NHSDLC Fall Online II
2024 — Online, CN
Public Forum Paradigm List
All Paradigms: Show HideBERWA KEZIAH
Age:21 years
College: Beijing Institute of Technology
Current Occupancy (Student in college, or career field): Student
1.What types of debate have you participated before and how long is your debate career?
A reasonable number of debates more than 3 years
2.How do you consider fast-talking?
Am good with fast talking provided the debaters are audible maintain clarity and are understandable speed should not affect quality of arguments.
3. How do you consider aggressiveness?
Provided its respectable and in contest we good focus on strength of your arguments rather than personal attacks.
4. How do you usually determine the winner of the debate?
According to the team's ability to defend their argument with amble evidence and impacts clear articulation, logical reasoning and overall persuasiveness, how well can debaters respond to their opponents' arguments and counterpoints.
5. Please specify any additional notes you want to share with debaters, including any unique preference of the debate.
Be clear and concise in your arguments and support your points with credible evidence.
6. How many tournaments have you judged in the past year?
A. 0-5
7. How many notes do you take during a debate?
A.I try to note everything.
8. What is the main job of the summary speech?
A. Highlight the major points of clash and show how your team won them.
Please answer the following questions based on a scale of 1-10.
9. How important is defining the topic to your decision making? 9
10. How important is framework to your decision making? 8
11. How important is crossfire in your decision making? 7
12. How important is weighing in your decision making? 8
13. How important is persuasive speaking and non-verbal communication in your decision-making?8
14. How fast should students speak?7
Hello, I’m Chishimba Chama. I’ve had experience in debating during my high school years both as a judge and a competitor.
My philosophy on debating is based on the debater’s delivery, eloquence, content and approach. It is in no way influenced by external beliefs or values, this allows me to be fair, equal and open minded when deliberating on a decision. What I look for in a debate is a logical approach to the notion as well as clear communication with the opposing party, judges and audience.
My expectations during debate:
I prefer debaters who are logical, delivering quality arguments which are well thought out with strong evidence to support their points. Simply put: quality over quantity. In the spirit of open mindedness, i appreciate various debating styles and techniques so long as it is effective. I expect debaters to deliver their arguments statements skilfully whilst also being articulate in their speech as this allows listeners to pay close attention to what is being said. I expect reasonable counter arguments or rebuttals where need be to encourage competition and persuading the judges and audience. However, rebuttals should be done in a respectful manner.
Upon judging, I try to provide constructive criticism to the debaters to help debaters improve their skills and learn. This includes pointing out their weaknesses and shortcomings as well as their strengths and abilities. Participants are encouraged to ask questions for further explanation or clarity on my feedback. I always look out for improvement in debaters I have previously judged to ensure growth. It is important for both parties of the debate to be well-verse and prepared on the topic of discussion and comply with the rules of the debate. In conclusion, I am devoted to giving fair, impartial judgements as well as constructive criticism during all debates.
I was president of both English and Chinese debate team during college, now work in the field of licensing. Started to judge different tournaments for DLC since 2015, both off-line and online.
In terms of preference, I value clear presentation and direct logic, simply repeating how strong your cases is not helping you to win, identify your opponent's logical flaw then rebut or defend analytically, ideally to connect with your prepared evidence, or to rebut basing on the real clash. As for speakers point, being kind and clear is the key. And please, don't yell.
KASONDE CHILESHE
Age:24
Location: Hangzhou, China
College: Zhejiang Universty of Science and Technology
Current Occupancy: Student in college
Tabroom email: kaykasondechileshe@gmail.com
1.What types of debate have you participated before and how long is your debate career?
I have participated in Public Forum and British parliamentary styles of debating as a competitor for over 10 years. I have judged Public forum and WSDA debates for a little over 2 years to date.
2.How do you consider fast-talking?
Its good as long as one takes care to fully pronounce their words and finish sentences while maintaining to stay on track and taking care to articulate ones arguments with as much coherence as possible.
3.How do you consider aggressiveness?
A little of it done in a modest manner with finesse is good. One needs it to give their arguments in a manner that shows an utmost belief in ones arguments and position. Without it, one can be taken for granted and be interjected unnecessarily throughout the debate and general life settings.
4.How do you usually determine the winner of the debate?
By analyzing the overall impact from the debaters. Considering the framework one uses and their coherence to it while giving arguments whose impact is both logical and applicable to life settings that it is easy to support ones arguments. The delivery and articulation of ones arguments also factors in when deciding the winner of a debate.
5.Please specify any additional notes you want to share with debaters, including any unique preference of the debate.
In articulation of arguments, pick a framework and stick to it. Either go in with force and clearly and logically analyze ones arguments or go in with softness of voice yet stern to give ones arguments. Also take note that a well analyzed argument with enough points backing it will do more than multiple arguments that ain’t thoroughly developed
6. How many public forum debate tournaments have you judged in the past year?
A. 0-5
7. How many notes do you take during a debate?
C. I write down the points I think are important and focus more on the overall presentation.
8. What is the main job of the summary speech?
B. Highlight the major points of clash and show how your team won them.
Please answer the following questions based on a scale of 1-10.
