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

Re: Interventionist Judges Who Interrupt Your Opponent's Sp

We probably ought to expand the issue even more.  What do people
think about the non-verbal behavior of judges?  I have always been 
uncertain as to what was "appropriate."  If I really, really hate a 
position, is it cool to frown?  shake my head in disgust?  When I first 
started judging I tried to help debaters clue into how I was thinking 
because I always appreciated it as a debater.  Lately, I question the 
level to which this is interferring.  Am I a blind, mute ajudicator?  
Should I try to be?  I really see little difference at times between 
a strong non-verbal gesture and a verbal expression of my feelings.

A quick story:  Two years ago I was in a final round panel and one of 
the judges was very vocal and expressive - almost responsive to the 
debaters.  Comments like "oh yeah,"  "nice card,"  "come on," etc. 
throughout the round.  I felt really uncomfortable, but recognized that 
was just the way he judged and the way he normally interacted.  Later 
I really thought about why I was uncomfortable, should I have been?  
Should I have tried to stop the judge?  Am I just not open to 
alternative styles? Was his style better?

Another thought:  For a while I just told debaters that during a round if 
they wanted to know if I was "buying" a position, that they could just 
ask (they would have to be proactive, and fairness was maintained by 
allowing each side equal opportunities).  Few debaters took me up on 
the offer and half the time I would just end up giving them a shrug because 
I didn't know as too many issues were still unsettled.  This really 
didn't seem to improve the debates, so I dropped the offer a few 
years ago.

Jack Rogers wrote:

> This type of behavior is most disturbing to me, as well.  I have serious 
> problems with judges who's remarks "steer" the outcome of the debate.  Even if 
> the judge has already made up his or her mind (and we've all had those rounds 
> that were over after the 2NC) we owe it to the debaters to hear them out and 
> not "steer" the round. I would like to see this thread developed.  How do those 
> who engage in this type of behavior justify their actions?  What are they 
> trying to teach?  

Greg Patton
Trojan Debate
University of Southern California
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page