Effective Debate Judging

Overview

This lecture focuses on effective judging in debates, covering how to identify and resolve clashes, give oral adjudications, and take useful notes during debates.

Identifying and Resolving Clashes

• Clashes are central questions or points of contention in a debate that both sides attempt to win.
• Clashes are not individual arguments but broad issues containing multiple sub-arguments.
• Judges should identify the most critical clashes, often those explicitly or implicitly prioritized by teams.
• Winning a clash requires robust analysis, logical links between arguments, and effective impact explanation.
• Rebuttals reduce, refute, or reframe the impact and scope of opposition material.
• Judges must actively compare arguments, not just count the number of points made.
• The “Goldilocks intervention” means judges weigh arguments only when teams provide equally balanced analysis.

Determining Debate Outcomes

• Explicit agreements on metrics take priority; otherwise, look for implicit agreements or the quality of material presented.
• If teams provide different metrics, judges should determine which is better justified by the arguments presented.
• In rare cases with no agreement, use the perspective of an average reasonable voter.
• Avoid making subjective value judgments unless justified by team analysis.

Oral Adjudication (OA)

• OA should be concise (about 7 minutes), focusing on key reasons for the decision.
• General comments should be brief and not include detailed feedback.
• Clearly explain which clashes were decisive and how material was weighed.
• Use the terminology and framing teams used during the debate for clarity.
• Avoid giving constructive feedback or making arguments teams did not make.

Note Taking in Debates

• Use a method that allows you to track the flow and replay the debate (speech-by-speech notes, summary sheets, shorthand, etc.).
• Annotate key points, rebuttals, and impacts.
• Write notes clearly to avoid over-crediting or missing arguments.
• Check personal and circuit biases when evaluating material.

Key Terms & Definitions

• Clash — A major point of contention or central question in a debate.
• Impact — The explained consequence or importance of an argument.
• Rebuttal — A response aimed at weakening or refuting the opponent’s arguments.
• Goldilocks intervention — Judge’s limited intervention when team analyses are equally balanced.
• Oral Adjudication (OA) — The verbal explanation given by judges after a debate, explaining the decision.

Action Items / Next Steps

• Practice identifying and prioritizing clashes in practice debates.
• Limit OA to 7 minutes, focusing on key comparative points.
• Develop personal note-taking strategies that best capture the debate flow.
• Review lecture slides and recommended materials for further learning.