1. Judge’s Name

NAME: ASHWIN

GENDER: MALE

INSTITUTION: NANJING UNIVERSITY

AGE: 24

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 (front lining)? (a)

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? (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?

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.

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

Do all your necessary preparations, and have your evidence ready in place. Don't second guess your argument, if you do let it be inside don't show it

In a debate judging, I prioritize clear argumentation, evidence-based claims, and logical reasoning. I value concise and impactful delivery, adherence to time limits, and respect for opponents. I appreciate debaters who engage with the opposing arguments and maintain a professional demeanor. Ultimately, I aim to assess the strength of arguments, depth of analysis, and overall debate strategy to determine the

What types of debate have you participated before and how long is your debate career?. Public forum, JWSD, original oratory extemporaneous, impromptu, informative speech.I have worked with several debating organizations such as NHSDLC, SIDC, TOC, BASIS, for the past 2 years

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?

Well detailed claim, link and impact of each contention raised. The points should be supported by good evidence, high quality of rebuttal.

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

I prioritize clear and logical argumentation, effective rebuttal, and engagement with the opponent's arguments. 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

BRANDON L.P. Judging Paradigm

Introduction
I have been a judge for more than two years, and in the last year, I have judged over eleven tournaments. My extensive background in judging has equipped me with the skills necessary to provide thorough and fair evaluations, ensuring a positive experience for all participants.

Judging Philosophy
Throughout the argument, I take careful notes because I think it's essential to record all significant points. I thoroughly examine and document every significant argument since these specifics help me make an overall evaluation of the round.

Summary Speech Expectations
The main purpose of the summary speech is to draw attention to the main issues of contention and show how your team has won the argument. Instead of presenting fresh ideas, I like to reflect on the entire debate in summary speeches. This means focusing on resolving any unresolved issues and combining arguments.

Topic Definition
I rate the importance of topic definition a 6 on a scale of 1 to 10. I understand that a clear and relevant definition can improve the discussion, even though I would rather stick to the accepted term. Arguments about technicalities are not given priority by me until they significantly advance the subject at hand.

Framework Importance
I give a framework's significance in my decision-making a seven. In order to guide the discussion and guarantee that arguments are consistently evaluated, a clear framework is necessary. I concentrate on how well your framework supports your claims and if I can follow your reasoning back to the source of your decisions.

Crossfire Evaluation
I give Crossfire a seven for significance. This section is mostly used by me to verify your claims and determine the strength of your arguments. It is also helpful for figuring out which arguments are more convincing, particularly when they conflict. When assessing your capacity to defend your positions against criticism, Crossfire can be extremely beneficial.

Weighing Arguments
I give the importance of weighing arguments an eight. I need to see that you can show why your arguments are more important by comparing and contrasting your views with those of your opponent. Making a strong case requires the capacity to effectively weigh arguments.

Persuasive Speaking and Non-Verbal Communication
I rate persuasive speaking and nonverbal communication a five out of ten. I will not penalize debaters who do not succeed in properly selling their points, even though I do encourage them to do so. On the other hand, a powerful delivery might make your points seem more compelling.

Speaking Speed
My preferred speaking speed is a 7, which is just a little bit above average. Fast delivery is OK with me, but it is crucial that you clearly state your points. You are probably talking too quickly if you are having trouble breathing. Clarity and lyricism in speech are essential.

Final Thoughts

I will keep improving this judge paradigm as I get more experience because it is adaptable writing. I will do everything to make this a fruitful experience for all participants, and I am excited to see the creativity and dedication that each debater brings to the table.

BRIAN BWANYA

AGE: 24

COLLEGE: NANJING UNIVERSITY

CURRENT OCCUPANCY: STUDENT

1. What types of debates have you participated before and how long is your debate career?

I have been honored to represent my school as a first speaker back in high school at both provincial and national level during the 2019 season and participated in numerous high school debates in both Zimbabwe and South Africa.