9. How important is defining the topic to your decision making?
10
10.How important is framework to your decision making?
8
11. How important is crossfire in your decision making?
8
12. How important is weighing in your decision making?
5
13.How important is persuasive speaking and non-verbal communication in your decision-making?
7
14. How fast should students speak?
Enough to be thoroughly understood and for them to communicate with their intended audience( the Judges and the other team)
1. Debate career?
I have previous judging experience with NHSDLC the past several mothns. Judging PF online and offline tournaments.
2. Fast-talking?
Fast-talking can be impressive and effective in some cases, but it can also be overwhelming and difficult to follow for some people. As a general rule, I prefer a moderate speaking pace is preferable as it allows the debater to communicate their points clearly and ensures that I can follow along.
3. Aggressiveness?
Aggressiveness can be useful in some debates, particularly when the topic is emotionally charged or controversial. However, it's important to maintain a respectful and professional tone, even when challenging an opponent's arguments, also ensuring your points are well delivered. Personal attacks or insults or gestures like throwing hands when an opponent is speaking are never acceptable and can undermine the credibility of the debater.
4. Determining the winner of the debate?
To determine the winner of a debate, I consider several factors, including the coherence and accuracy of the arguments presented, the quality of the evidence provided, and the persuasiveness of the debater's delivery, not forgetting well argued out logical responses.
I do not admit new arguments in the summary speech. Any supplementary information included in your summary speech won't garner extra points. Your role is to consolidate the main points of conflict in this round, facilitating a better understanding of the issues that have been discussed.
In general, the debater who can provide the strongest and most well-supported argument, while also successfully rebutting their opponent's points, is likely to win the debate.
Ultimately, the goal of a debate is to engage in a respectful and informative exchange of ideas, and the winner is the one who best achieves that goal.
Kaye Esperanza G. Elizalde
Age: 28
College: University of Southeastern Philippines
Current Occupancy (Student in college, or career field): Public Speaking Coach
1. What types of debate have you participated in before and how long is your debate career?
I am an English Teacher from the Philippines since 2018 and have coached debaters as well. Since I have just recently moved in China, my first judging event was when I participated last WSDA Dec 2-3 Competition. I have judged both Middle School and High School Public Forum. I have also judged Spontaneous Debate as well as Original Oratory and Expository Speech.
2. How do you consider fast-talking?
Fast talking in general may be challenging for others to follow. It can be due to conveying excitement or delivering information with a sense of urgency. However, in Debate it is quite a talent to Fast Talk during Constructive and Rebuttals speeches since it is time limited. However, when one does fast talk yet cannot articulate well the words, it removes the purpose of giving information and will just be unclear for the receiver of the message.
3. How do you consider aggressiveness?
I view aggressiveness as a tool to overpower the opponent. It can also be used to show confidence in what you believe and are trying to say. It is being persuasive. In a debate, both parties must present their sides with ample assertiveness to persuade the judge about their claims, warrants and impacts to win. However, being aggressive alone still cannot impose certain victory. It’s only an aid to convince the people.
4. How do you usually determine the winner of the debate?
I always take down notes especially in the Constructive. Usually, both parties are starting strong about their claims. However, I notice that during Crossfires and Rebuttals, one team dominates the other. It’s about who can answer logically and with a more reasonable rebuttal. Also, I am looking for evidence that supports their contentions. Lastly, I am very particular with the team who cannot rebut quickly. It shows doubt towards their information and unpreparedness.
5. Please specify any additional notes you want to share with debaters, including any unique preference of the debate.
First, I tell them that whenever you deliver a speech, raise your volume 20% higher than your normal speaking voice. A lot of debaters are almost inaudible. Next, I tell them to think before you speak. Learn to conjure questions directly that the Judge and Opponents understand. Debate is time limited, most debaters waste Crossfires due to a lot of unnecessary phrases like repeating contentions rather than directly asking their questions. Overall, I judged according to logical reasonings, their thorough preparedness and their speaking ability.
julianvgagnon@gmail.com please add me to email chains
from planet debate-
this is difficult for me b/c i'm not sure i have A judging philosophy but I do have many different ideas about and for debate...some inconsistent. that being said i don't want what i think about debate to totally dictate what debaters decide to do in rounds.
topicality- generally don't like it. I find no abuse args to be really persuasive. Since I like critical arguments so much I think you can usually find ground in any debate. i don't like the competing interpretations framework very much. i find the "that limits out any aff" arg to be persuasive. but i will vote on that framework and topicality if left unchallenged. in a good topicality debate on competeing interp vs an ok no abuse arg i'll USUALLY vote aff.
cp- like em. with a critical nb even better. i think i'm a fair judge for these debates. aff theory args generally not persuasive unless unchallenged. very similar to topicality in this regards.
das- great. a lot of people are now struggling with the we control the uniqueness = a risk vs. we got d/risk of turn. i don't think the aff has to have offense to win a da but i do find in a lot of debates that with only defense it hurts the aff a bunch. especially when the neg has a cp. but i tend to weight the da first in terms of probability and then magnitude.
