Judges FAQ

***UPDATE 02/19/2022*** Speechwire is requiring that you rank out. Please do so instead of doing 5 out***

Judging Policies:

1. Students are expected to wait for your arrival to enter the room.

2. When you arrive in the room, please start your round immediately on Speechwire so we know the round has started.

3. Rank the students 1-5 and then do 5 out for any students after 5.

4. Please give students points between 85 and 100. Please be aware of any 100's you are giving, as we want students to continue to improve.

5. We suggest typing the critiques as you go on a google/word document. You can the copy and paste your comments into Speechwire at the conclusion of the round.

6. Draw Categories (Extemp Speaking, Extemp Reading and Storytelling) will be done every 8 minutes. Please make sure you do not call students in before their scheduled speak time. We suggest writing out the times starting at the beginning of the round.

7. At the end of the round, you can submit your ranks/points. Please do this right away and then you can go back in and enter your critiques. This helps us maintain a timely tournament.

***Some of the doors may appear locked. If the handle doesn't pull down, trying pulling the door out and it will open. If it is still locked, please notify a tournament manager.***

Statement on Implicit Bias and Equity

Judges, please read and thoughtfully consider the National Speech and Debate Association’s Statement on Implicit Bias:

We are all influenced by implicit bias, or the stereotypes that unconsciously affect our decisions. When judging, our implicit biases negatively impact traditionally marginalized and disenfranchised students. Before writing comments or making a decision, please take a moment to reflect on any biases that may impact your decision making.

In addition, judges are encouraged to review the National Speech and Debate Association’s Guide to Culturally Competent Judging.

Impromptu Category

What is Impromptu?

(Information retrieved from speechanddebate.org)

Impromptu is a public speaking event where students have seven minutes to select a topic, brainstorm their ideas, outline the speech, and finally, deliver the speech. The speech is given without notes and uses an introduction, body, and conclusion. The speech can be light-hearted or serious. The speech can be based upon prompts that range from nursery rhymes, current events, celebrities, organizations, and more.

**Please note: We will be using quotations as prompts at the tournament today and the quotations are themed in each round.

How do I judge Impromptu?

(Information retrieved from speechanddebate.org)

Judges are expected to give time signals for impromptu speeches.

In an Impromptu round the speaker draws three prompts from an envelope. After drawing the three prompts, the student must select one and begin brainstorming their ideas for the speech. In total, a student has seven minutes. These seven minutes may be divided up by the student however they see fit. For instance, they could brainstorm and outline their ideas for three minutes and then deliver a four-minute speech; or they could brainstorm and outline for one minute and speak for six minutes. There is no minimum amount of time required for brainstorming and no minimum amount of time for speaking. Examine which students struck the best balance between preparation and speaking. The introduction should provide adequate context for the trajectory of the speech. If a student has illustrated an example, conveyed their chosen prompt, and provided a thesis statement for the speech, they have created a structurally sound introduction! The most common formulation for the body of the speech is to explore two or three main ideas in greater depth. For example, if a student’s thesis focuses on cultivating innovation, they would likely introduce two effective ways to do so and use examples to prove their point. Following this, the student will conclude the speech by reiterating the prompt, thesis, and main arguments.

Students who do well in these three categories have demonstrated effective Impromptu speaking skills.

Organization. Does the student have a clear structure to their speech? Are transitions used to move effectively between each part of the speech? Does the development of the speech make sense?

Analysis. Does the student directly address the prompt? Does the student develop justifications for their ideas and establish significance to the points?

Delivery. Does the student use voice, movement, and expression effectively? Is the speaker confident? Is there consistent eye contact? Is the volume appropriate?

Program Oral Interpretation (POI) Category

What is Program Oral Interpretation (POI)?

(Information received from speechanddebate.org)

Program Oral Interpretation is a 10-minute performance that can include a combination of Prose, Poetry, and Drama. All students must have at least two out of the three genres included in their performance. The use of a script/book is required. The focus of the event is developing a theme or argument through the use of narrative, story, and/or characterization.

How do I judge POI?

(Information received from speechanddebate.org)

There are three key areas of a POI the judge will evaluate.

First, the process of piecing together different types of literature into one cohesive performance. The program should create a compelling performance centered around a theme or idea.

Second, blocking, or the movements a performer makes to convey space, emotion, and action. Blocking should enhance the performance, not distract from the story. In POI, the student is allowed to use the script/book as a prop to enhance blocking as long as they maintain control of the script/book at all times.

Third, characterization: characterization reveals the personality of the character through line delivery, vocal, and facial expression. Each piece of literature in a student’s POI should have unique and engaging characters that can be distinguished from other pieces in the program. Additionally, each character should adequately represent the genre of literature from which they are drawn.

When critiquing a program, judges ought to reference areas of the Dramatic Structure that were strong or weak and suggest ways in which the student can improve upon the cutting, in addition to focusing on how the student’s selections of literature fit with each other. Judges should consider if they could easily identify which selection the student was performing. If the performer’s blocking is ineffective, the judge ought to indicate ways the performer can improve on the ballot. Critiquing characterization requires the judge to consider whether the character’s response to a situation is believable. The ultimate goal of blocking, programming, and characterization is to create a fully realized performance that moves the audience. The performer who combines these three factors the best should receive the one ranking.