Adjudication Briefing

Schedule

• The role of the adjudicator• Basic rules• Administrative overview• Judging guidelines

▫ Team roles• Deliberation and delivery

▫ Ballots• Adjudication Test

▫ True and false▫ Test Result▫ Scale

Scratches

• It is the responsibility of adjudicators not debaters to list any scratches

• Any scratches other than your institution need to be communicated to the tab room▫ Judges test▫ In person

• Failure to list your scratches will adversely effect your judge ranking

• Information will be held in the strictest confidence

The Role of the Adjudicator

• Role of adjudicator• Principles of adjudication

▫ Holistic adjudication▫ Leave yourself out of debate

• Professionalism• Rankings

▫ Trainees▫ Rotation▫ Feedback

Quick Rules

• Debaters (4 x 2)• Timing

▫ 7 min (7:20 with grace period)▫ Protected time

• PoIs▫ Take 3 per team, minimum 1 per speaker, 1 from

each team▫ No heckling or badgering

• Call to Order

Quick Rules

• Challenging Definitions:▫ Highly inadvisable If definition is debatable stick with it

▫ Must be in LO: Explain why definition is wholly unreasonable Present a reasonable definition and engage

▫ Subsequent teams: May challenge if the previous team challenged

Administrative Overview

• Check-in• Panel: Chair, 1st/2nd panelist, trainees• Go to room, debates start 15 minutes after

announcement▫ Ballot should be in room – if not contact FM

• Missing team▫ Contact FM▫ Swing team/team race to the room

• Missing panelist – chair has deciding vote• Watch debate

▫ Take notes

Administrative Overview

• 15 minute deliberation▫ Before adjudication give ballot to

Runner/FM/Panelist• Oral adjudication

▫ Rounds 7-9 closed• Feedback (teams, panelists, trainees)

Judging Guidelines

• Focus on persuasiveness▫ Matter/manner

• Comparative▫ Burdens▫ Team positions

• Don’t involve yourself in the debate▫ Biases▫ Knowledge▫ Analyse using the “reasonable person” standard

Judging Guidelines• Content:

▫ Different stylesAccents Order of arguments/rebuttal Systematic/thematic rebuttal

▫ PoI evaluation• No automatic positions• Role of facts/evidence/lies

▫ Evaluate contextually (ability to respond)▫ Weight against a “reasonable person” standard of

knowledge

Team Roles – Front Half• Definition/Model:

▫ Provide common ground for the debate▫ Not necessarily a detailed plan (context)▫ Spec knowledge/truism/squirrel/time-set ▫ “Spirit” of the motion▫ Early in PM speech

• First opp: positive stance (status quo/alternative)• Deputy:

▫ Must introduce new matter▫ Do not need to introduce new arguments, but advisable

Roles – Extension Speeches

• Extension▫ “Propel the debate forward”▫ New analysis, arguments, rebuttal, examples▫ Does not need to be an entirely new argument, but

recommended▫ Make it clear what you extension is ▫ Consistency

• Engagement

Roles - Whips

• Win arguments and determine what arguments matter

• Summary• Defend/Emphasise Partner• New matter:

▫ GW: new arguments allowed but discouraged▫ OW: new analysis, rebuttal, examples NOT

arguments▫ Matter in whip is worth less than in extension

Deliberation and Delivery

• Chair facilitates and guides but does not dominate adjudication▫ Allow open discussion

• Attempt to comes to consensus▫ Otherwise vote ▫ Even panel – chair casts deciding vote

Deliberation and Delivery

• Chair delivers oral adjudication▫ Even if in the minority, preference is for the chair

to deliver the adjudication▫ Otherwise panelists decide

• Comparative• No longer than the deliberation• Silent rounds 7-9

Ballot

• Add correctly• Write in team names• Write legibly• Make sure speaker points are associated with the

correct speaker

Ballot

Adjudication test – True and False

• 1) The Opening Government team must provide a detailed policy when debating under the motion “THW legalize prostitution”

• False• 2) The OG clearly squirrels the debate, the OO complain,

but doesn’t challenge and chooses to continue the debate. The CO can challenge the definition through a PoI

• False• 3) If it helps clarify the debate, PoIs may be offered to

speakers on your own bench• False

Adjudication test – True and False

• 4) A speaker must rebut all the points of the previous speaker, and should be penalized if he hasn’t done so

• False• 5) A speaker that is more fluent gets more points for

style, and hence, will always be ranked higher than a speaker who isn’t fluent

• False• 6) Rebuttal must be done at the beginning of a

speech, and separated from constructive points• False

Adjudication test – True and False• 7) The opp whip may add new points of rebuttal and examples

• True

• 8) Principled points should always be valued as more significant than practical points

• False

• 9) An extension must include new arguments that weren’t discussed in the debate

• False

• 10) An argument should be deemed more important if it contains lots of facts and statistics

• False

Adjudication test – True and False

• 11) The highest speaker mark should always be allocated to a speaker form the winning team

• False• 12) An OO that successfully challenged the

effectiveness of the proposition will always be ranked higher than the OP

• False• 13) The member of opposition must present an

extension• True

Adjudication test – True and False

• 14) Whip speakers must only summarize the closing half of the debate if the first half of the debate was weak

• False• 15) If any government team places first, the

other government team must place 2nd • False• 16) If the DLO contradicts the LO, the OO must

place 4th• False

Test Results

Test Results-Speaker points• OG: 148-152

▫ 1: 76-78

▫ 2: 72-74

• OO: 151-155

▫ 1: 78-80

▫ 2: 73-75

• CG: 150-154

▫ 1: 75-77

▫ 2: 75-77

• CO: 156-160

▫ 1: 76-78

▫ 2: 80-82