critical args- love em. these are the debates i find the most interesting. i'm willing to listen to virtually any way the neg wants to present them. method. alternative. text no text. don't care. case turn. obviously it's the neg's burden to provide some way to evaluate their "framework" but in terms of theory i think they are all pretty much legit. args are args and it's the other teams responsibility to answer them.
others- i like to see people be nice to each other in debate rounds. some people may say i intervene sometimes. it's true but let me provide context. if you go for you mis-spelled (jk) a word in your plan and you should lose and your winning the arg but the other team says this is stupid...we'll i'm persuaded. you just wasted a bunch of peoples time. another thing. DON'T RUN MALTHUS IN FRONT OF ME- DOESN'T MATTER IF IT RIGHTS OR NOT. i won't flow it. i think that while debate is a game we still have a responsibility to "speak truth to power". discourse is very important. definately co-constitutes with reality. this may be why i'm starting/have been hating the politics debate for the last year and a half. but hey, like i said before, i'm full of inconsistancies b/c sometimes you just don't have another arg in the box to go for. i'm sympathetic to this. especially in high school debate. i still research it for the hs topic and coach my kids to go for it.
from debateresults...
Debate is a game- i have a lot of ideas about how the game should be played but in the absence of teams making those arguments i won't default to them. i think debate should make the rules of the game and provide a framework for how i should evaulte the debate. i'm not a big fan of some arguments...like malthus in particular...but also theory arguments in general. these debates generally happen faster then my mind and pen can handle. ive judged a lot although i haven't much this year on the china topic. some people may think i have a bias towards critical arguments, and while this is true to some degree (i generally find them more intersting than other debates), it also means i have higher standards when it comes to these debates. yeah imagine that, me with high standards.
My approach to adjudication is rooted in fostering a dynamic and intellectually stimulating environment. I believe in the power of constructive dialogue, critical thinking, and effective communication as essential pillars of successful debating.
I prioritize fairness, objectivity, and impartiality, aiming to provide insightful feedback that not only highlights strengths but also offers constructive suggestions for improvement.
Ultimately, I view debates as an opportunity for intellectual growth, fun, and skill development.
Best of luck to all participants, and let the exchange of ideas commence!
ANU KHAN
Age: 27
College: Zhengzhou University
Current Occupancy (Software Engineer/Foreign Teacher Expert ):
What types of debate have you participated in before and how long is your debate career?
I have participated in various types of debates, from informal discussions to formal competitive debates. My debate "career" spans from my primary school years to my master's studies at university, totaling around 10 years of experience. Not only did participate in debates, but also gained experience as a judge for national debate competitions among different universities during my job at the university.
How do you consider fast-talking?
Fast-talking in debate can be seen as a “skill” when used effectively. It shows a deep knowledge of the topic and “quick thinking”. However, it's essential for debaters to balance speed with clarity to ensure that their arguments are still comprehensible to the judges and the audience.
How do you consider aggressiveness?
For me being a judge, I consider aggressiveness positively in a debate when it's channeled into a “strong” and “confident” presentation of one's argument without resorting to “rudeness” or “personal attacks”.
How do you usually determine the winner of the debate?
Certainly, as a judge, I assess and determine the winner of a debate based on the debaters' ability to present clear, persuasive, and relevant arguments, while adhering to the competition's rules and criteria.
How many tournaments have you judged in the past year?
11+
How many notes do you take during a debate?
I write down the points I think are important
What is the main job of the summary speech?
Highlight the major points of clash and show how your team won them.
Please answer the following questions based on a scale of 1-10.
How important is defining the topic to your decision making?
9
How important is framework to your decision making?
9
How important is crossfire in your decision making?
7
How important is weighing in your decision making?
8
How important is persuasive speaking and non-verbal communication in your decision-making?
10
How fast should students speak?
7
*As a judge, I appreciate debaters who incorporate real-world examples and practical solutions into their arguments. Additionally, I value creativity and the ability to think outside the box when addressing the debate topic. Engaging the audience with memorable anecdotes or relatable scenarios can make a positive impression. Lastly, maintaining a respectful and professional tone throughout the debate is essential. These qualities can set you apart and make a lasting impression in my assessment*
Logistics: suyanglisusie@gmail.com if you'd like to start an email chain or doc for evidence checking.
Preferences:
- Signposting > roadmaps
- I appreciate well-reasoned empirical evidence, extra points if you can explain the mechanism/reasoning behind the facts.
- I appreciate impact calculus and world comparison, even better if you have a framework that you reference consistently throughout the round.
- I appreciate assertiveness and confidence but please do not be rude to your opponents at any point in the round.
- I'm okay with spreading as long as you're strategic about what to drop vs extend in the second half ie. summary & FF. In the end I'm voting on your impact/weighing/frameworks, not solely on whether an argument was dropped without a good explanation of its significance.
- Please keep your own time in speeches and crossfires. Repeatedly going over time will result in a lower speaker point.
