Basic Guide for New Judges
Individual Events
Judging individual speaking events (ie’s) can be a bit intimidating if you have never done it before. The following guidelines should help you to approach judging with a bit more knowledge and confidence. It is important to remember that judging is always subjective – every judge will have different preferences and be moved in different ways by different performances – that is OK! There are always going to be different thoughts and perspectives about how to evaluate forensics performances, whether it is speeches or debate. However, these students work very hard on their events and should be able to expect some level of consistency in their judging. That is why we are providing this guide for new judges - to hopefully answer some of your basic questions. So please read over the following guidelines thoroughly!
First and foremost, be sure to write a detailed ballot! Students need feedback to grow. You are there to evaluate and judge and render decisions about how to rank the students, but you are also there to provide feedback on their hard work. Be thoughtful in what you say. Provide both praise and constructive criticism (things they can work on). Be specific and try your best to give the students some idea about why they received the scores that they received from you.
Every tournament is different, and forensics is an incredibly large and diverse activity. As you read this, you should keep in mind that it is entirely possible that things will operate differently for you. This guide is being written from my perspective (Jared Anderson) and based on my experiences in college forensics. I have participated in speech and debate events as a competitor, judge, coach, program director, and tournament director since 1995. I have competed for a community college and a University. I have coached a community college and a University. I have been to Phi Rho Pi, CEDA Nationals, The NDT, NPDA, AFA, and NFA. None of this is meant to establish anything other than to explain my background and experience as I write this. There are more organizations out there. There are formats of speech and debate that I am unfamiliar with. There are norms I do not know about. The advice I offer in this guide should be broadly helpful, but is not universal.
For most of our individual speech events (ie's) - there are 3 primary categories: Limited Preparation Events, Platform Speeches, and Interpretation of Literature. I will be covering each individual event within those three categories.
I am providing links to several of the "event descriptions" that are available from different national organizations that host championship tournaments with these events. You may notice that they are fairly standard across our different organizations.
Limited Prep Events – 7 minutes, give time signals
Impromptu Speaking
Impromptu is a TOTAL of 7 minutes. You will be responsible for having the prompts (you will often need to pick these up from the tabroom) and you will be responsible for distributing them to the speakers. When you give the prompt to the speaker, give them a bit of time to get settled and read the prompts. Normally, they will say something like “opening now” and you can give them a few seconds (5-10) to read them over and then announce when you are starting the time. PAY ATTENTION and give your time signals. Students are counting on this. For the first two minutes you should give verbal time signals (30 seconds used, 1 minute used, etc..) and then hand signals from 5 down. A normal expectation for time usage is that students will prep for the first two minutes and then speak for the remaining five. Some students will start earlier than that and some will start later, but they are all still expected to use the full 7 minutes.
Impromptu is a TOTAL of 7 minutes. You will be responsible for having the prompts (you will often need to pick these up from the tabroom) and you will be responsible for distributing them to the speakers. When you give the prompt to the speaker, give them a bit of time to get settled and read the prompts. Normally, they will say something like “opening now” and you can give them a few seconds (5-10) to read them over and then announce when you are starting the time. PAY ATTENTION and give your time signals. Students are counting on this. For the first two minutes you should give verbal time signals (30 seconds used, 1 minute used, etc..) and then hand signals from 5 down. A normal expectation for time usage is that students will prep for the first two minutes and then speak for the remaining five. Some students will start earlier than that and some will start later, but they are all still expected to use the full 7 minutes.
Evaluating impromptu –
- Use of time - Did the student use all of their time? How balanced was it?
- Structure – Was the speech well structured with a clear introduction, preview statement, main points that followed the preview, transition statements, review statement, conclusion.
- Topic – did the student clearly state the prompt, interpret the prompt, and then give a clear thesis?
- Movement – Was the student’s movement intentional? Did they use an effective “speaker’s triangle”? What about posture and hand gestures?
- Eye contact – there is typically not much audience, but did the student make good eye contact?
- Vocal variety – this would include things like volume, pace, tone, use of verbal fillers (um, uh)
- Content – How well did the student interpret the topic? Did their points support the interpretation? Did they provide interesting and clear examples?
The AFA-NIET is a National Championship tournament for Individual Events. Click the link for videos of the final round. We will be providing a link for each event provided for the 2018 or 2019 finals. Remember as you watch these - they are the best of the best, final round at the championship tournament. These are meant to be examples and not to necessarily set the bar for students you may be judging.
Extemporaneous Speaking
Extemp starts with a 30 minute prep time where students will gather elsewhere to get their topics, do research, and prepare to speak. You should pay attention and be aware of the start time so that you are in the room and ready when the students need to begin speaking. Different tournaments will use different “lead times” – some will do the extemp draw 30 minutes prior to the announce start time, so your first speaker will be arriving right as the round starts, some will do 15 minutes. These students will also be expecting time signals. Typically, hand signals from 5 down should be fine. Some students will ask you to go over them before they begin speaking, others may forget to do that. You should probably go over it with them regardless, you may be judging novices and they may not even know to ask you.