2. How do you consider fast talking?

I prefer moderate and composed talking. Fast talking can result in poor word articulation and the judge(s) might miss a curial argument. I do not encourage debaters to use speed rather use substance to overwhelm your opponents. Quality over Quantity.

3.How do you consider aggressiveness?

It's important to present your arguments with conviction and passion but always maintain a respectful and professional approach. Keep in mind that, the main aim is to persuade others with logic and mechanism and not by intimidation or hostility.

4. How do you usually determine the winner of the debate?

Well l take into consideration many factors before determining the team which wins. The debater/team who has the most compelling argument backed with concise logic and in-depth analysis, persuasiveness and clear arguments and a team which demonstrated the strongest grasp of the topic at hand has a chance to win my vote.

5. Please specify any additional notes you want to share with debaters, including any unique preferences of the debate?

It's important for me to see clear arguments presented by both sides backed with recent and relevant evidence. I also prefer debaters who are able to remain calm and collected during the debate by avoiding personal attacks or insults even derogatory language. Lastly, stick to the topic and avoid tangents or irrelevant arguments that do not directly relate to the topic.

GOOD LUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My approach to judging is rooted in clarity, professionalism, and a strategic evaluation of arguments. When it comes to speaking speed, I prefer an intermediate pace that allows me to follow the debate and take notes effectively. I encourage debaters to prioritize clarity over speed, ensuring their arguments are well-articulated and easy to understand. While I value passionate and assertive speaking styles, as they demonstrate confidence and conviction, I do not tolerate hostility, condescension, or personal attacks. Such behavior detracts from the constructive exchange of ideas and will negatively affect a team’s evaluation.

In determining the winner of a debate, I focus on the strength of claims, warrants, impacts, and evidence. Rebuttals are especially important to me, as I consider how effectively a team addresses and counters the majority of their opponent’s points. Impacts are carefully weighed after the summary speeches, which I view as a critical opportunity for debaters to highlight key clashes and demonstrate their superiority on those issues.

I highly value clarity and organization in debate. I expect debaters to structure their speeches with clear signposting and smooth transitions, making it easy to follow the flow of arguments. I prioritize quality over quantity, favoring well-reasoned and supported arguments over a long list of underdeveloped points. Evidence is essential, but it is not enough to simply cite facts; I expect debaters to analyze their evidence and explain its relevance and impact within the debate.

Crossfire holds significant importance in my decision-making process. I value strategic questioning that demonstrates listening skills and uses the opponent’s answers to strengthen one’s own case. However, it is crucial to maintain respect and professionalism during crossfire. Aggressive or confrontational behavior is counterproductive and can harm a team’s evaluation.

Professionalism is a cornerstone of my judging philosophy. I appreciate debaters who remain composed and respectful, even under pressure. Personal attacks or unprofessional conduct are unacceptable and will result in penalties. In summary speeches, I expect debaters to emphasize major clashes, provide clear comparisons of impacts, and show how their team prevailed. A well-executed summary allows me to make a fair and informed decision.

My scoring priorities reflect what I value most in debate. I assign high importance to defining the topic (8/10), crossfire (9/10), framework (7/10), weighing impacts (7/10), and persuasive speaking along with non-verbal communication (7/10). I aim to take detailed notes on the most important points rather than everything, focusing heavily on the overall quality and presentation of the debate.

Finally, my advice to debaters is to remain calm, clear, and confident under pressure. I respect those who can effectively convey their ideas while maintaining professionalism and composure. By following these guidelines, debaters can ensure a strong performance in front of me as a judge.

1. What types of debates have you participated before and how long is your debate career?

Public Forum debate: 2 years of participation during High School, 2014-2017, 2 appearances at the provincial level ZINDC and ZNDT

2. How do you consider 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.How do you consider aggressiveness?

I see aggressiveness as a tactic used during debates to ridicule your opponent. That being said, I would strongly advise against using this in a tournament setting. Respect your opposition. This is a pretty good strategy in politics, but we aren't here to judge your character, we are here to judge your arguments. Don't make it so that we are forced to consider aggressiveness into our judging paradigm.

