NAME :MAGUNDA TAROPAFADZWA

FRAMEWORK

l prioritize framework, which involves deciding which issues are of paramount importance. The fundamental priorities are well-reasoned arguments, logical analysis and effective use of evidence.

HOW TO DETERMINE THE WINNER

-To decide the winner, I will assess the clarity and strength of the arguments presented by each team. The team which has strong communication skills has a more persuasive and engaging performance. Also, respect and decorum for opponents should be maintained throughout the debate, despite the arguments.

-I also consider how well the debators present their arguments. The arguments should be clear, well-structured and organized so as to make it easier for judges and audience to follow the debate.

One of the pivotal things is to assess whether arguments presented by each team ia relevant to the topic of the debate. Deviation from the topic of debate lessens the team's chance to win.

-A winning team should should engage with strongest arguments presented by the opposition team and effectively refute them.

The use of relevant evidence and examples to support argument is very vital. I also assess the quality and relevance of the evidence provided by each team

Judge Philosophies

1. Judge’s Name:MAGUNDA TAROPAFADZWA

1. Tell us about your debate judging experience.

a. I have never judged debate before.

b. I have judged debate for less than a year and this is my first time judging Public Forum.

c. I have judged debate for less than a year and have judged Public Forum before.

d. I have judged debate for more than a year, but Public Forum for less than a year.

e.I have judged Public Forum debate for more than a year.

2. Tell us about your debating experience.

a.I have never debated competitively before.

b. I debated Public Forum for less than a year.

c. I debated other formats for less than a year.

d. I have debated Public Forum for more than a year.

e. I have debated other formats for more than a year, but not Public Forum.

3. What is your speaking speed preference?

a. Deliberate speed (100-120wpm)

b. Conversational speed (120-150wpm)

c.TED talk speed (150-200wpm)

d. Fast speed (200+wpm)

4. How much do you know about the topic?

a. I coach debate and have researched this topic

b. I have professional-level knowledge about this topic.

c.I regularly read news about this topic. It’s an interest of mine.

d. I pay attention to this topic, but I don’t go out of my way to know about it.

e. I have no idea about the topic. Please make sure I understand things.

5. Do you think the second rebuttal speaker should be expected to respond directly to the first rebuttal speaker (frontlining)?

a.Yes, if the second rebuttal doesn’t respond to the first rebuttal I consider it a dropped argument

b. No, the second speaker rebuttal is only responsible for answering the first constructive

c. I’m not sure.

d. Other (please specify)

6. How important is the flow (your notes) in making your decision? What do you write down in your notes?

a.It’s very important. I take lots of notes and make my decision based almost entirely based on my notes.

b. It’s somewhat important. I use my notes to aid me in making my decision.

c. It’s not that important. I tend to judge the debate more wholistically.

d. Other (Please Specify)

7. What factors go into your decision as to who wins the debate?

The outcome of a debate depends on various factors, such as the strength of arguments presented, the persuasiveness and clarity of communication, the ability to address counterarguments effectively, and the audience's subjective interpretation and judgment.In assessing a debate,I consider factors such as logical reasoning, evidence-based arguments, coherence of ideas, ability to rebut opposing viewpoints, presentation skills (such as clarity and organization), use of rhetoric or persuasive techniques, and adherence to debate rules or guidelines.Ultimately, determining the winner of a debate is subjective and can vary depending on perspectives and interpretations. It's important to note that debates are not necessarily about finding an absolute "winner" but rather about promoting dialogue, exchanging ideas, challenging assumptions,and arriving at a better understanding of complex issues.

8. Is there anything else you would like the debaters to know about you?

Active listening: I carefully listen to the debators arguments and l consider each point made before reaching a decision. Active listening involves paying attention to both content and delivery, as well as asking clarifying questions if necessary.

As a judge, I evaluate debates based on the quality of arguments, presentation, and strategy. My primary focus is on the clarity, logic, and persuasive power of the arguments presented. I prioritize teams that present well-structured, evidence-based arguments that effectively address the topic.

Effective presentation is also crucial, as I consider the clarity, concision, and delivery of speeches. I assess the teams' ability to communicate their arguments clearly and persuasively, taking into account factors such as body language, tone, and pace.

Strategy is another key aspect of debate that I evaluate. I consider the teams' approach to the topic, including their ability to identify key issues, counterarguments, and effective rebuttals. I assess their ability to allocate time effectively, ensuring that all points are covered, and arguments are fully developed.

When evaluating rebuttals and counterarguments, I consider the teams' ability to respond to opponents' arguments, challenge assumptions, and present effective counterarguments. I also assess the credibility and relevance of sources used to support arguments.

Ultimately, my decision is based on which team presents the most persuasive case, taking into account all of the above criteria. While I strive to be impartial, I tend to favor teams that present clear, concise, and well-structured arguments, use credible sources and evidence, and demonstrate effective time management and organization.

As a judge, I adapt my paradigm to align with the specific rules and guidelines of each tournament, ensuring a fair and impartial evaluation of debates.

The Standard for my Decision at the Debate

In making my decision at the debate, I will be evaluating teams based on their ability to present clear, logical, and persuasive arguments that effectively address the topic. My standard for decision is as follows: I will assess whether teams have demonstrated a thorough understanding of the topic, identified key issues, and presented relevant and credible evidence to support their arguments. I will also evaluate their ability to respond to opponents' arguments, adapt to the debate's progression, and demonstrate effective time management and strategic thinking. Ultimately, I will award the team that presents the most compelling case, demonstrating a deep understanding of the topic and the ability to persuasively communicate their arguments, while also adhering to the rules and guidelines of the debate.

My paradigm is rooted in creating an educational and fair environment that promotes critical thinking, effective communication, and respectful discourse. I believe that the purpose of competitive debate extends beyond winning or losing; it serves as a platform for intellectual growth and the development of essential life skills.

In evaluating debates, my primary standard for decision-making is the clarity and strength of argumentation. I place significant emphasis on well-reasoned, evidence-supported arguments that contribute to a coherent and logical case. Effective communication skills, including clarity of speech, organization, and the ability to articulate complex ideas, are paramount.

I also value strategic thinking and adaptability in debaters. The ability to respond to opponents' arguments with agility, while maintaining a consistent and coherent case, demonstrates a deeper understanding of the topic. Flexibility and strategic use of cross-examination and rebuttal time can be powerful tools when employed thoughtfully.

In addition to substance, I prioritize fairness and respectful engagement. Debaters should demonstrate an understanding of the importance of ethical considerations in argumentation. Respectful cross-examination, adherence to time limits, and a genuine willingness to engage with opposing perspectives contribute positively to the overall quality of the debate.

As part of my decision-making process, I consider the quality and relevance of evidence presented. Debaters should use credible sources to support their claims, and the evidence should be contextualized effectively within the broader argument.

While style is not the primary focus of my judging paradigm, effective delivery and presentation can enhance the overall impact of a debater's case. However, style should complement substance rather than overshadow it.

In providing feedback, I aim to offer constructive criticism that guides students toward improvement. I highlight strengths and weaknesses, emphasizing areas for growth and providing specific suggestions for enhancement.

Ultimately, my goal as a judge is to contribute to the educational experience of the participants by fostering a positive and intellectually stimulating atmosphere, promoting fair and thoughtful decision-making, and encouraging the development of critical thinking and communication skills.