Chances are, if your child is participating in public forum debate you will be called to judge. I'm going to pull a few quotes from my favorite debate book and between Edwards, Richard E, PhD, Competitive Debate, The Official Guide and myself you will be anxiety free while judging Public Forum debate.
In Public Forum debate a team of 2 will prepare a case for and against the resolution. For example, this month's resolution is The continuation of current US drug policies in Latin America will do more harm than good. The team will need to prepare a Pro side and a Con side.
The first speaker of the team will have a 4 minute speech. In this speech they will restate the resolution and then provide reasons why they support or oppose it. Just as we were taught to outline our writing in school, the speech will come to you in sort of outline form. For example team a wins the coin flip and takes the affirmation (pro) side of the above resolution. Their speech may look like this:
For the last 20 years the US has spent billions of dollars fighting the war on drugs and we are no closer winning this war than we were when we started, for this reason we affirm, the continuation of current US drug policies in Latin America will do more harm than good.
Contention 1: (Our first reason) The war on drugs is ineffective .
Subpoint A: According to ABC we have not seen a reduction of drugs entering the US
Subpoint B: According to XYZ, the number of coca farms in central America is growing with the US being their main destination.
Contention 2: (our second reason) Our policy of pesticide spraying in Peru is detrimental to the environment.
Subpoint A: The pesticides spray indiscriminately
For these reasons we urge a pro ballot.
The first speaker for the opposing team will now rise and give their 4 minute speech to the opposite side, they will negate and lay out their reasoning.
When the second speaker is done, both speakers will stand for crossfire. Think of crossfire as question and answer. It's a time to ask questions and have them answered. Direct and to the point. It is not a time to re-read evidence. This is where you are able to make points of contentions for your speech. It is a time to start poking holes in your opponents case and to clear up points of interest. It is a 3 minute round and the last speaker is the one who should ask the first question.
At this point a judge will have an outline of each case. I take notes in 2 different colors as it is easier to read back on and know which side said what.
After crossfire the second speaker on the first team will give his 4 minute speech. This time is usually spent attacking each of the oppositions contentions. If time allows, the speaker will quickly run through his case. Then, the second speaker on the opposing team gets his 4 minutes to attack what the previous speaker just said about his case. If time permits the speaker should then state again his contentions and why they are stronger.
Another 3 minute crossfire with the second speakers.
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
Judging, something to think about
As I was reading today, I came across a paragraph that, just about, fits the quality of judges in some debate tournaments. I'm not singling out public forum debate as I've heard some whopper RFD's for just about all speech and debate events.
Basically, an FBI agent had worked hard for his career and lands his dream job at the FBI. "...all of it had been training for the Bureau, and now that he was here, he hated like hell to think it could all go away at the hands of a boss who clearly disliked him...Funny how that works. You get assigned to work for a man who doesn't know his ass from a whole in the ground, and then it's the incompetent one who gets to write the performance evaluation." Gilstrap, John. Even Steven.
The kids will tell you, "You work your butt off, and then it's the incompetent judge that gets to do the judging."
Unfortunately, it's very true. Every ballot we judges fill out, we have to give a RFD, reason for decision. When you have judges that have no idea what they are suppose to be judging you find the strangest RFD's. Some might make some sense, "the pro team had a better argument", some will leave you stumped, "I liked the pro better" and some will just tick you off, "if you are going to list you contentions then you should alphabetize the sub points". This is a debate! This is not LA class.
What hurts the kids the most is the cost of losing a debate on a non issue. There is no right or wrong way to list sub points. You don't really even need sub points. So, to lose with the RFD being a lack of correct sup point listing, it's a terrible thing.
I started this blog to write about my time on the public forum debate circuit (for lack of a better word) and the biggest complaint I hear and see is the judging quality. I decided to spend the next few days informing future judges what exactly public forum debate is and how to judge it.
Basically, an FBI agent had worked hard for his career and lands his dream job at the FBI. "...all of it had been training for the Bureau, and now that he was here, he hated like hell to think it could all go away at the hands of a boss who clearly disliked him...Funny how that works. You get assigned to work for a man who doesn't know his ass from a whole in the ground, and then it's the incompetent one who gets to write the performance evaluation." Gilstrap, John. Even Steven.
The kids will tell you, "You work your butt off, and then it's the incompetent judge that gets to do the judging."
