Instructions: Evaluate the speaker using the following Criteria. Please offer justification for the ranking in the round and provide constructive suggestions to improve the student’s skills. Criteria for Evaluation Analysis and Content: Did the speaker analyze the topic adequately? Did the content show that the speaker has adequate knowledge of the subject? Was the content relevant to the topic? Introduction: Did the speaker get your attention and introduce the subject in an interesting manner? Did it relate to the rest of the speech? Organization: Were the ideas carefully selected and set forth in the speech? Supporting Materials: Did the speaker have adequate support for his/her assertions? Was the evidence pertinent and logically set forth? Judge’s Remarks Please write comments that will be helpful to the competitor. It helps if the judge writes things that the competitor did well and things they can improve upon. Style: Did the speaker exhibit command of informal conversational style, rather than stilted or formal usage? Was the language communicative rather than “memorized?” Oral Presentation: Was the speaker’s speech devoid of dialectical errors, mannerisms, etc. that call attention to themselves rather than communicate the ideas presented? Did the speaker’s bodily action contribute to his/her skill of communication? Circle One Rank, All contestants must have a different rank. 1st is BEST in the room, 8th is the worst… Sign ALL BALLOTS here. University, High School or Office Rank the speaker. Circle one (1st being best, etc.) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Judge’s Signature 5th 6th 7th 8th Affiliation Page 3 Instructions for Judges TURN OFF ALL ELECTRONIC DEVICES: Please refrain from answering a cell phone, listening to music, or using a computer during the round. These speakers deserve your full attention. SET ASIDE YOUR OWN PERSONAL FEELINGS ON THE TOPIC. Remember that the debaters have to debate BOTH sides of every resolution. PLEASE DO NOT GIVE ORAL CRITIQUES after a round is over (even if the debaters ask for them). They hold up the entire tournament and can create problems for tournament directors. WRITE CONSTRUCTIVE, RESPECTFUL COMMENTS on the ballot. Blank ballots or ballots that say “oral critique” are not acceptable unless otherwise instructed to do so by the tournament director. PLEASE DO NOT TALK TO ANYONE ABOUT YOUR DECISION until AFTER you have filled out your ballot – even if you are on a panel! Your decision should be yours and yours alone. TIMELINESS: Please be on time for your rounds. The small delays always accumulate and cause unnecessary and sometimes lengthy delays. Please do your best to keep the tournament on schedule. DO NOT TRADE YOUR BALLOT WITH ANOTHER JUDGE FOR ANY REASON. If there is a problem, please return to the judges’ table so that it can be corrected. PLEASE WAIT 15 MINUTES for missing speakers to arrive before leaving the room after the round is over. Some speakers may be cross entered! This is especially important during the SEMI and FINAL rounds. But it is the speaker’s duty to inform the judge if they are cross entered. BALLOT PICK-UP AND RETURNS: Pick up and return ballots to the tab table. It is important to return your ballots as soon as possible after each round. Returning ballots after each flight is not necessary. Our sincere thanks! Without you, this event would not be possible! Page 4 Instructions for Judges TIME SIGNALS: “Three down” means show three fingers when there are three minutes remaining, two when there are two left, and one when there is one minute remaining. At the end of time say “GRACE” out loud. When the grace period is over, say “TIME!” out loud. At that time, the speaker should stop. If you need assistance, please ask one of our tournament workers. STUDENT CONGRESS: The judges’ job in Student Congress is to rank the speeches they hear between 1 and 6 (SIX IS BEST) based on content, organization, presentation, etc. Then the judge will rank all the speakers in the room based on their overall performance in Congress (one is best). If you need assistance, please ask one of our tournament workers. Prose Interpretation: Max time 7 min / 30 sec. grace. The selection (a published piece or collection of pieces) should be of literary merit. The introduction must be memorized, but the piece itself is to be read from a binder. At time, the interpreter must complete the sentence and stop. A selection used in this event may not be used in any other event. Poetry Interpretation: Max time 7 min / 30 sec. grace. The selection should be a poem or collection of poems. The introduction must be memorized, but the piece itself is to be read from a binder. At time, the interpreter must complete the sentence and stop. A selection used in this event may not be used in any other event. The contestant is NOT bound