My name's Rachael Liu, and I have debated other formats for more than a year, but not Public Forum. I have judged debate for more than a year, but Public Forum for less than a year. I prefer Conversational speed (120-150wpm).
I pay attention to this topic, but I don’t go out of my way to know about it.
I also believe that the second speaker rebuttal is only responsible for answering the first constructive. My note is somewhat important. I use my notes to aid me in making my decision.In addition, the engagement really matters in my decision.
Judge philosophies
- judge’s name: MAGUNDA TAROPAFADZWA
- Tell us about your debate judging experience.
- I have judged Public Forum debate for more than a year.
3. Tell us about your debating experience.
- I have debated Public Forum for more than a year.
4. What is your speaking speed preference?
- TED talk speed (150-200wpm)
5. How much do you know about the topic?
- I regularly read news about this topic. It's an interest of mine
6. Do you think the second rebuttal speaker should be expected to respond directly to the first rebuttal speaker (frontlining)?
- Yes, if the second rebuttal doesn't respond to the first rebuttal I consider it a dropped argument
- How important is the flow (your notes) in making your decision? What do you write down in your notes?
- It's somewhat important. I use my notes to aid me in making my decision.
- What factors go into your decision as to who wins the debate?
The following are the factors that goes into to my decision as to who wins the debate:
1. Content and Argumentation: l assess the strength of each team's arguments, evidence, and reasoning presented during the debate. This includes the clarity of the arguments, the relevance of the evidence cited, and the logic of the reasoning.
2. Clash and Rebuttal: l then evaluate how well each team engages with and responds to the arguments made by the opposing team. Effective rebuttals that address the key points raised by the other side and highlight weaknesses in their arguments are important.
3. Organization and Structure: l also look at how well each team organizes their case, presents their arguments in a logical and coherent manner, and provides a clear roadmap for the debate.
4. Delivery and Presentation: l consider the speaking skills of the debaters, including their clarity, confidence, and ability to effectively communicate their arguments to the audience.
5. Crossfire Performance: l sometimes also take into account how well debaters perform during the crossfire, where they engage in direct questioning and answering with the opposing team.
6. Impact and Weighing: l further assess the overall impact of each team's arguments and weigh the significance of the impacts presented. Debaters are expected to explain why their arguments are more important or have a greater impact than those of the opposing team.
7. Use of Evidence: l alsoevaluate the quality and relevance of the evidence presented by each team to support their arguments. Debaters who use credible and well-supported evidence are often viewed more favorably.
8. Clarity of Final Focus: The final focus speeches are crucial in summarizing the key arguments and impacts of the debate. I pay attention to how well debaters crystallize their arguments and make a compelling case for why they should win.
- Is there anything else you would like the debaters to know about you?
Debaters need to relax and enjoy the debate .
Judge Philosophies
Judge’s Name: Latifa Mtawali
As a debate and public speech judge, I will consider the following factors when deciding the best speech or debate:
- What factors go into your decision as to who wins the debate?
1. Substance of Arguments
Strength of evidence: Did the debaters back their claims with facts, statistics, and credible sources?
Logical reasoning: Were the arguments internally consistent and well-structured? Did they avoid fallacies?
Addressing counter-arguments: Did the debaters anticipate and effectively respond to opposing viewpoints?
2. Delivery and Style:
Clarity and conciseness: Were the arguments easy to understand and follow?
Charisma and stage presence: Did the debater hold the audience's attention and project confidence?
Civility and respect: Did the debaters treat each other and opposing viewpoints with respect?
3. Audience and Context:
Debate format: Was it a formal competition with set rules or a more informal discussion?
Audience expectations: What were the audience members hoping to gain from the debate?
Persuasiveness: Did the debater effectively shift the audience's opinion on the issue?
Is there anything else you would like the debaters to know about you?
The energy of young debaters is truly inspiring! Witnessing their passion and deep knowledge of these important issues is a privilege. I'm excited to participate and immerse myself in the entire experience.
Debate judging paradigm
Name: Ronald
Age: 26
College: NJUPT
Current Occupation: Phd
- What types of debate have you participated in before, and how long is your debate career?
NSDA Judge China (2019-now), - How do you consider fast-talking?
Arguments should be delivered at a moderate pace, with an emphasis on communication. Clarity and structure are more important than speed. - How do you consider aggressiveness?
Debaters should be respectful towards opponents while presenting their arguments. I prefer to see strategic, confident debating over unnecessary aggression. - How do you usually determine the winner of the debate?
· Clear and well-developed arguments presented in constructive speeches.
· Impact weighing in rebuttals—well-explained and justified arguments win.
· Extending arguments from constructive to rebuttals effectively.
5. Please specify any additional notes you want to share with debaters, including any unique preference of the debate.
Ø Keep your arguments structured and well-connected throughout your speeches.
Ø Ensure to provide voters to address key issues from the constructive speech in rebuttals.
Ø Use key evidence and data where possible to strengthen arguments.
- How many public forum debate tournaments have you judged in the past year?