4.How do you usually determine 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.

Generally speaking, the person who can effectively refute their opponent's points and present the strongest, most convincing case will probably win the debate.

The winner of a debate is the one who most successfully accomplishes the main objective of the discussion, which is to have a courteous and educational exchange of ideas.

5. Please specify any additional notes you want to share with debaters, including any unique preferences of the debate?

For me, it's critical to see well-reasoned arguments from both sides supported by current, pertinent data. Additionally, I favor debaters who can maintain composure under pressure by refraining from insults, personal attacks, and even insulting language. Finally, stay on topic and refrain from digressions or unrelated debates that have no bearing on the main point.

6. How many tournaments have you judged in the past year?

B. 6-10

7. How many notes do you take during a debate?

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.

9. How important is defining the topic to your decision making?

8

10. How important is the framework to your decision making?

8

11. How important is crossfire in your decision making?

10

12. How important is weighing in your decision making?

9

13. How important is persuasive speaking and non-verbal communication in your decision-making?

8

14. How fast should students speak?

8

GOOD LUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Age: 27

College: JIANGSU UNIVERSITY

Current Occupancy (Student in college, or career field): Economics and International Trade / Business Owner.

How many tournaments have you judged in the past year?

- 6-10

How many notes do you take during a debate?

- I try to take notes on literally everything

What is the main job of the summary speech?

-Highlight the major points of clash and show how your team won them

How important is defining the topic to your decision-making?

- 3/10

How important is framework to your decision-making?

- 7/10

How important is crossfire in your decision-making?

- 5/10

How important is weighing in your decision-making?

- 8/10

How important is persuasive speaking and non-verbal communication in your decision-making?

- 4/10

How fast should students speak?

- 1-10 (feel free to speak as fast as you please)

What types of debate have you participated before, and how long is your debate career?

-High school Debate team (2 years)

-Model United Nations Debate, Jiangsu University, 2020.

-Host of Model United Nations Debate, Jiangsu University, 2021.

-Host of Model United Nations Debate, Jiangsu University, 2022.

How do you consider fast-talking?

-It can be a great skill and strategy to deploy during the debate.

-I consider speaking at around 300 words per minute to be fast, of course words should be clearly pronounced and consistent throughout the speech.

-I type at 100 wpm, so you can be confident I will be getting down everything you say.

How do you consider aggressiveness?

-When the debater is confrontational or actively attacks the opponent’s arguments (expected)

-On the extreme side, when the debater resorts to excessive interruptions, aggression, shouting or personal attacks towards their opponents to undermine their arguments (not tolerated).

How do you usually determine the winner of the debate?

Here are the 3 points I use to determine the winner:

-Clarity and organization: The debater who presents their arguments in a clear, logical, and well-structured manner.

-Strong arguments and evidence: The strength of the arguments presented, supported by relevant and compelling evidence.

-Rebuttal and refutation: Effectively addressing and countering opponents' arguments is crucial. The ability to identify weaknesses in opponents' positions, provide counterarguments, and refute their points with sound reasoning and evidence.

Please specify any additional notes you want to share with debaters, including any unique preference of the debate.

-Mutual respect and Politeness go a long way.

-Respect time.

Judge philosophies

1. judge’s name: Moirah Sithole

1. 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

1. 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.

1. 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 also evaluate 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.

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

Debaters need to relax and enjoy the debate .

Public Forum Debate and Junior Debate

As an adjudicator look for the following qualities in debates and speeches

1. Clear communication and pronunciation.
2. Well-structured arguments that are logical
3. Use of credible sources and evidence to back up arguments.
4. Effective counterarguments and rebuttals.
5. Effective questioning and responses during cross-examination.
6. Ability to persuade the audience and judges
7. Coordination and collaboration between team members.
8. Confidence, poise, and body language.
9. Timing: Adherence to time limits and effective time management.

