[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Re: Debaters as judges



I think I tend to agree with most of the concerns raised below. I also 
have another concern to mention, which has yet to have been raised - it 
may put unwanted pressure on some of the debaters.  This summer at our 
workshop, we had students fill out the panels in some of the elims (for 
example, 2 college debaters judged with 5 students (whose ballots 
combined had the weight of one college student ballot). This was also 
done at Dartmouth's workshop when I attended it years ago. anyhow, I 
talked to some of the students on a panel I was on after one of the 
elims, and some of them said they felt awkward/pressured in having to 
decide their peers' fates (particularly since they felt they had less 
credibility due to the fact that they were not still debating in the 
elims). Meanwhile, others said, while they thought judging those 
particular debates were fun, said they were glad they did not have to judge during 
the regular year at "real" tournaments (which determined whether people 
qualified for the TOC, for example). I don't think students judging is a 
terrible thing, but I think it should be well thought out to avoid making 
things uncomfortable or more of a hassle than it's worth.

adrienne brovero
assistant coach
wake forest debate




On 6 Dec 1995, Carson Brackney wrote:

> I don't like the idea of using debaters as judges.  My only experience with
> such a system was when I took a Southwestern team to the CA swing a few years
> ago.  Nothing horrible happened to them because of it (they would've dropped
> that outround regardless of who was judging), but I have a few concerns with
> the idea.
> 
> 1.  The wrong debaters end up judging?
> 
> If I am going to have active debaters judge my teams, I would want the best
> active debaters around in the round.  Unfortunately, if you use
> student-involved panels in outrounds, it means that you are using students who
> are NOT in outrounds to judge.  In other words, teams that couldn't make it
> out of prelims (or early outs) are judging.  Sort of creepy.
> 
> 2.  How do debaters get coached?
> 
> One of the first things most coaches do before their teams starts an outround
> is to discuss the panel with the debaters.  How does a coach advise her or his
> students to approach a particular panel if they have no idea how one of the
> judges perceives debate?  For those of you who believe in less active
> coaching, how do debaters determine on their own how to approach an utter
> unknown as a judge?  
> 
> 3.  Too close for objectivity?
> 
> A week ago, people were in favor of having newbie judges watch rounds until
> they felt comfortable/confident to judge.  Now others are expecting a
> non-breaking/advancing debater to do this all of the sudden.  The irony.
> 
> Meanwhile, people want to insure "fair" judging at all turns.  Now, some
> advocate putting people who still have very direct contact and sometimes
> personal stakes into elim rounds.  More irony.
> 
> I am not saying that all active debaters would be corrupt.  I am also not
> claiming that receipt of a diploma (or in sadder cases the end of eligibility)
> give someone the magic power of objectivity in all cases.  I do, however,
> think that there is a greater likelihood of non-round motivated decisions
> among active debaters.
> 
> 
> --There are a few other reasons I can think of, but I'll let this fly as the
> starter set and see what others think.  It is an interesting idea, but I don't
> think it is a good one.
> 
> Pax
> Carson Brackney
> Asst Dir of Speech & Debate
> Wichita State U
>
References:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page