11+ - How many notes do you take during a debate?
A. I try to take notes on everything.
B. I write down the points I think are important.
C. I take a few notes and focus more on the overall presentation. - What is the main job of the summary speech?
A. Summarize the main arguments in the debate.
B. Highlight the major points of the clash and show how your team won them.
C. Answer all the attacks on your contentions made by the rebuttal speech.
Please answer the following questions based on a scale of 1-10:
9. How important is defining the topic to your decision-making? 9
10. How important is framework to your decision-making? 5
11. How important is crossfire in your decision-making? 7
12. How important is weighing in your decision-making? 10
13. How important is persuasive speaking and non-verbal communication in your decision-making? 7
14. How fast should students speak? 5 – A moderate to moderately fast pace allows for clarity and better note-taking.
2. 1-2 sentences to summarize your personal debate philosophy.
Debate should be based on facts and evidence provided.
3. How do you consider fast-talking?
I respect time management so l accept fast talking as long as the speaker is audible.
4. How do you consider aggressiveness?
It’s not necessary for a win …. Everything should be done in moderation showing respect for every debater.
5. How do you usually determine the winner of the debate? Briefly explain in 1-2 sentences
l consider all the facts given then compare the facts to the evidence provided .
6. Please specify any additional notes you want to share with debaters.
Debates should flow smoothly with the highest level of professionalism
DAVID BRIAN MUNYAO PARADIGM
Age: 23yrs
College:Beijing Institute of Technology
Current Occupancy (Student in college, or career field): Student
1. What types of debate have you participated before and how long is your debate career?
A reasonable number of debates more than 2 years
2. How do you consider fast-talking?
Am good with fast talking Provided the debaters are audible maintain clarity and are understandable speed should not affect quality of arguments.
3. How do you consider aggressiveness?
Provided its respectable and in contest we good focus on strength of your arguments rather than personal attacks
4. How do you usually determine the winner of the debate?
According to the teams ability to defend their argument with amble evidence and impacts clear articulation,logical reasoning and overall persuasiveness,how well can debaters respond to their opponents arguments and counterpoints.
5. Please specify any additional notes you want to share with debaters, including any unique preference of the debate.
-be clear and concise in your arguments and support your points with credible evidence
6. How many tournaments have you judged in the past year?
A. 0-5
7. How many notes do you take during a debate?
A. I try to take notes on everything.
8. What is the main job of the summary speech?
A. Highlight the major points of clash and show how your team won them.
Please answer the following questions based on a scale of 1-10.
9. How important is defining the topic to your decision making? 9
10. How important is frame work to your decision making? 8
11. How important is crossfire in your decision making? 7
12. How important is weighing in your decision making? 8
13. How important is persuasive speaking and non-verbal communication in your decision-making? 8
14. How fast should students speak? 7
1. Judge’s Name
Charles Junior Mupotaringa
2. Tell us about your debate judging experience.
a. Ihave 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.
3. 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.
4. 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)
5. 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.
6. 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)
7. 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)
8. What factors go into your decision as to who wins the debate?
Clarity, evidence, logic and persuasiveness, those are the four main factors i consider when evaluating arguments from each team. I also look at the presentation style, organization and structure, speaking skills and demeanor from the debaters of each team for me to be able to make my final decision.
9. Is there anything else you would like the debaters to know about you?
I appreciate clarity,professionalism,respectful behavior and debaters who adhere to the debate rules. Fairness and open mindedness are my approach to each and every argument that is presented by the debaters, hence with this i can say my judgement to each team is without bias.
Tinashe Musuka
Debating Experience:
National 2nd Price, at National Schools Debate Championship
2018 3rd Regional best speaker- at Zimbabwe National University Debate Championship
Pre Quarter Finalists at 2020-at Zimbabwe Public Speaking and Debating Championship
National Constitutional Court Schools Debate Tournament-2019 Grand Finalists
Judging Experience:
BASIS INTERNATIONAL PARK LANE HARBOUR 20/4/2024 Public Forum
BASIS INTERNATIONAL BILLINGUAL CHENGDU 30/3/2024 Public Forum
BASIS INTERNATIONAL HANGZHOU 9/13/2023 Public Forum
Judging Preference or Judging cateria:
My preference for the outcome of the debate may vary slightly depending on the specific rules and regulations of the tournament or organization and I consider fairness, adherence to debate rules, and overall impact of the arguments presented by each team:
The Standard for my Decision at the Debate; (RFD)
Clarity and Organization: I evaluate how well debaters communicate their arguments and ideas. Debaters should articulate their points clearly and concisely, using logical organization and effective signposting.
Content and Evidence: I assess the quality and relevance of the arguments presented by debaters. Debaters should provide well-reasoned arguments supported by credible evidence and sources and I also consider the depth of analysis and the ability to respond to opposing arguments.
Clash and Rebuttal: I look for effective clash and rebuttal between debaters. Debaters should engage with the arguments made by their opponents, address their points, and provide counterarguments also i assess the ability to identify flaws in opposing arguments and effectively challenge them.
