UHSAA Region 1

2024 — Farmington, UT/US

• Invite
• Judges
• Pairings
• Live Updates
• Results

Lincoln Douglas

Event Description:

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 www.speechanddebate.org/topics for the current topic.

Entries: Each contestant will debate both sides. No substitution is permitted once the tournament has begun.

Order of Speeches:

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 four minutes.

Use of Electronic Devices: The use of internet-enabled devices and internet is permitted at the National Tournament. The use of internet-enabled devices and internet at the qualifying tournament will be the autonomous decision of each district. Laptop use must comply with the “Guidelines for Use of Internet-Enabled Devices in Debate Events.”

Lincoln Douglas Judging Rubric (UHSAA/UDCA Specific)

Judging guidelines:

1. The resolution evaluated is a proposition of value, which concerns itself with what ought to be instead of what is. Values are ideals held by individuals, societies, governments, etc., which serve as the highest goals to be considered or achieved within the context of the resolution in question.
2. Each debater has the burden to prove their side of the resolution more valid as a general principle. It is unrealistic to expect a debater to prove complete validity or invalidity of the resolution. The better debater is the one who, on the whole, proves their side of the resolution more valid as a general principle.
3. Students are encouraged to research topic-specific literature and applicable works of philosophy. The nature of proof should be in the logic and the ethos of a student’s independent analysis and/ or authoritative opinion.
4. Communication should emphasize clarity. Accordingly, a judge should only evaluate those arguments that were presented in a manner that was clear and understandable to them as a judge. Throughout the debate, the competitors should display civility as well as a professional demeanor and style of delivery.
5. After a case is presented, neither debater should be rewarded for presenting a speech completely unrelated to the arguments of their opponent; there must be clash concerning the major arguments in the debate. Cross-examination should clarify, challenge, and/or advance arguments.
6. The judge shall disregard new arguments introduced in rebuttal. This does not include the introduction of new evidence in support of points already advanced or the refutation of arguments introduced by opponents.
7. Because debaters cannot choose which side of the resolution to advocate, judges must be objective evaluators of both sides of the resolution. Evaluate the round based only on the arguments that the debaters made and not on personal opinions or on arguments you would have made.
8. Comments: provide detailed comments (both positive feedback and constructive criticism) designed to help both the debater and the coach; for example, suggestions on improving case construction, refutation, logic, delivery, etc

Speaker Points Rubric: 4-6 Points awarded in each area to total no less than 20

• Clarity: arguments were presented in a manner that was clear and understandable to the judge
• Delivery: presentation, style, poise, articulation/enunciation, and inflection are effective in delivering the arguments and responding to the opponent.
• Evidence and Logic: cites credible sources and warrants claims accordingly that is relevant and supports claim/ideas, . The nature of proof should be in the logic and the ethos of a student’s independent analysis and/or authoritative opinion.
• Cross Examination: Cross-examination should clarify, challenge, and/or advance arguments.
• Overall Presentation: Behavior is ethical, respectful of topic, opponent, and judge in manners and tone.