Transcript Judges Briefing Will Take Place Here

We couldn’t do it without you!
Style of Debate
This Brief Presentation
Role Of Each Team
Will Cover Five Talking
Points That Will Train
You To Be Great Judges
Role of Each Debater
Your Role as a Judge
Turning Point Factors
Understanding the
proceedings of the
debate is key to
understanding how to
judge the debate.
The basic structure of
all debates remains
consistent, and is
very simple.
Prime Minister
Deputy Leader of the
Opposition
Minister of the Crown
Leader of the Opposition
PMR

Debating as though in Parliament
Roles (Prime minister, Member of the Crown…)
 Referring to other debaters by their title (Prime minister
Leader of the Opposition…)
 Calling the Chairperson Mr./Madame Speaker




Addressing all remarks to the speaker of the house
Government Vs. Opposition
Resolutions = Bills

Debating as though in Parliament
Roles (Prime minister, Member of the Crown…)
 Referring to other debaters by their title (Prime minister
Leader of the Opposition…)
 Calling the Chairperson Mr./Madame Speaker




Addressing all remarks to the speaker of the house
Government Vs. Opposition
Resolutions = Bills

Types of resolutions
- Policy
- Values

Policy resolution
- A change or improvement must be made to the status quo
(outline needs for change)
- The Government must provide a plan for action/change

Values resolution
- The Government must argue for, and the Opposition must
argue against
You.
You.
You.


Proposes a motion
Defines the terms of the motion
 Impromptu
Motions
 “THW Ban Handguns”


Gives Reasons to pass the motion
In Canadian National style, the proposition has a
burden to extinguish


Opposes the Motion
If Necessary counters definitions
 This
should only occur if the definitions are clearly
wrong


Gives Reasons against passing the motion
In Canadian National, the opposition can
theoretically win by proving the prop has not
proven their case

Clearly States the Definitions
 “We
will always pursue negotiation with terrorists
during terrorist atrocities”
 “Whenever there are discernable demands of the
terrorists, we will pursue negations”

Opens the Government Case which will establish
either:
 Needs
to Change
 Benefits to Changing



8 Minute constructive
Contest definitions (if needed)
Introduce and outline the Opposition’s case


Proposes pragmatic/practical/philosophical arguments
against
Clash and refute the Governments case



Clashes with all of the opposition arguments
presented thus far
Finishes off the case for the government
Should be rewarded for striking a good balance
between the two

Last word from the Opposition on constructive
material
 Presents


new constructive
Clashes with new arguments
Then delivers the Opposition Rebuttal speech for 3
minutes
 Clarifies
everything in the round
 Summarizes cases
 Finishes Opposition side of the debate




Summarize the entirety of the debate
Elevate the arguments to clashes of ideology
Asks Questions which try to uncover deeper
meaning
Presents no new material
Feedback
Your role as
a judge
revolves
around
some simple,
core aspects
The
Choice
Speaker Points




Your Primary Function as a Judge in this tournament
is to award speaker points to each individual
debater
In Parliamentary Style, Range is theoretically out of
100
Technically all scores must fall within 80-95
Scores SHOULD be within 82-93

Broken down into a bunch of categories
 20
- Content
 20 - Organization
 20 - Presentation
 20 - Refutation
 10 - Reasoning
 10 - Debating Skills
• Content and Evidence (20)
•
Does the debate present relevant facts, and examples?
•
Does the debater have strong knowledge of the subject, and
does he/she back up the knowledge?
• Argument and Reasoning (10)
•
Does the debater understand what is being debated?
•
Does the debater comprehend the burdens for the position
he/she has taken?
• Organization (20)
•
Does the debater present material in a clear, logical and
coherent manner?
•
Does the debater allow the judges to follow his speech
effectively?
• Presentation and Delivery (20)
•
Is delivery of the speech comfortable and easy to comprehend?
•
Consider poise, posture, gestures, enunciations, use of voice,
emphasis and other speaking techniques
•
•
Refutation and Rebuttal (20)
•
Does the debater identify, summarize and refute the opponent’s
case?
•
Is the debater capable of handling objections to his or her own
case?
•
Does the debater take time to summarize both sides of the debate?
Debating Skills (10)
•
Does the debater understand the style of debate and adapt?
•
Does the debater use strategical techniques like POIs?
Any scores higher than 95 will be dropped to 95
95 - Best of the Seminar
94 - 90 Excellent
89 - 85 Very Good
84 - 81 Good
80 - Satisfactory
Any scores lower than 80 will be raised to 80

Depends on the balance that occurs at the end of
the debate.
 No
Such thing as an automatic win, or automatic loss
 Weighing
 Comparing


of Influences
Cases
In Canadian Parliamentary Style the team points
must be aligned with the “winning team”
Evaluating Arguments
 Constructive
 Clash
 Who
pushed the ball the most?


Occurs after the round has completed, after ballots
have been completed, and handed to the chair for
delivery
Is the most valuable tool for debaters
 Centered
around why the round was one or lost
 What they can do individually to make themselves
better debaters




Models or plans are used to determine how the
team is going to take the action they are
advocating
Not always necessary
Are useful in defining the pragmatics of the case
Does not need to address
 Funding
 Timelines
 Legislative

information
Only deals with how in an ideal world the
Government would follow through





Points of Information, Order and Personal Privilege
Heckling
Signposting
Impacting statements
Counter cases


Also a component of strategy
Used to ask questions in the middle of speeches
 Pertinent
 Should
illustrate a flaw in the other teams arguments, or
reposition one of their own arguments
 Short, and Clear




Used to address broken rules or a gap in
parliamentary protocol
Are given during an opposing debaters speech
Almost NEVER used (only in extreme cases)
Usually lower the level of debate (so avoid using at
all costs




Points of Privilege include misquoting or
misrepresenting an opponent (but not misinterpreting
his or her remarks), referring to a member incorrectly,
and slandering a member.
Given during an opposing debaters speech
Often lower the level of debate (so avoid using them)
Everything that can be done in a POPP can also be
done within your constructive speech






Witty, poignant, funny, VERY SHORT
Are given during an opposing debaters speech
without rising or being recognized
Are infrequent (or the debater will be penalized
severely)
The Prime Minister’s reply is protected from heckling
Should only given if it’ll make the judges pee their
pants
Happens in about 1 of 100 rounds

Conferral Versus Consensus Versus Individual

Keeping within the Scoring Range

Keeping Feedback to Reasonable amounts of time
Questions?