student judges

[erica@uclink.berkeley.edu (Erica Grosjean)]

A number have people have already mentioned the student judging at Cal Poly
.  Like, Nora, I recently debated in front of a student panel at that
tournament.  Students get the option of judging when they place high, but
not high enough to break, during the elimination rounds.  Some of the
effects of this philosophy are as follows:

1.  Judging becomes and honor, acknowledging the value of debaters who
missed a competitive break but should be rewarded for doing well.   

2. The debaters take this job very seriously in the hopes of living up to
this honor. (In fact the best argument I have heard against this concerns
the need to check for undue pressure on the student.)

3. The system fosters a community feeling among the students who respect
eachother and help the activity be the fairest and most enjoyable 
Likewise, people are reminded of the importance of every individual's
contribution to debate.  We shouldn't only be in it to win our own rounds,
but to help the community as a whole.  SLO uses this procedure to
complement its other community policies such as peer awards (which are
often valued more than the normal speaker awards).


Finally, people have mentioned striking.  Many of the arguments against
student judges can be answered by a voluntary system for both competitor
and student judge.  

This sport relies on thoughtful, critical, and conscientious judges.
Student judges offer all those qualities.

Erica Grosjean
Cal Debate

---

• Prev by Date: Subscription
• Next by Date: re:student judges--Double Standard in Evidence
• Prev by thread: student judges
• Next by thread: regional constraints
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page