Original Oratory

1. Original, interesting, and meaningful content.
2. Clear and logical organization of the speech.
3. Clear pronunciation and enunciation.
4. : Confident, engaging, and dynamic presentation.
5. Ability to connect emotionally with the audience.
6. Effectiveness in persuading the audience.
7. Effective use of language, including vocabulary and rhetorical devices.
8. Appropriate and effective use of gestures and body language.
9. Speech should be memorized, not read.
10. Adherence to time limits and effective pacing.

Impromptu Speech

1. Clear understanding of the given topic.
2. Clear and logical structure despite limited preparation time.
3. Clear communication and pronunciation.
4. Confidence, poise, and dynamism in delivery.
5. Original and creative approach to the topic.
6. Relevant, coherent, and substantive content.
7. Ability to engage with the audience.
8. Effectiveness in convincing the audience.
9. Appropriate use of gestures and body language.
10. Adherence to time limits and effective time management.

Debate judging paradigm

Name: Ronald
Age: 26
College: NJUPT
Current Occupation: Phd

1. What types of debate have you participated in before, and how long is your debate career?
   NSDA Judge China (2019-now),
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.

1. How many public forum debate tournaments have you judged in the past year?
   11+
2. 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.
3. 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.

Judge Philosophies\

Judge’s Name : TINASHE NERWANDE

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

4. 4. What is your speaking speed preference?

a. TED talk speed (150-200wpm)

5. How much do you know about the topic?

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

e.

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

a.

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

c

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

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

As a judge I take note of the quality of reasoning and the speaker's points to be essential factors in evaluating the debate. I assess how well each speaker presents their arguments, supports them with evidence, and addresses the topic at hand. I also look at the structure and organization of their points, as well as their ability to effectively engage with their opponents' arguments.

Additionally, I consider the clarity and persuasiveness of the speakers' delivery, including their tone, demeanor, and ability to connect with the audience.By evaluating both the reasoning behind the arguments and the effectiveness of the speakers' points, I aim to determine the overall quality of the debate and select the most compelling team as the winner

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

I suggest debaters to make sure you do as much research on the topic as you could before entering the round. You only succeed with over-preparation. Have a fun debate.

I've judged debates and speeches at various levels, including high school and college competitions. My experience spans different formats, such as Public Forum debates, as well as individual events like original oratory. In judging, I prioritize clarity, logical consistency, and effective communication, providing detailed feedback to help participants improve. My background in these areas has given me a deep understanding of argumentation, rhetoric, and the importance of presenting ideas persuasively and coherently.

TONY KIMANI

Age: 24

Current occupation: Undergraduate Student

College: Central South University, Hunan, Changsha

During my four years of high school years, I participated in various debates as a speaker, and in the 2018-2019 national debate, I participated as a judge. Some debate topics included:

1.Universal Basic Income (UBI): Should governments provide a guaranteed income to all citizens, regardless of their employment status, to alleviate poverty and promote economic stability?

2.Internet Privacy: Is it justified for governments or corporations to monitor and collect personal data?

3.Genetic Engineering and CRISPR Technology: Should humans be allowed to modify the genetic makeup of living organisms, including human embryos, to treat diseases or enhance desirable traits?

4.Free Speech vs. Hate Speech: Should societies prioritize the protection of free speech, even if it means allowing hate speech?

I consider fast talking as a level of confidence and time consciousness as long as the speed doesn’t render the words said by the speaker unclear. Politeness is a key aspect of giving out speaker points as it ensures order in the debate room. I make a judgment on the winner based on the logic of the clash and how the speaker debates the claim. This, however, needs substantial up-to-date evidence and logic.

I would urge debaters to be composed and argue their points without rushing. If debaters are well prepared to debate either as a pro or con of a debate, then they will stand in a good position in making reasonable claims and in the crossfire.

In speeches, I like to see confidence and composure. It displays good understanding of the topic and shows that the speaker practiced enough before the presentation.