How to Judge a BP Debate at the Heart of Europe BP Track 2013 Definitions Matter (Content) Manner (Style) Structure (Strategy) Individual Points Adjudicator Duties Forbidden Interference Martin Režný Heart of Europe 2013 BP Track, Olomouc, 29.7.-1.8.2013

How to judge... DEFINITIONS No „squirrels“ No truisms A BP Debate Definitions How to judge... DEFINITIONS No „squirrels“ No truisms Set in the present Fair, allowing for a ballanced debate The Leader of the Opposition may challenge an unreasonable definition and then must provide a reasonable alternative. However, every new unreasonable definition may be challenged by the first speaker of the next team. Martin Režný Definitiions Matter (Content) Manner (Style) Structure (Strategy) Individual Points Adjudicator Duties Forbidden Interference www.c-d-s.cz

How to judge... MATTER (CONTENT) Relevant Logical Consistent A BP Debate Matter How to judge... MATTER (CONTENT) Relevant Logical Consistent Persuasive Except for the last two speakers, all must bring positive matter, except for the first speaker, all must do rebuttal. All matter should be assessed from the viewpoint of an average reasonable person without personal bias. Martin Režný Definitiions Matter (Content) Manner (Style) Structure (Strategy) Individual Points Adjudicator Duties Forbidden Interference www.c-d-s.cz

How to judge... MANNER (STYLE) Eye contact Voice modulation A BP Debate Manner How to judge... MANNER (STYLE) Eye contact Voice modulation Hand gestures Language and accent Use of notes Style should enhance the speech, not hinder or diminish it. Accent becomes a problem only when it hampers the intelligibility of the message. Martin Režný Definitiions Matter (Content) Manner (Style) Structure (Strategy) Individual Points Adjudicator Duties Forbidden Interference www.c-d-s.cz

How to judge... STRUCTURE (STRATEGY) Framing of the speech A BP Debate Structure How to judge... STRUCTURE (STRATEGY) Framing of the speech Timing of matter elements Assessing relevance and prioritizing Team consistency Debater should always start with introduction, end with a conclusion and present a series arguments in between. It is wrong to waste a lot of time on irrelevancies, time should be used efficiently. Martin Režný Definitiions Matter (Content) Manner (Style) Structure (Strategy) Individual Points Adjudicator Duties Forbidden Interference www.c-d-s.cz

How to Judge A BP Debate Individual Points Individual Points A 90-100 Excellent to flawless. The standard of speech you would expect to see from a speaker at the Semi Final / Grand Final level of the tournament. This speaker has many strengths and few, if any, weaknesses. B 80-89 Above average to very good. The standard you would expect to see from a speaker at the finals level or in contention to make to the finals. This speaker has clear strengths and some minor weaknesses. C 70-79 Average. The speaker has strengths and weaknesses and roughly equal proportions. D 60-69 Poor to below average. The team has clear problems and some minor strengths. E 50-59 Very poor. This speaker has fundamental weaknesses and few, if any, strengths. Martin Režný Definitiions Matter (Content) Manner (Style) Structure (Strategy) Individual Points Adjudicator Duties Forbidden Interference www.c-d-s.cz

Adjudicator Duties Confer about the debate Determine team rankings How to Judge A BP Debate Adjudicator Duties Adjudicator Duties Confer about the debate Determine team rankings Determine team grades Determine speaker marks Provide verbal feedback Complete documentation Decision (team ranking) is either arrived at by 1) consensus, 2) majority vote or 3) Chair override. Unless Chair splits, he or she gives the feedback. Martin Režný Definitiions Matter (Content) Manner (Style) Structure (Strategy) Individual Points Adjudicator Duties Forbidden Interference www.c-d-s.cz

Forbidden Inteference How to Judge A BP Debate Verboten Forbidden Inteference No debate interruptions No personal bias No opinionated matter assessment No helping or encouragement during the debate Feedback limited to ten minutes The only justifications for any of the adjudicators (most likely the Chair) to interfere with the debate arise when one team is either harrassing the opponent speaker by constant POIs or directly threatening or attacking the opponent speaker. Martin Režný Definitiions Matter (Content) Manner (Style) Structure (Strategy) Individual Points Adjudicator Duties Forbidden Interference www.c-d-s.cz

Do you have any questions? Název prezentace Název prezentace THE END Thank you for your time! Do you have any questions? Jméno Přednášejícího Definitions Matter (Content) Manner (Style) Structure (Strategy) Individual Points Adjudicator Duties Forbidden Interference www.c-d-s.cz