Judging Congressional Debate Arizona NFL District Qualifier Created

Judging Congressional Debate Arizona NFL District Qualifier Created by Adam Jacobi, NFL Adapted for Arizona by Kevin Berlat

At a Glance Evaluate every speech by each speaker - writing comments as students speak. Rank-order the eight (8) best legislators at the end of the session Evaluate the presiding officer

How Speeches Work All speeches = up to 3 minutes Sponsor/Author - introduces legislation; establishes need. Fields 2 minutes of questions. First Negative - “ground” for opposition; 2 minutes of questions. Other Speeches - 1 min. of questions

Frequently Asked. . . Not necessary to recite legislation students + judges have copies. Judges do not time speeches. This is the student presiding officer’s job. Do not ask students to write names on the board. Use seating chart/roster (time is of essence).

Argumentation Speeches should argue - to make substantive claims, to support those claims with credible evidence, and to show impact on people/society. After the sponsor/author speech, students should respond to other speakers, building or refuting.

Questions & Answers Listen to speakers’ answers to questions – do they show a firm working knowledge of issues beyond their own speeches? There is a space on the evaluation sheet to note any issues with questions asked by the student.

Delivery Congress is more an exercise in spontaneously reacting to others’ viewpoints, rather than polished oration, though some oratorical flourishes (rhetorical devices) may be present.

Delivery Extemporaneous delivery is preferred (sparse use of notes, but not a word-forword manuscript). Take effective movement, eye contact and audience engagement into account. Note distracting bad habits.

Priorities? Pay more attention to the content of students’ speeches (what they say) than delivery (how they say it). It isn’t necessary to note all arguments students make; rather comment on specific arguments that were questionable or spot-on.

Constructive Critiques Avoid generalizations like “good, ” “weak, ” “work on. . . ” Use specific comments that describe exactly what you found fault or strength with. If you were the student, would you know exactly what the judge was looking for, and how to fix it?

Johnny Appleseed 2 3 -038 x 38 H 3 x Be cautious when trying Slow down! You hit us w/ to explain nuances of several statistics, without economic theory-you providing analysis to help talked yourself in circles. us understand the You are reading too much significance of those stats. off your notepad. Just write When you reference another short bullets that prompt speaker, please use her name. All that said, a solid speech! you to say more. Please write legibly in blue or black ink. George Washington Don’t be too aggressive. Wait for their response before interjecting. Shermer HS

Awarding Points 1 = Disgraceful behavior/mockery Spoke on the wrong side So brief, there was no substance 2 -3 = Minimal effort; little substance 4 = Mediocre (not well organized or substantive in information offered)

Awarding Points 5 = Proficient - meets expectations, but isn’t particularly original or skillful in advancing debate 6 -7 = Excellent - solid, although there may be some minor flaws, or fluency of delivery is lacking.

Awarding Points 8 = Superior – not necessarily perfect, but flaws were so minor, they did not detract from the impact of the speech. Minor pauses in fluency are acceptable.

Presiding Officers Separate rubric of standards: fairness of speaker recognition, handling questions and motions, command of procedure and ability to hold decorum.

2 Johnny Appleseed 3 -038 38 H 3 Communicate your approach to speaker recognition more clearly when you begin the session, so there are fewer questions later. Remember, it’s better to be methodical (and even a bit slow), than to make an unfair speaker selection. . 3 15 George Feeney Shermer HS

Overall PO Performance Facilitate debate in assertive but not aggressive manner? Were motions/votes handled efficiently? “Crutch phrases, ” or word economy? Considering the PO’s aggregate performance, how would it compare to a speaker’s performance based on your expectations?

Holistic Ranking Rank-order the eight (8) best legislators at the end of the session Account for the “whole legislator” – skills, knowledge, disposition. Use seating chart and alphabetized roster to keep notes as you go. Quality and quantity (but +Quality)

A Word about Laptops Students may use laptops as per NFL rules. Scorers can monitor use from back Students may not CONNECT. They may access files stored on it. Watch for games/distractions.

Thank you! Scorers may report to chambers Parliamentarians, please stay (anyone wishing to learn how serving as a parliamentarian works may stay!)