by any UIL categories in this event. Impromptu: Contestants will draw 3 topics from an envelope and pick 1, then place the other two back. They have up to 3 minutes to prepare a speech that is a maximum of 4 minutes long. An impromptu speech, with topic selection varied round by round, section by section, may be of a humorous or serious nature. Duet Improvisation: Teams will select from three topics and have three minutes to prepare. An introduction must precede the performance and the entire performance cannot exceed five minutes in length. Extemporaneous Speaking (United States and International): Max time 7 min / 30 sec. grace. Students will enter the room with their speech prepared. They should hand their topic to the judge and begin. Students have spent 30 minutes preparing a speech answering a question related to U.S. or International current events. Dramatic Interpretation: The time limit is 10 minutes with a 30 second grace. This includes an introduction. This is an individual category in which the selections are dramatic in nature. Selections shall be cuttings from published-printed novels, short stories, plays, poetry, or any other printed-published materials. Presentations must be memorized, without props or costumes. Original Oratory: Max time 10 min. / 30 sec. grace. Orators are expected to research and speak intelligently, with a degree of originality, in an interesting manner, and with some profit to the audience, about a topic of significance. Although many orations deal with a current problem and propose a solution this is not the only acceptable form of oratory. Humorous Interpretation: Max time 10 min. / 30 sec. grace. The rules for this event are the same as Dramatic Interp, except the selection must be humorous in nature. Duet Acting: Max time 12 minutes / 30 sec. grace. This must be a cutting from a play, novel, poem, or short story. No costumes or props are allowed, other than two chairs. Students may not use the same selection for duet and another event. Duo Interpretation: Max time 10 minutes / 30 sec. grace. This is a two-person category in which the selection may be either humorous or dramatic in nature. All other rules are the same as Dramatic Interpretation. Actors do not DIRECTLY interact with one another which is not the case in DUET. Our sincere thanks! Without you, this event would not be possible! Page 5 Judge Instructions and Guidelines General Instructions • • • • • All judges are to report to their assigned rooms at least five minutes before the time the contest round is scheduled to begin. Each judge's ballot is to be secured from contest official and returned immediately following each round. Read the instructions on the ballot. Do not confer with other judges. Judges should not interrupt the flow of debates or contests in any way. They are silent evaluators and should not reveal their decision. Judging Debate Events Thank you for agreeing to judge a debate round. Your service is especially important as this event is designed to bring judges and debaters together in an educational, productive, and encouraging experience. This activity is designed to teach excellent critical thinking and public presentation skills. Your role as a judge is to determine which debater did a better job of convincing you that his/her side of the resolution more valid as a general principle. BEFORE THE ROUND: • • • • Find out the exact wording of the debate resolution and write it down. Read and follow the instructions on the judging ballot you will receive. Talk with debaters before the round starts if you wish, but the conversation should not demonstrate favoritism toward a debater. Debaters should always be respectful of one another and of you, and you should set a tone of decorum and professionalism. TO BEGIN THE ROUND: • • • • • You will be instructed as to which side the debaters have been assigned. The affirmative/pro side should be listed on the left side of the ballot and you may ask the debater to sit on the left side of the room as you, the judge, look at the debaters. The negative/con side should be listed on the right side of the ballot and you may ask the debater to sit on the right side of the room as you, the judge, look at the debaters. Record each debater’s code and side. You can confirm this information with the debaters. When both debaters are ready, the Affirmative debater (in Public Forum, the team speaking first) will stand in the front of the room to deliver the initial speech. DURING THE ROUND: • • • • • • While the debaters may keep track of their own time, judges need to monitor speaking times during the round. Speech times and order are listed on the ballot. Each debater has preparation time in each round that can be used prior to any of that debater’s speeches or cross‐examination period. Judges need to monitor how much preparation time