Unfortunately, it's very true. Every ballot we judges fill out, we have to give a RFD, reason for decision. When you have judges that have no idea what they are suppose to be judging you find the strangest RFD's. Some might make some sense, "the pro team had a better argument", some will leave you stumped, "I liked the pro better" and some will just tick you off, "if you are going to list you contentions then you should alphabetize the sub points". This is a debate! This is not LA class.
What hurts the kids the most is the cost of losing a debate on a non issue. There is no right or wrong way to list sub points. You don't really even need sub points. So, to lose with the RFD being a lack of correct sup point listing, it's a terrible thing.
I started this blog to write about my time on the public forum debate circuit (for lack of a better word) and the biggest complaint I hear and see is the judging quality. I decided to spend the next few days informing future judges what exactly public forum debate is and how to judge it.
Saturday, April 6, 2013
TOC bound
Just when I thought it was safe to put away my "judge" hat, we are off to the Tournament of Champions in Kentucky later this month. My totally awesome children received 1 of the 7 at large bids.
We have a topic to debate that I feel is very one sided: The continuation of the US drug policy in Latin America will do more harm than good. Hmm, that's a thinker. We'll see how this one turns out.
We have 3 weeks to prepare and no teams to run a prep. debate on. But, I think positive and I know my guys can do this.
Until April 28th I'll be offline. I also have to prepare for the upcoming TOC.
We have a topic to debate that I feel is very one sided: The continuation of the US drug policy in Latin America will do more harm than good. Hmm, that's a thinker. We'll see how this one turns out.
We have 3 weeks to prepare and no teams to run a prep. debate on. But, I think positive and I know my guys can do this.
Until April 28th I'll be offline. I also have to prepare for the upcoming TOC.
Monday, April 1, 2013
A few of my favorite public forum debate topics
With our debate season at an end, I thought I'd take a few moments to recall some of my favorite PF topics. As a judge, you have to put aside your preconceived notions and listen to the debaters. Let the teams sway you with their contentions, evidence and, logic.
My favorite topic ever, resolved, the cost of a college education outweighs the benefits. The ironic thing regarding this topic was that most of the high school debaters are on the fast track to college. You don't need to push these kids to college, it's where their next step will lead them. However, I have always felt that college is not for everyone (myself included, even though I did go and achieved my BS with honors) there are other options not everyone is college bound. Take into account the financial aid industry and it was a timely and informative topic. I loved this topic.
On balance, the rise of China is beneficial to the interest of the United States. Judging this topic was very interesting to me. I learned more about an emerging China than I ever thought I'd need to know. The most important fact I took away from this topic, there is more to the world than just the United States. There is a whole world out there, and every decision that is made by one part will affect another part at some point in time. Thousands of miles apart is not a whole lot. Not anyone. Not in the global economy, global world we live in today. The Keystone pipeline-guess who is a major player in that one? China. Oil, think China. Military, think China. Cyber "anything", think China.
Prior to, on balance, the United States Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election committee harms the election process, I didn't even know what Citizens United was. Perhaps, I need to watch more tv news. I got educated quickly on Super PACS. In this case, I went into judging with a totally open mind. I let logic play a major part in the outcome of the debate. I was sure to let the debaters know evidence and logic would play a part in my decision.
Due to the scarcity of judges, especially as the tournament winds down and teams go home, I had the honor of judging a finals Lincoln Douglas round. Being from Texas, I really enjoyed listening to the students debate, whether it is morally permissible to use deadly force as a deliberate response to repeated domestic violence. While I went into the round thinking, yeah, kill em, I left the round thinking, hmmmm, let him rot in jail.
It's been fun.
My favorite topic ever, resolved, the cost of a college education outweighs the benefits. The ironic thing regarding this topic was that most of the high school debaters are on the fast track to college. You don't need to push these kids to college, it's where their next step will lead them. However, I have always felt that college is not for everyone (myself included, even though I did go and achieved my BS with honors) there are other options not everyone is college bound. Take into account the financial aid industry and it was a timely and informative topic. I loved this topic.
On balance, the rise of China is beneficial to the interest of the United States. Judging this topic was very interesting to me. I learned more about an emerging China than I ever thought I'd need to know. The most important fact I took away from this topic, there is more to the world than just the United States. There is a whole world out there, and every decision that is made by one part will affect another part at some point in time. Thousands of miles apart is not a whole lot. Not anyone. Not in the global economy, global world we live in today. The Keystone pipeline-guess who is a major player in that one? China. Oil, think China. Military, think China. Cyber "anything", think China.
