Interpretation analysis is a new and interesting event on the forensics horizon which appears to be attracting an ever larger number of supporters. This event, developed by Larry Lambert of Ball State University in 1989, requires a student to perform all three disciplines of forensic competition (interpretation, public speaking, and limited…

Of the many things which are important to a student's performance, the ballot determines who advances in forensics competition and, ideally, offers a rationale for why some are successful and others are not. This paper aims to lay out guidelines for inexperienced judges and new coaches in writing a proper oral interpretation ballot. The paper also…

The lack of consistent theory in nonpolicy debate has contributed to difficulty for debaters and judges alike. The problem is especially apparent for second negative speakers in the Cross Examination Debate Association (CEDA) format. The controversy over the direction and goals of CEDA style debate has led some members of the CEDA community to…

Conducted a meta analysis of studies of procedural modifications of the Angoff method of setting cutoff scores. Findings for 38 studies (113 judges) show that common modifications have produced systematic effects on cutoff scores and the degree of consensus among judges. (SLD)

The theoretical perspectives of intercollegiate debate are constantly shifting. This paper evaluates the mirror state counterplan--a strategy open to the negative team--both generally and in light of the criticisms leveled against it by Richard H. Dempsey and David J. Hartmann in their recently published article entitled "Mirror State…

The term "turnaround" has taken a permanent place among the intercollegiate debate jargon. All too often, the first affirmative rebuttalists charge "turnaround" for every plan or response they do not know how to label properly. After so many "false alarms," judges are too weary or aggravated to notice the real thing,…

Noting that a series of mechanical rules created for pairing and placement of judges at the National Debate Tournament (NDT) may be useful in developing a computer program to pair tournaments, this paper focuses on the methods used to pair rounds at the NDT and also looks at some pairing options frequently employed by other debate tournaments. The…

When tournament judges view a particular speaking event they are inevitably going to have different perceptions of that event. For example, typical descriptions for after dinner speaking events deal with time limits, originality, wit and creativity, and tasteful humor. Definitions of these terms vary, but efforts have been made to establish some…

The judging philosophy form has been in use at the CEDA National Tournament since 1987, and its use at the NDT has been a mainstay for quite some time. The judging philosophy statement is a document listing a series of topic areas or common issues on which the prospective judge is to elaborate so his or her views will be known to the debate…

If the forensics community has real choice between debate formats, there must be distinctions that justify the existence of each respective style or organization. While such differences can exist at any one of a number of levels, this paper examines differences in adjudicating in both parliamentary and team policy debate, generally known as CEDA…

The delivery of an argument in debate has been clearly shown to be important in facilitating the changing of attitudes favorably toward a message, in enhancing understanding of the material, and in increasing the speaker's ethos. Despite its importance, however, delivery has become dead as a communication concept in debate and is no longer a…

Examining the role of the debate judge reveals many differences between the Cross Examination Debate Association (CEDA) and National Debate Tournament (NDT). One area in which CEDA differs is that of judge qualifications. At present CEDA is moving towards using more lay judges, while NDT has more strict requirements. It would be interesting to use…

Policy debate as an activity should be maintained but must be invigorated. Some reasons to save policy debate are (1) the benefit to large numbers of students who might otherwise fail to debate given the increased difficulty associated with learning how to play the game; (2) the shrinking size of policy tournaments, which makes it easier for…

Although a good deal of the controversy over debate strategy versus substance has been on the construction of both affirmative and negative cases, the most widespread concern is with the use of the "spread." Debate scholars argue that the spread can be misused in two somewhat similar ways. The strategic spread, in which a large number of…

The most common criticism of CEDA (Cross Examination Debate Association) debate tournaments voiced by coaches and students alike centers on the quality of judging. If the debater is completely unaware of the qualifications or credentials of the critic, he or she will be unable to fulfill the judge's expectations. Debates are then lost not on…