Use of Crossfire: I evaluate how debaters utilize crossfire, a period of direct questioning between teams. Debaters should ask strategic and relevant questions, respond effectively to their opponents’ questions, and use crossfire to clarify and strengthen their arguments.
Delivery and Style: I also consider the overall speaking style and delivery of debaters. Debaters should speak with confidence, clarity, and appropriate use of gestures and vocal variety and use of fluent English also Debaters should assess the ability to engage the audience and maintain a professional demeanor.
Summary and Final Focus: I assess the ability of debaters to summarize the main arguments and reiterate their team’s position. Debaters should effectively prioritize key points and provide a clear final focus on why their team should win the debates
Location:
Nanjing University of Post and Telecommunication, Jiangsu Province, China
Name: Zarnick Nangcas
Age: 29
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
College: Holy Cross of Davao College
Current Occupancy (Student in college, or career field): Grade school Science Teacher
1. What types of debate have you participated before and how long is your debate career?
I have judged Public Forum and Extemporaneous debates. I have been judging for 3 months now.
2. How do you consider fast-talking?
In judging debates, I understand the importance of both passionate delivery and clear communication. While a fast-paced speaker can be engaging, I prioritize debaters who can effectively convey their arguments without sacrificing clarity. I value the ability to place emphasis on key points, as it can enhance persuasion by making arguments more impactful and memorable. I am also fond of debaters who incorporate historical events, as they provide valuable context and weight to the discussion. My focus will be on the strength of the arguments, the use of evidence, and the ability to address opposing viewpoints, all balanced with clear, well-organized, and persuasive delivery through emphasis.
3. How do you consider aggressiveness?
While a forceful style can be persuasive in debate, I distinguish between assertiveness and aggression. Effective debaters present their ideas confidently but avoid resorting to personal attacks or interrupting their opponents. I value respectful discourse that allows both sides to be heard clearly. My focus will be on the quality of arguments, not the volume or aggression with which they're delivered.
4. How do you usually determine the winner of the debate?
The key to a fair decision lies in evaluating each debater on several key aspects. First, I'll assess the strength of their contentions. Did they present a clear, well-defined position supported by relevant arguments focused on the core issue? Next comes the evidence. Did they back their claims with credible facts, statistics, and expert opinions? Effective rebuttals are crucial too. Did they directly address opposing arguments, expose weaknesses, and offer well-reasoned counterpoints? Questioning skills also matter. Did they ask insightful questions that forced their opponent to clarify or reveal weaknesses? Finally, logical reasoning is paramount. Were their arguments presented in a clear, logical sequence with well-supported conclusions? By awarding points or using a scoring rubric for these aspects, I can ensure a consistent evaluation. While the goal is to identify the most compelling case, I won't forget the overall impact. Did one debater sway the audience or maintain a more respectful demeanor? Remember, a close debate with strong arguments on both sides can be just as valuable as a clear victor.
5. Please specify any additional notes you want to share with debaters, including any unique preference of the debate.
I prefer debaters who can share good quantifiable evidences, confidence and composure during argument, and clear articulation.
6. How many public forum debate tournaments have you judged in the past year?
A. 0-5
B. 6-10
C. 11+
7. How many notes do you take during a debate?
A. I try to take notes on everything.
B. I write down the points I think are important.
C. I take few notes and focus more on the overall presentation.
8. What is the main job of the summary speech?
A. Summarize the main arguments in the debate.
B. Highlight the major points of clash and show how your team won them.
C. Answer all the attacks on your contentions made by the rebuttal speech.
Please answer the following questions based on a scale of 1-10.
9. How important is defining the topic to your decision making? 10
10. How important is framework to your decision making? 8
11. How important is crossfire in your decision making? 8
12. How important is weighing in your decision making? 10
13. How important is persuasive speaking and non-verbal communication in your decision-making? 9
14. How fast should students speak? 8
I have experience judging NHDLC and NSDA tournaments in the past few months for PF, Novice, and Middle school online and offline competitions.
In my experience, I consider fast talking as not a very effective manner of conveying your argument. I want to follow your chain of arguments. Therefore, I appreciate it more when the debaters convey their arguments in a moderate-paced manner. Otherwise, I will miss out on important details.
In some cases, aggressiveness is helpful, especially in arguments where the debaters try to make their opponents understand their point of view. However, I prefer it when the debaters are professional and respectful. You can still present an effective debate when calm and firm. Employ convincing skills and evidence-based and impactful arguments. Impoliteness, insults, and personal attacks will not be entertained.
To determine the winner, I consider the overall structure of the debate. I follow the complete chain of main arguments. I then assess the strength of each argument, the quality of evidence, the logic of the reasoning, and the relevance of the points made. I look for clear impacts and explanations of why certain arguments matter more than others.
I don’t admit new arguments in the summary and final focus. Any new arguments introduced in the summary do not earn any points. Debaters should focus on strengthening their main arguments. They should explain why their arguments are more important or carry greater weight in the round. I also consider the clarity and persuasiveness of each debater's presentation. Effective refutation and addressing opposing points are also crucial for a strong case.