Prior to, on balance, the United States Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election committee harms the election process, I didn't even know what Citizens United was. Perhaps, I need to watch more tv news. I got educated quickly on Super PACS. In this case, I went into judging with a totally open mind. I let logic play a major part in the outcome of the debate. I was sure to let the debaters know evidence and logic would play a part in my decision.
Due to the scarcity of judges, especially as the tournament winds down and teams go home, I had the honor of judging a finals Lincoln Douglas round. Being from Texas, I really enjoyed listening to the students debate, whether it is morally permissible to use deadly force as a deliberate response to repeated domestic violence. While I went into the round thinking, yeah, kill em, I left the round thinking, hmmmm, let him rot in jail.
It's been fun.
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
Just what is a Public Forum debate
In the world of debate, Public Forum is a newcomer with its first national competition occurring in 2002. Public forum debate is based on a crossfire type of debate made famous by Ted Turner and CNN. With Ted Turner being on of the first sponsors.
One of the biggest obstacles public forum debate has to overcome is, the common thought of it being "the ordinary man's debate". Debate books, debate coaches and many debate professionals will tell you that it is any one's debate. "You can literally pick anyone off the street and have a well judged debate". I stand in firm negation of this quote. Public forum topics are considered "hot" and "ripped from the headlines" current and highly debated/debatable. With seasoned debaters, you are almost guaranteed an exciting and well informed debate round. I do enjoy judging public forum debate and would like to see more judges understanding this type of debate.
There are numerous things to keep in mind when judging public forum. My biggest contention is that NOT anyone can judge this debate. There is order, there are rules and there is a symmetry that must be followed. I'm not saying you must be an expert in the field, I'm not stating you have to know anything about the topic. I am saying you must know some (and I use this term loosely) debate jargon.
Public forum debate consists of 2 teams of 2 speakers. A coin flip begins with the winner of the flip deciding if they wish to speak first or second and/or take the affirmation or negative side of the debate. Seasoned debaters will chose wisely based on the topic at hand. The second speaker will also be the last speaker in the round. They can take their final focus speech and the last words the judges hear is theirs. There is something to be said for having the last word. However, topic wise, some teams will take the pro (affirmation) or the neg (negate) for their specific reasons. Some topics lend themselves to being easier to argue for or against. See, there is logic in public forum debate.
One of the biggest obstacles public forum debate has to overcome is, the common thought of it being "the ordinary man's debate". Debate books, debate coaches and many debate professionals will tell you that it is any one's debate. "You can literally pick anyone off the street and have a well judged debate". I stand in firm negation of this quote. Public forum topics are considered "hot" and "ripped from the headlines" current and highly debated/debatable. With seasoned debaters, you are almost guaranteed an exciting and well informed debate round. I do enjoy judging public forum debate and would like to see more judges understanding this type of debate.
There are numerous things to keep in mind when judging public forum. My biggest contention is that NOT anyone can judge this debate. There is order, there are rules and there is a symmetry that must be followed. I'm not saying you must be an expert in the field, I'm not stating you have to know anything about the topic. I am saying you must know some (and I use this term loosely) debate jargon.
Public forum debate consists of 2 teams of 2 speakers. A coin flip begins with the winner of the flip deciding if they wish to speak first or second and/or take the affirmation or negative side of the debate. Seasoned debaters will chose wisely based on the topic at hand. The second speaker will also be the last speaker in the round. They can take their final focus speech and the last words the judges hear is theirs. There is something to be said for having the last word. However, topic wise, some teams will take the pro (affirmation) or the neg (negate) for their specific reasons. Some topics lend themselves to being easier to argue for or against. See, there is logic in public forum debate.
Monday, March 25, 2013
Time to start blogging again
Wow, it's been almost 1 year since my last post. While I haven't been posting, I have been gathering my thoughts, attending and judging debates and, making plenty of notes to add to my blog.
Let's start with a little bit of background. I grew up in Texas (which will later prove to be very important), I attended a small high school. I believe there were about 150 in my graduating class. I was an average student. There is no excuse for me, I really thought of school as a waste of time. I took my required classes, passed (some just barely) but was never very interested in more than leaving school and hanging out with my horses. I am a college graduate, suma cume laude in fact. I married in college and never really worked a job outside the home. I worked briefly after college in the law area but after having my first child, never went back to work again. I stay home and consider it one of the top 3 things I have been able to do in my life.