has elapsed for each debater. During the debate, you are encouraged to take notes of the arguments made by the debaters to assist you in making your decision at the end of the round. You should also keep track of what a debater says, if anything, in response to the other debater’s arguments. To ensure fairness, your notes should help you determine if a debater is improperly making brand new arguments in the final rebuttal speeches to which the opposing debater has no opportunity to respond. Judges should not ask questions during the round. During the questioning periods in Policy and LD, the time belongs to the debater asking the questions. The questions should be brief and the answers short and specific. The person answering the questions should not be permitted to refute, but should be limited to simply answering the questions. The questioner should not be permitted to comment on the answers. Page 7 Policy Debate Debaters work in pairs (teams) to address the school year's topic, either from the affirmative side (to propose a plan to solve a problem with the topic), or the negative side (to prove how the affirmative’s plan is flawed). Argumentation includes a constructive case, cross‐examination, and refutation. Skills learned include research, policy analysis, case building, refutation, questioning, organization and communication. 1. Resolution: The resolution will be one requiring a policy judgment. It is determined annually by the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS), and is published in Rostrum and at www.NFLonline.org. 2. Order of Speeches: Each debater must give one and only one constructive speech, one period of questioning, one period of answering, and one rebuttal speech, in the following order: Affirmative Constructive Speech 8 minutes Negative Cross Examines Affirmative 3 minutes Negative Constructive Speech 8 minutes Affirmative Cross Examines Negative 3 minutes Affirmative Constructive Speech 8 minutes Negative Cross Examines Affirmative 3 minutes Negative Constructive Speech 8 minutes Affirmative Cross Examines Negative 3 minutes Negative Rebuttal 5 minutes Affirmative Rebuttal 5 minutes Negative Rebuttal 5 minutes Affirmative Rebuttal 5 minutes 5 minutes per team Prep time 3. Prompting Philosophy: Oral prompting, except time signals, either by the speaker's colleague or by any other person while the debater has the floor, is discouraged though not prohibited and may be penalized by some judges. Debaters may, however, refer to their notes and materials and may consult with their teammate while they do not have the floor. 4. Reading case and/or plan: A team may decide, when asked by the opponent team for a copy of their case and/or plan, whether or not to provide it; if the team refuses they will not be penalized in any way. 5. Timing: Timekeepers are an option but not required. If no timekeeper is used, debaters may time for their partners or the judge may keep time. Prep time for each team is five minutes. 6. Oral Critiques: No debate ballot may be returned without a reason for decision. Oral commentary is not considered a substitute for the written ballot. The NFL strongly discourages judges from disclosing decisions in the preliminary round of NFL competition. Comments made by a judge (orally or written) should be constructive and professional. Page 8 Page 9 Lincoln Douglas Debate Lincoln Douglas Debate centers on a proposition of value, which concerns itself with what ought to be instead of what is. A value is an ideal held by individuals, societies, governments, etc. Debaters are encouraged to develop argumentation based upon a values perspective. To that end, no plan (or counterplan) will be offered by the debaters. In Lincoln Douglas Debate, a plan is defined by the NFL as a formalized, comprehensive proposal for implementation. The debate should focus on reasoning to support a general principle instead of particular plans and counterplans. Debaters may offer generalized, practical examples or solutions to illustrate how the general principle could guide decisions. The hallmarks of Lincoln Douglas Debate include: 1. Parallel Burdens: No question of values can be determined entirely true or false. This is why the resolution is debatable. Therefore neither debater should be held to a standard of absolute proof. No debater can realistically be expected to prove complete validity or invalidity of the resolution. The better debater is the one who, on the whole, proves his/her side of the resolution more valid as a general principle. Burden of proof: Each debater has the equal burden to prove the validity of his/her side of the resolution as a general principle. As an LD resolution is a statement of value, there is no presumption for either side. Burden of clash: Each debater has an equal burden to clash with his/her opponent’s position. After a case is presented, neither debater should be rewarded for presenting a speech completely unrelated to the arguments of his/her opponent. Resolutional burden: The debaters are equally obligated to focus the debate on the central questions of the resolution, not whether the resolution itself is worthy of debate. Because the affirmative must uphold the resolution, the negative must also argue the resolution as presented. 