Every debate is different and based on my evaluation of the arguments, impacts, and overall performance, I decide on which side presented the stronger case and deserves to win the debate.
In case of any questions, I encourage debaters to seek clarification.
I am a very expressive judge. I will have several nonverbal that will tell you how I feel about an argument. Don't take it personal, I do it to everyone in basically every round and it might help you win round.
I like to keep an open mind about most things. The thing I love the most in debate is the impacts. I enjoy big impacts and I enjoy hearing them blown up (no nuke war pun intended) in the round. Small impacts are not immediately shut down, but I will say that it would be more persuasive to have evidence that tells me to prefer these impacts.
I am okay with most types of speed and I will let you know if I can't keep up. I will say that if you do speed please be clear.
I will disclose results based on Tournament policy
I am willing to discuss any specific questions you have in the round.
Judge Philosophies
1. Judge’s Name: Alvin Stanley 2. Tell us about your debate judging experience.[e]
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.
3. Tell us about your debating experience.[d]
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.
4. What is your speaking speed preference?[c]
a. Deliberate speed (100-120wpm)
b. Conversational speed (120-150wpm)
c. TED talk speed (150-200wpm)
d. Fast speed (200+wpm)
5. How much do you know about the topic?[d]
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.
6. Do you think the second rebuttal speaker should be expected to respond directly to the first rebuttal speaker (frontlining)?[d]
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)
In Public Forum debate, it's generally expected that the second rebuttal speaker will engage with the arguments presented by the first rebuttal speaker. This often involves frontlining, where they directly address and counter the points made by the opposing team.
7. How important is the flow (your notes) in making your decision? What do you write down in your notes?[b]
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)
8. What factors go into your decision as to who wins the debate? The factors that determine the winner in PF debate and speech events include argument strength, rebuttal effectiveness, crossfire performance, clarity, organization, impact, and delivery. 9. Is there anything else you would like the debaters to know about you?
I appreciate well-structured speeches that are easy to follow and deliver persuasive points with confidence and clarity. Additionally, adhering to time limits and demonstrating adaptability and strategic thinking throughout the debate
(new paradigm) Alvin Zablon Stanley
1. What types of debate have you participated before and how long is your debate career?
PF Debater (2014-2022)
NHSDLC, WSDA ,Toc , Basis, Zolo , Dialogue Judge(2022-now)
2. How do you consider fast-talking?
As long as you can express your argument clearly, I don’t care whether you talk fast or not. In my case, the speed of speech does not affect the debater's score, but the accuracy of the message does.
3. How do you consider aggressiveness?
I like to see the debaters be aggressive as long as they respect the opponent and don't affect their game.
4. How do you usually determine the winner of the debate?
Argument Strength: Are the debater's arguments logical, well-supported, and convincing? Do they effectively address counterarguments?
Evidence: Is the debater using credible sources and facts to back up their claims?
Organization and Clarity: Is the debater's argument easy to follow? Are their points clearly laid out and well-connected?
Rebuttal: How effectively does the debater challenge and refute their opponent's arguments?
Adherence to Topic: Is the debater staying focused on the resolution and addressing all its key aspects?
5. Please specify any additional notes you want to share with debaters, including any unique preference of the debate.
1)Maintain a respectful and civil tone throughout the debate, even when strongly disagreeing with your opponent.
2) Directly address your opponent's points and engage with their argument. Simply presenting your case without refuting theirs is not enough.
6. How many public forums debate tournaments have you judged in the past year?
A. 0-5
B. 6-10
C. 11+
7. How many notes do you take during a debate?
A. I try to take notes on everything.
B. I write down the points I think are important.
C. I take few notes and focus more on the overall presentation.
8. What is the main job of the summary speech?
A. Summarize the main arguments in the debate.
B. Highlight the major points of clash and show how your team won them.
C. Answer all the attacks on your contentions made by the rebuttal speech.
Please answer the following questions based on a scale of 1-10.
9. How important is defining the topic to your decision making?9
10. How important is framework to your decision making?7
11. How important is crossfire in your decision making?7
12. How important is weighing in your decision making?10
13. How important is persuasive speaking and non-verbal communication in your decision-making?7
14. How fast should students speak?5– moderate pace will help when it comes to noting key points rather than the idea that a debater should finish all their points when they are not clear.
I have experience judging PF debates both online and offline with NHSDLC over the past several months. When it comes to speaking speed, I find that a moderate pace is preferable for clear communication and easy understanding.
In terms of aggressiveness, it can be effective if done respectfully. Maintaining a professional tone is crucial, and personal attacks or disruptive gestures are never acceptable.
To determine the winner, I focus on the coherence and accuracy of arguments, the quality of evidence, and the persuasiveness of the debater's delivery. I don't entertain new arguments in the summary speech, emphasizing the consolidation of main points. The winner is typically the debater with the strongest, well-supported arguments and effective rebuttals. The goal is a respectful and informative exchange of ideas, with the winner being the one who best achieves that objective.