Extemp starts with a 30 minute prep time where students will gather elsewhere to get their topics, do research, and prepare to speak. You should pay attention and be aware of the start time so that you are in the room and ready when the students need to begin speaking. Different tournaments will use different “lead times” – some will do the extemp draw 30 minutes prior to the announce start time, so your first speaker will be arriving right as the round starts, some will do 15 minutes. These students will also be expecting time signals. Typically, hand signals from 5 down should be fine. Some students will ask you to go over them before they begin speaking, others may forget to do that. You should probably go over it with them regardless, you may be judging novices and they may not even know to ask you.
Evaluating Extemp -
- Use of time - Did the student use all of their time? How balanced was it?
- Structure – Was the speech well structured with a clear introduction, preview statement, main points that followed the preview, transition statements, review statement, conclusion?
- Topic – Did the student clearly state the question and then clearly answer the question?
- Movement – Was the student’s movement intentional? Did they use an effective “speaker’s triangle”? What about posture and hand gestures?
- Eye contact – there is typically not much audience, but did the student make good eye contact?
- Vocal variety – this would include things like volume, pace, tone, use of verbal fillers (um, uh)
- Content – How well did the student answer the question? Did their points support the thesis? Did they provide interesting and clear examples?
- Source Citations – students have 30 minutes to prepare and are expected to provide a reasonable amount of source citations to support their claims during the speech. There is no prescribed number of sources that is expected, so you can use your judgement. Keep in mind that they had 30 minutes to research and it is a 7 minute speech, so there should definitely be some sources and they should be of good, credible, academic quality.
Platform Speaking – 10 minutes, NO time signals
There are a few different platform speaking events that all have very similar expectations when you are judging. A “platform” speech is a basic, traditional speech that you would teach in an introductory public speaking class. It is a reference to politicians speaking from a raised “platform” (like a stage) – which doesn’t really influence how we think about the speeches now, it just informs the category. Again, there won’t be much difference in how you judge these platform events, so I’ll give you the tips for ALL of platform speaking and then breakdown what makes each different event unique.
Evaluating platform speeches –
- Use of time - Did the student use all of their time? How balanced was it?
- Structure – Was the speech well-structured with a clear introduction, preview statement, main points that followed the preview, transition statements, review statement, conclusion. Platform speeches are written ahead of time, so our expectations for structure and word choice are high.
- Topic – did the student choose an interesting and unique topic?
- Movement – Was the student’s movement intentional? Did they use an effective “speaker’s triangle”? What about posture and hand gestures?
- Note Cards/Memorization – historically, note cards were ok for the novice division but frowned upon in the open division. The goal is for the student to memorize the speech. You can compare how well memorized the students are, some will still be using note cards, some will be memorized. Some will rely heavily on the notes while others won’t.
- Eye contact – there is typically not much audience, but did the student make good eye contact?
- Vocal variety – this would include things like volume, pace, tone, use of verbal fillers (um, uh)
- Sources – a platform speech should be well researched and they should provide clear citations.
- Visual Aids – these are not required! However, many students will choose to use them. How successful were they? Were the visuals clear? Helpful? Handled well?
Persuasive Speaking – the goal of a persuasive speech is to advocate for change. The speaker should present a compelling and coherent argument that is well-supported by credible evidence. The topic should be significant and there should be a tangible call for action. Persuasive speeches will often present a solution that is then supported by something that the audience can do to help facilitate that solution.
Informative Speaking – the goal of an informative speech is to further develop the audiences knowledge and/or understanding of specific subject. Topics should be relevant, significant, and timely. Informative topics should focus on enhancing knowledge and avoid making an argument. These speeches will also rely on credible research and clear source citations.
After-Dinner Speaking (sometimes Speech to Entertain) – these speeches can either be persuasive or informative, but their primary focus is on entertaining the audience. So, while the topic may sometimes be serious or significant, the presentation will focus on humor. While these speeches can be VERY funny, it is important to remember that it is still a speech, this is not a comedy contest, it is a speech contest. You should still be looking for everything you typically look for in a platform speech. Just as a warning, the humor can often be very adult and/or dark.
Communication Analysis (Rhetorical Criticism) – the goal of this speech event is to present a critical analysis of a communication artifact in the form of a speech. There is a lot to cover in this speech and it can sometimes be difficult to organize. The speech should clearly identify and describe the communication artifact they have chosen, the theory that they are using for their analysis, and then the analysis itself. The analysis of the artifact should offer some significant insight for the audience.
