Reminder to all SSDC Adjudicators

Dear SSDC 2010 Adjudicators,

Firstly, thanks to everybody who came down and spent their Friday evening with us last week,  judging the various debates. Although the round went quite well, the debates ended very late because some of the rooms started late, and (more commonly) because the second and third debates were delayed due to extensive debriefs by the adjudicators. As an adjudicator myself, I understand the desire for us to be as thorough as possible with both teams, so that they learn from their mistakes (and work on their strengths). This unfortunately causes the young student volunteers from the host schools have to stay back very late to re-arrange and clean up the classrooms. Thus, we would like to reiterate a few points (the ones in red) for all adjudicators, to help us keep things running on time for the next round.

1. FILLING IN THE SCORE SHEET

• Your score must be within the standard grid (provided) of 60-80. The average speaker score for this competition is 70. Adjudicators are reminded to be discerning and have strong justifications when awarding speaker scores above 75 or below 65.
• A speaker who reads extensively from a prepared speech with minimal eye contact usually scores below average on style, unless the speech managed to nevertheless be engaging.
• Track your debate on a separate sheet, and change your draft speaker scores on that sheet. Only write your final scores and summarised comments (in bullet points) on the score sheet.
• All 3 debates on the day are the same Round.
• Your comments should be worded diplomatically. Try and have a balance of positive comments and constructive criticism.
• Draws are not allowed.
• Check your addition to make sure the numbers are correct, and that the team you felt won the debate does indeed have the higher score.

2. DISCUSSING THE VERDICT

• Give your score sheet to the chairman before you begin the discussion. Shadow judges should also hand in their score sheets before joining the discussion.
• If you intend to discuss the verdict in the room, make sure all judges have completed their score sheets before you begin the discussion.
• You should take no longer than 5 minutes for the discussion to finalise the key points for the oral adjudication. This discussion is for you to share your perspectives with the chief judge on what to highlight during the oral adjudication and to the teams during debrief, not to argue about which team won.
• The judging panel must also determine the Best Speaker for the debate. This will be the speaker that most judges (not including the shadows) scored the highest; if there is a tie, the best speaker can be chosen by consensus from the judges. If there is still no decision emerging, the chief judge will decide the best speaker.

3. ORAL ADJUDICATION AND FEEDBACK TO TEAMS

• Irrespective of whether the Chief Judge is in the majority or dissents, the Chief Judge will deliver the oral adjudication. Another judge will only deliver the oral adjudication if the Chief feels strongly that another judge would be better suited for this role,
• The Oral Adj should cover all elements of the debate, including style, content, and strategy. The speech should be a balanced commentary of positive comments and constructively-worded criticism, on both teams. Be encouraging, polite and professional in your delivery.
• The speech should last less than 5 minutes.
• Announce the best speaker before you announce the winning team.
• All judges may give additional feedback to the teams. Be concise, and do not delay the start of the next debate because of your feedback to the teams. Some helpful tips: (1) debrief the teams outside the classroom so that the next round’s teams can get set up in the room; (2) please do not debrief each speaker point-by-point – provide just one or two key lessons for each speaker at most.

4. OTHER MATTERS

• The Chief Judge should advise the convenors (from DA(S)) on the performance of their shadow judges. If there are concerns about any of the judges, feedback should be directed to convenors, not teams.
• If there are administrative or logistical problems during the debate, the Chief Judge should act decisively and inform the convenors when possible. The Chief Judge is responsible for the smooth progress of the debate.

Once again, thanks to all the adjudicators who make SSDC possible every year. We are always open to suggestions and ideas on how to streamline the competition to help end a little bit earlier (so we can all go out and enjoy our Friday evening!) so please feel free to comment below or email us directly if you have any thoughts.  See you at the next round on Mar 5th!