2. Value Structure: The value structure (or framework) is established by the debater to serve two functions: a) to provide an interpretation of the central focus of the resolution, and b) to provide a method for the judge to evaluate the central questions of the resolution. The value structure often consists of a statement of the resolution (if affirming), definitions (dictionary or contextual), the value premise (or core value), and the value criterion (or standard). This structure is commonly but not always employed. Definitions: The affirmative should offer definitions, be they dictionary or contextual, that provides a reasonable ground for debate. The negative has the option to challenge these definitions and to offer counter‐definitions. Value Premise/Core Value: A value is an ideal held by individuals, societies, governments, etc. that serves as the highest goal to be protected, respected, maximized, advanced, or achieved. In general, the debater will establish a value which focuses the central questions of the resolution and will serve as a foundation for argumentation. Value Criterion/Standard: In general, each debater will present a value criterion (a standard) which the debater will use to: explain how the value should be protected, respected, maximized, advanced, or achieved. measure whether a given side or argument protects, respects, maximizes, advances, or achieves the value. evaluate the relevance and importance of an argument in the context of the round. The relationship between the value premise and the criterion should be clearly articulated. During the debate, the debaters may argue the validity or priority of the two value structures. They may accept their opponent’s value structure, prove the superiority of their own value structure, or synthesize the two. 3. Argumentation: Because Lincoln Douglas Debate is an educational debate activity, debaters are obligated to construct logical chains of reasoning which lead to the conclusion of the affirmative or negative position. The nature of proof may take a variety of forms (e.g., a student’s original analysis, application of philosophy, examples, analogies, statistics, expert opinion, etc.). Arguments should be presented in a cohesive manner that shows a clear relationship to the value structure. Any research should be conducted and presented ethically from academically sound and appropriately cited sources. 4. Cross‐Examination: Cross‐examination should be used by the debater to clarify, challenge, and/or advance arguments in the round. Page 10 5. Effective delivery: Lincoln Douglas Debate is an oral communication activity that requires clarity of thought and expression. Arguments should be worded and delivered in a manner accessible to an educated non‐specialist audience. This encompasses: ‐ Written communication: Cases and arguments should be constructed in a manner that is organized, accessible, and informative to the listener. The debater should employ clear logic and analysis supported by topical research. ‐Verbal communication: The debater has the obligation to be clear, audible and comprehensible, and to speak persuasively to the listeners. Additionally, debaters should strive for fluency, expressiveness, effective word choice, and eloquence. ‐ Non‐verbal communication: The debater should demonstrate an effective use of gestures, eye‐contact, and posture. Throughout the debate, the debaters should demonstrate civility as well as a professional demeanor and style of delivery. Rules 1. 2. 3. Resolution: The resolution will be one requiring a value judgment. Districts must use the current Lincoln Douglas topic for the month in which the competition occurs. Refer to Rostrum or www.NFLonline.org for the current topic. Order of speeches: Affirmative Constructive 6 Minutes Negative Cross Examination 3 Minutes Negative Constructive 7 Minutes Affirmative Cross Examination 3 Minutes Affirmative Rebuttal 4 Minutes Negative Rebuttal 6 Minutes Affirmative Rebuttal 3 Minutes Prep Time 4 Minutes per debater Timing: A timekeeper is an option but isn’t required. If no timekeeper is used, debaters may time for their opponent or the judge may keep time. Prep time for each debater is 4 minutes. 