Interpretation of Literature (Interp) – 10 Minutes, no time signals
These events are the least “speechlike” events you will probably see at a tournament. The concept behind this style of forensics is that we are still making an argument, but we are doing so with the way that we interpret literature. These events primarily rely on what most people would consider acting skills, but it’s still a lot of “delivery” skill that you will be evaluating as a judge. As a new judge, these events are fun to watch but may also be a bit intimidating to try to evaluate, especially if you are not familiar with the norms of the event. Interp events at the collegiate level are differentiated by the genre of literature that the students choose to use for their piece. While the differences in genre change the tone and will impact how you evaluate the performance, there are also a LOT of similarities in what you are looking for. Similar to the previous section on platform speeches, I will focus on those similarities first and then talk about the differences in each event.
Evaluating Interpretation of Literature –
- Use of time - Did the student use all of their time? Over time is typically considered worst than being under. I usually look for the piece to be between 9:00 and 9:49, however, I may be an outlier in this as I have noticed a lot of pieces in the 8 minute range, even from open competitors. Keep in mind that this is both subjective and only one area of comparative evaluation. You shouldn’t simply be ranking pieces based on which was the longest.
- Structure – For interp, there is a unique structure that is normally used, the piece will typically begin with a “teaser” that is about a minute to two minutes long, followed by an introduction that is usually about a minute, and then the rest of the piece. This is really basic and most pieces will do this.
- Structure/Cutting – Beyond the basic structure described above, you should be looking at the overall structure of the piece. Does it make sense? Does it have a clear arc? Think about story and pacing and how well put together the piece is. The students in these events get to choose how they put everything together, so are those choices good?
- Introduction – This section is the part of the piece where the student makes their argument. It should be more than just a description of the “plot” that they are performing, a clear and interesting/unique argument should be clearly made. The literature should also be appropriately cited. In some formats there will be selections from multiple works and all of them need to be cited. Typically a title and author is sufficient.
- Selection – As a new judge, this may be difficult to assess at first. With more experience, you will get a better feel for how well the student has chosen their literature. The norm is to try to avoid “overused” pieces – we want to avoid comparison to well-known performances both in our activity and outside of it. So you should probably be seeing literature that you are not really familiar with, and that’s a good thing. You will also get a feel for the overall quality of literature.
- Movement – This is also known as “blocking” for interp and it can be very creative. You are still looking for intentionality. Was each movement clear, crisp, and intentional? We are talking about ALL of the movement – foot movements, body movements, how they physically represent different characters, hand movements, and particularly page turns. Yes, how they turn the page matters. It can be additive, it can be distracting, it can be sloppy, or kind of neglected. You should pay attention to how the student moves, and how those movements add to the piece and the performance.
- Memorization – this one can be a bit fuzzy at times because the students will almost always be expected to have the manuscript in front of them in their little black book. Like all of our judging, there is a lot of subjectivity. While there are some fairly obvious differences in levels of memorization, and we clearly don’t want to see students who are unfamiliar with their piece and just looking down at the book the whole time, we also have some level of expectations that the point of this event is to interpret literature, which is a little different from acting. The book is there to reinforce this concept and some judges will look for the performers to at least give a perfunctory glance at the text now and again while still being memorized. The norms on this are constantly changing, so just use your best judgement.
- Eye contact – This is not actually expected much in these events. It is definitely more theatrical, where you may be looking more for consistency of characters and where they are looking.
- Vocal Performance – this would include things like volume, pace, tone, etc…but it is all performative at this point. You want variety, difference, and you want it to make sense to the piece and to the argument that the student is making.
Prose Interpretation – literature includes short stories, novels, essays, and story-centered new media. It can often be difficult to distinguish between the different genres as a new judge, but in Prose, the focus should typically be on STORY. Think about the 5 key elements of plot - Exposition, rising action, climax, falling action and the resolution. There may still be characters and dialogue, but the story-telling should be the focus and the main support for the argument.
Dramatic Interpretation- literature includes plays, materials written for stage/screen/radio (scripts), documentaries, and character-centered new media. In Drama, the focus we look for is on CHARACTER. You can look for how the character or characters are portrayed, how they change, grow, and develop, and how that supports the argument.
Duo Interpretation – this event is not genre specific and will feature TWO students (hence “duo”). Most duo interps tend to be very similar to dramatic interp and focus on character and dialogue, but what we are looking for is the INTERACTION between at least two characters and how that supports the argument.
Poetry Interpretation – literature includes poems, slam poetry, lyrics, any material with poetic elements. The focus in Poetry should typically be on the WORDS. Not exclusively, but things like character and story can take a backseat to wordplay. There is an attention paid to the interplay between form and content. Poems do not need to rhyme or have a particular meter, but we still want to see the poetic elements of the piece and how that poetry supports the argument.
Programmed Oral Interpretation – this is a multiple-genre event and the literature should include at least two different genres. The focus for POI should be on THEME. While all of our interpretation events have an argument, it takes front and center in this event. We are looking for how the theme develops through the interplay of the different genre interpretations. How does the combination of prose/drama/poetry develop a specific and unique, thematic, argument?