To the good stuff. Three years ago my (now) senior child decided he wanted to take a speech and debate class. I was thrilled, public speaking for me, as most people, terrifying. Four days later he came to me and told me he would need me to be a judge at their first tournament. Yikes, ok. I had no idea what I suppose to do, their coach would explain what was expected of me and I'd be fine. A few days before the tournament, coach sat me down and explained. (This is all I remember of the conversation). "This paper should explain most things. Basically, the first speaker will stand up and state his/her resolution and their contentions, each resolution will have a value and you just judge on their debate of the value." Sounds good right? Wrong.
After (literally) taking a zanax in the school parking lot, I entered the school, made my way to the judges lounge and sat by myself shaking. The other volunteer/coerced parents showed up and the tournament began. High school debate tournaments are an amazing feat of fitting as many teams into as many rooms, closets, gym locker rooms, theater prop rooms a school has. I found myself in the theatre prop room and the only positive that came from my first debate was the fact that the kids looked way more nervous than me. Of course, by now the zanax had just began to kick in. The ballots for Lincoln Douglas debate will give each person their side (pro or con, for or against) and mention who goes first. I was ready, then one side asked me if I wanted some flow paper. Flow paper, what the hell?? Sure, I took a sheet of 9x11 blank paper. Somewhere in the dark corner of my memory I remember that I have to FLOW the debate and keep time. Time, gotta get out my phone and keep track of time. Looking extremely confident I then asked the debaters to remind me how much time I would need to allow each. In a nutshell, I had no friggin idea what I was doing there or what I was even suppose to do.
Three years later I can laugh about it. I hear the way my kids rant over the judges and I would have loved to be a fly on the wall when my first debaters left the room. I'd also love to see some of my first ballots I filled out and my reason for decision. Why they even let me judge again is one of the great questions of all time. It's also one of the reasons I am writing this blog. I hope some kids find this blog and read so they can understand that us "parent" judges are given a ballot and sent on our merry way, but, I REALLY want the parents to understand how to judge and, why, yes why, it is extremely important for judges to have some idea of how they should judge.
I shall ramble more tomorrow.
Let's start with a little bit of background. I grew up in Texas (which will later prove to be very important), I attended a small high school. I believe there were about 150 in my graduating class. I was an average student. There is no excuse for me, I really thought of school as a waste of time. I took my required classes, passed (some just barely) but was never very interested in more than leaving school and hanging out with my horses. I am a college graduate, suma cume laude in fact. I married in college and never really worked a job outside the home. I worked briefly after college in the law area but after having my first child, never went back to work again. I stay home and consider it one of the top 3 things I have been able to do in my life.
To the good stuff. Three years ago my (now) senior child decided he wanted to take a speech and debate class. I was thrilled, public speaking for me, as most people, terrifying. Four days later he came to me and told me he would need me to be a judge at their first tournament. Yikes, ok. I had no idea what I suppose to do, their coach would explain what was expected of me and I'd be fine. A few days before the tournament, coach sat me down and explained. (This is all I remember of the conversation). "This paper should explain most things. Basically, the first speaker will stand up and state his/her resolution and their contentions, each resolution will have a value and you just judge on their debate of the value." Sounds good right? Wrong.
After (literally) taking a zanax in the school parking lot, I entered the school, made my way to the judges lounge and sat by myself shaking. The other volunteer/coerced parents showed up and the tournament began. High school debate tournaments are an amazing feat of fitting as many teams into as many rooms, closets, gym locker rooms, theater prop rooms a school has. I found myself in the theatre prop room and the only positive that came from my first debate was the fact that the kids looked way more nervous than me. Of course, by now the zanax had just began to kick in. The ballots for Lincoln Douglas debate will give each person their side (pro or con, for or against) and mention who goes first. I was ready, then one side asked me if I wanted some flow paper. Flow paper, what the hell?? Sure, I took a sheet of 9x11 blank paper. Somewhere in the dark corner of my memory I remember that I have to FLOW the debate and keep time. Time, gotta get out my phone and keep track of time. Looking extremely confident I then asked the debaters to remind me how much time I would need to allow each. In a nutshell, I had no friggin idea what I was doing there or what I was even suppose to do.
Three years later I can laugh about it. I hear the way my kids rant over the judges and I would have loved to be a fly on the wall when my first debaters left the room. I'd also love to see some of my first ballots I filled out and my reason for decision. Why they even let me judge again is one of the great questions of all time. It's also one of the reasons I am writing this blog. I hope some kids find this blog and read so they can understand that us "parent" judges are given a ballot and sent on our merry way, but, I REALLY want the parents to understand how to judge and, why, yes why, it is extremely important for judges to have some idea of how they should judge.
I shall ramble more tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)