4. Reading case: A team may decide, when asked by the opponent team for a copy of their case, whether or not to provide it; if the team refuses they will not be penalized in any way. 5. Oral critiques: No debate ballot may be returned in without a reason for decision. Oral commentary is not considered a substitute for the written ballot. The NFL strongly discourages judges from disclosing decisions in the preliminary round of NFL competition. Comments made by a judge (orally or written) should be constructive and professional. Page 11 Page 12 Public Forum Debate 1. Resolution: Specific resolutions for district tournaments held during certain months and the National Tournament topic will be published in Rostrum and at www.NFLonline.org. Public Forum Debate focuses on advocacy of a position derived from the issues presented in the resolution, not a prescribed set of burdens. 2. Procedure and order of speeches: Prior to EVERY round and in the presence of the judge(s), a coin is tossed by one team and called by the other team. The team that wins the flip may choose one of two options: EITHER the SIDE of the topic they wish to defend (pro or con) OR the SPEAKING POSITION they wish to have (begin the debate or end the debate). The remaining option (SIDE OR SPEAKING POSITION) is the choice of the team that loses the flip. Once speaking positions and sides has been determined, the debate begins (the con team may lead, depending on the coin flip results). 3. First Speaker ‐ Team A 4 Minutes First Speaker ‐ Team B 4 Minutes Crossfire (first question by speaker A1) 3 Minutes Second Speaker ‐ Team A 4 Minutes Second Speaker ‐ Team B 4 Minutes Crossfire (first question by A2) 3 Minutes Summary ‐ First Speaker ‐ Team A 2 Minutes Summary ‐ First Speaker ‐ Team B 2 Minutes Grand Crossfire 3 Minutes Final Focus ‐ Second Speaker ‐ Team A 2 Minutes Final Focus ‐ Second Speaker ‐ Team B 2 Minutes Prep Time 2 Minutes per team Timing: Timekeepers are an option but not required. If no timekeeper is used, debaters may time for their partners or the judge may keep time. Prep time for each team is two minutes. 4. Plans/Counterplans: In Public Forum Debate, the NFL defines a plan or counterplan as a formalized, comprehensive proposal for implementation. Neither the pro or con side is permitted to offer a plan or counterplan; rather, they should offer reasoning to support a position of advocacy. Debaters may offer generalized, practical solutions. 5. Prompting Philosophy: Oral prompting, except time signals, either by the speaker's colleague or by any other person while the debater has the floor, is discouraged though not prohibited and may be penalized by some judges. Debaters may, however, refer to their notes and materials and may consult with their teammate while they do not have the floor and during the Grand Crossfire. 6. Reading case: A team may decide, when asked by the opponent team for a copy of their case, whether or not to provide it; if the team refuses they will not be penalized in any way. 7. Oral Critiques: No debate ballot may be returned in without a reason for decision. Oral commentary is not considered a substitute for the written ballot. The NFL strongly discourages judges from disclosing decisions in the preliminary round of NFL competition. Comments made by a judge (orally or written) should be constructive and professional. 8. Judges: The use of community judges is strongly encouraged. Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Extemporaneous Speaking L This event focuses on knowledge of current events and the ability to analyze and present information with minimal preparation time. Contestants begin the event in the preparation (or draw) room. Students draw topics at staggered times and have 30 minutes to prepare a speech on the selected topic. Topics are in the form of questions on national or international events to be answered in the speech. Students may choose to use a note card in the speech presentation for the preliminary round only. 2. Speakers will enter the room one at a time at approximately 7 minute intervals to present their speeches. Once finished, the contestant will usually leave and call in the next contestant (although some may elect to stay and watch the remainder of the speeches). If several minutes pass without a contestant entering the room, you should check to see if the student is waiting in the hail. 3. Be sure to check that the student’s name matches your ballot. Because of cross-entry, students may not appear in the room to speak in the same order they are listed on the master ballot. 4. The time limit is 7 minutes with a 30-second grace period, 5. Please write the contestant’s name and school number listed on the master ballot on the student’s individual ballot. Please note any name changes on both the master ballot and the individual ballots. 6. Specific judging criteria is listed on the ballot. Since these ballots are eventually returned to the students, your comments are encouraged. Please try to give encouraging comments along with suggestions for improvement. 