JUDGE PARADIGM
NAME: ARLENA NJOKI WAITHANJI
AGE: 23 YEARS
CURRENT OCCUPANCY: UNIVERSITY UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT.
DEBATE ETIQUETTE
Personally, I prefer a moderate-paced speaker as I feel that this allows the debater to clearly articulate their points and guarantees them that all their points are heard by the judges. The debaters should also be confident and explain their arguments clearly. During the debate, certain virtues and manners should be observed. The debaters should not be aggressive towards their opponents because as much as this is a competition, it is also an opportunity for the debaters to learn. In this regard, the debating environment should therefore be calm, and everyone accorded the time and space allocated to them to present their motion without disruption.
DECISION MAKING PROCESS
During the debate I employ the format of establishing what claim the debater presented, their justification for the claim and the impact of the claim. In addition to this I look at the logic plus the evidence presented by the debaters to establish who the winner is. Concerning impact, I encourage students to provide justification and demonstrate feasibility. This is because some students might present quantitative data without explaining the mechanism or providing a link to how these outcomes will be achieved.
I would also like to convey to the students the importance of clearly convincing me, as the judge, about what they mean and why their arguments are unique. It is not my role to interpret their claims in any way. They should be persuasive and make a compelling case for why they should win the various contentions they are championing. Additionally, I suggest using crossfire to challenge opponents and attempt to weaken their arguments by addressing any loopholes they might have. Failure to do so only strengthens the opponent's position.
SPEAKER POINTS
When I am allocating speaker points, they vary in different aspects. I consider the English proficiency, manner of delivery, articulation, and overall presentation. Moreover, I assess how well students respond to questions and engage with their opponents during crossfire. In addition to penalizing the use of abusive language and intentional falsification of evidence, I also take into account the organization and clarity of their arguments, as well as their ability to adapt to unexpected challenges or counterarguments. These factors collectively contribute to the overall evaluation and scoring of each participant.
Moderate speaking is preferred. Given that English may not be the first language for many students, clarity could become an issue. Therefore, I advise students to speak moderately to ensure that all their points are heard clearly by both the judge and their opponents. This helps avoid situations I've encountered before where the opposing team asks for a repetition of contentions. However, if you are confident in your pronunciation, then a quicker pace is acceptable to me.
I am eagerly looking forward to learning, listening to, and interacting with all the teams in the debate.
1. What types of debate have you participated in before and how long is your debate career?
PF and BP. Have 6 years of debate experience. I've judged 20+ TOC, 10+ WSDA, and 10+ DLC tournaments. Also, I did a half-year TA experience at Speechcraft in Chengdu, mainly for PF debate and speech.
2. How do you consider fast-talking?
This requires a combination of the clarity of the debater's delivery, as well as the accuracy of the delivery. If the debater can emphasize the key points by using voice intonation or appropriate pauses. It is acceptable to speak at a fast pace if the articulation is clear and the arguments given are detailed.
3. How do you consider aggressiveness?
This depends on the specific situation, if it does not involve personal attacks on the opponent with insulting words, or radical political statements, as well as discriminatory and racist content. It is only the personal debate character of the debater, will be expressed in the speed of speech, or emotional ups and downs fluctuate strongly, this is acceptable.
4. How do you usually determine the winner of the debate?
I would consider the following three sections:
First, the completeness of the structure of the speech. From the constructive speech whether to establish a detailed framework and definition (not just repeat the motion's content), rebuttal speech performance (including: whether to carry out effective rebuttal, and based on the constructive speech on the output of new extensions), and the final focus/summary speech whether to summarize the clashes properly, and point of valid view comparison (not just repeat the previous point of view needs to be summarized and condensed), and the final focus/summary speech whether to summarize the clashes and point of view comparison (not just repeat the previous arguements needs to be summarized and condensed). The performance of the rebuttal speech (including: whether there are effective rebuttals, and whether there are new ideas based on teammates' constructive speeches), and whether there are clashes in the final focus/summary speech, as well as the comparison of ideas (not just repeating previous ideas, but summarizing and condensing them).
Second, the overall performance at crossfire. Including: strategy design, whether to be able to ask effective questions (do a good job of attacking). As well as the ability to answer questions to improve their own side of the argument, to enhance their own side of the position (whether the defense is in place). Extra bonus points for performance: the ability to catch the other side's loopholes and contradictions in the answer to carry out many repeated attacks (here is the test of the team's two-person cooperation).
Third, how well the team works together, whether the pacing of the two people stays synergistic/complementary, and whether both people are on point when it comes to wrapping up at the end of the debate.
5. Please specify any additional notes you want to share with debaters, including any unique preference of the debate.
I don't have any preference for debating styles, but I hope that everyone will be able to have your thoughts and not just concentrate on reading scripts/flows just for the speed of speech and debate.
I am very attentive to the logic of each team's debate, as well as your interpretation of the topic and demonstration of your arguments. I hope everyone can respect the competition and your opponents, and don't be rude and interrupt when others are speaking.