7. After the last speaker is finished, keeping the criteria of the event in mind, record your ranking for the contestants by circling your decision on each individual ballot and record the ranking on the master ballot. ABSOLUTELY NO TIES MAYBE GIVEN! You may want to keep a running tally of the rankings after each speaker performs. Rank the best performer in the round 1, the second best as 2, and so on, for each speaker in the round. 8. Ifthere is more than one judge DO NOT confer. Make your decision based on your impression. Please wait until alljudges are present to begin the round. 9. Sign your completed ballots and return them to the judges’ room. Questions to ask yourself: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Did the contestant’s speech answer the topic question? Did the speaker use a variety of current news sources for support? Was the speech exhibit a command of conversational speaking style? Did the speaker show a depth of knowledge on the subject? Were the ideas presented in the speech well organized? Did gesture and bodily movement emphasize important ideas in the speech? Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Duet Acting/Duo Interp 1. These events involve 2 competitors performing a selected published work. Selecti ons may either be serious or humorous in nature. There should be an introduction which includ es both the title and author. 2. Judges should look for a depth in understanding in the interpretation, believability the in characters, and a good balance between the interaction of the 2 characters. The true purpos e is to communicate and entertain through the emotions of the scene. 3. Please make sure that all participants’ names and school codes are written correct on the ly ballot. Also,be sure that the rankings on the individual ballots match the rankin on gs the master ballot. If there are name changes, please make them in both places. 4. Judging is based on the criteria listed on the individual ballot. Since these critiqu e sheets are eventually returned to the students, your comments are encouraged. Please try to give encouraging comments along with suggestions for improvement. 5. After the last speaker has finished, keeping the criteria for the event in mind, record your ranking of each speaker by circling your decision on each individual ballot. ABSOLUTE LY NO TIES MAY BE GIVEN. You may want to keep a running tally of the rankings after each performance. 6. If there is morç than one judge, please wait until all judges are present before the first speake r begins. Please DO NOT confer with other judges when making your decision. Make your decision based on your own impression. 7. Sign your ballots and return them to the judging table. Questions to ask yourself: 1. Did the team create the atmosphere of the scene? 2. Did the introduction adequately set the tone? 3. Was the selection well-balanced between the two actors? 4. Was the team believable? 5. Did the selection utilize various emotional levels throughout? Some differences between Duo and Duet: 1. Time limits: Duet Acting is 12 minutes; Duo is 10. 2. Interaction: Performers in duet interact directly with each other. Duo performers act in tandem and should not have direct eye contact or touching. 3. Props: Duet teams may use 2 chairs as props. No other props or costuming is allowed. Duo teams may use no props or costumes. Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 ___ Texas Forensic Association Original Oratory Ballot Contestant’s Name: Code:_________ Round: 7: 3Z— Topic: Judge’s Instructions: Evaluate the speaker using the following Criteria. Please offer justification for the ranking in the round and provide constructive suggestions to improve the student’s skills. Criteria for Evaluation Judge’s Remarks Analysis and Content: Did the speaker analyze the topic adequately? Is the subject worthwhile and fresh? Oc)C cAr.ce_ rc f2 4 rY’Q-i’ S Introduction: Did the speaker get your attention and introduce the subject in an interesting manner? Did it apply to the rest of the speech? Organization: Were the ideas carefully selected and set forth in the speech? - Por s4 ed by LY\k- SY”l h • 3 p- t€__- Style: Did the speaker enunciate? Was the language usage better than average? Was style appropriate for the topic? Oral Presentation: Was the speaker communicative? Were mannerisms and posture appropriate? Did the speaker convey ideas effectively? L.. 3 rsk Supporting Materials: Did the speaker have adequate supporting materials for the main ideas presented? Conclusion: Was the conclusion concise? Was it well motivated? Did it effectively tie the speech together? - oc )oLr O.V-’ 1 ‘ orc Qonc*O OLh’ k-k S, So kdc ‘I-P ÷L4keck - Or\ 4 o f’. • ;C)AS /our OicL -- s+c-c_ 4o krvijj Yc’j oo C-Ic bLr na4- aLL Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34
© Copyright 2024