Student Name: _____________________ School: _________________ Division: ___________
Scoring Guide
Each benchmark
out of 10 points
Qualitative Assessment Project
Year-One Debaters: Out-of-Round Assessment
Benchmark 2 - Debate Round Mechanics
Role of the Judge, Function of the Ballot
Multiple Choice
Select the best answer from the set of options for each question.
1 point
2 points
1 point
1. The most important role of the judge in a policy debate round is to:
a. learn about arguments on both sides of the topic
b. determine the winning team as well as assign speaker points to each debater after the round
c. provide verbal or non-verbal feedback to debaters during the round
d. keep order in the debate by timing and otherwise managing the room
2. Identify the action below which violates sound judging practice:
a. assigning more than one debater in a round the same number of speaker points
b. saying “slow down” out loud if a debater is speaking at an incomprehensible rate of speed
c. describing their own level of debate experience (or inexperience) in a pre-round “judge philosophy”
d. assigning speaker points based on the content of each debater’s arguments and the win/loss based on
the relative stylistic strength of each team.
3. The ballot encompasses all of the following except:
4. a. a formal expression of a judge’s own views on the issues being debated
b. the official record of who wins and loses a debate
c. a source of written feedback to the debaters, describing the strengths and weaknesses of the most important
issues in the debate and the way they were debated
d. a set of stylistic ratings of each debater as an individual speaker in the debate
Short Response
3 points
Write 3 – 5 sentences that provide a clear answer to each question.
4. Most judge feedback is contained on the written ballot and in the post-round oral critique. But during the
round itself, describe several ways a judge can provide debaters with legitimate feedback on their argumentation and
how they can be useful for a debater.
3 points
-Identifies at least three ways a judge can provide feedback during a round such as body language, facial
expressions of confusion, anger, or happiness, eye contact, or amount of writing on the flow.
-Complete and meaningful description of how each form of feedback can be useful for a debater during a round.
2points
- Identifies at least two ways a judge can provide feedback during a round and a complete and meaningful
description of how each form of those two methods of feedback can be useful for a debater during a round
- OR the answer provides three ways a judge can provide feedback during a round but provides a limited
1 point
- Identification of one way a judge can provide feedback during a round with a limited or vague explanation
of how this feedback can be useful to a debater during around.
- OR identification two ways a judge can provide feedback during a round with an insufficient or no
explanation of how this feedback can be useful to a debater during around.
0 points
- Identification of only one way a judge can provide feedback during a round and no explanation.
3 points
5. Explain in detail what policy debate judges often mean when they say that choosing the winning team is like
selecting the best policy option in the round, based on the arguments and evidence presented by both sides.
3 points
Answer at least 3 of the following descriptors and no erroneous descriptors:
- Judge acts as a “policymaker”
- judge role is to determine which policy is net beneficial (best)
- cost/benefit analysis
- weighing each sides’ policy impacts
- disregarding non-policy arguments
2 points
Answer includes at least 2 of the above descriptors and one erroneous or vague descriptor
1 point
Answer includes at most one of the above descriptors and some (1-2) erroneous or vague descriptors
0 points
- no credit for including only incorrect descriptors
Benchmark 3 – Debate Round Scheduling
Pairings, Preliminary Rounds, Elimination Rounds
Multiple Choice
Select the best answer from the set of options for each question.
1 point 1. Preliminary round power-matching means that teams are matched up to debate each other in a round based on:
a. how many rounds each team has won
b. which teams are running the newest affirmative case
c. an alphabetical list of the schools
d. pre-tournament "seedings" (i.e., rankings) of all teams in a division
1 point
2 points
2. A team can be assigned a bye in a preliminary round if:
a. there is an odd number of teams in the tournament
b. that team has the worst win/loss record in that round
c. their opponents do not show up (forfeit)
d. all of the above
3. A randomly paired "schematic" (i.e., pairing) for preliminary round 4 contains which of the following pieces of
information, either explicitly or implicitly:
a. relative ranking of each team in the tournament based on how well they have done at previous
tournaments
b. the side (affirmative or negative) each team debated in round 3
c. the relative ranking or quality of each judge, as determined by the tabulation room program
d. all of the above
Short Response
Write 3 – 5 sentences that provide a clear answer to each question.
3 points
4. In a tournament that breaks to quarter-final rounds in the JV division, identify which number seed (ranked
team) debates which other number seed in each of the four quarter-final rounds.
3 points
1st seed with 8th seed; 2nd seed with 7th seed; 3rd seed with 6th seed; 4th seed with 5th seed
2 points
Vague but potentially correct description of how seeds match up (cannot make incorrect inferences)
1 point
- partial credit mistaking round for semis and listing: 1st seed with 4th seed, 2nd with 3rd seed
0 points
- no credit for including only incorrect match-ups
3 points 5. Identify three significant structural differences between preliminary rounds and elimination rounds at a debate
tournament.
3 points
Answers include 3 correct important differences and no incorrect important differences, such as:
- round win does or does not determine advancement to next round
- quality of debaters
- number of judges
- portion of overall teams competing
- method of assigning sides in the debate
- speaker points/ranks are or are not assigned
- can lock out with team memebrs
Answer explicitly excludes “prelims come before elims” as a significant defference
2 points
Answer includes only 2 correct differences OR includes three correct differences but also incorrect differences
1 point
Answer includes only 1 correct difference (incorrect differences allowed)
0 points
Answer includes no correct differences
Benchmark 4 – Competitive Mechanics
Seedings, Speaker Points and Awards, and Elim Structure
Multiple Choice1 point
If at least 2
are correct,
1 point.
Select the best answer from the set of options for each question.
1. Identify whether each of the following statements are true or false.
a. A school's total wins factor into whether an individual team from that school advances to the elimination
rounds. : ____ True _√____ False
b. For the purposes of identifying speaker award winners, the lowest number of points a speaker receives are
often dropped when determining an individual debater's ranking. : __√_ True _____ False
c. On an elimination round panel, it is considered legitimate for judges to confer with each other before making
their decisions about who won and lost the debate round.: ____ True _√__ False
1 point
2. Write down the number of JV teams that debate in each JV elimination round:
__8__ teams debate in quarterfinals
__4__ teams debate in semifinals
__2__ teams debate in finals
1 point
3. Put the following teams in order, with 1 being the team with the best record at this tournament and 4 being the
worst.
Rank # _4_
SchoolName YZ (3 wins) (260 speaker points)
Rank # _2_
SchoolName MN (4 wins) (280 speaker points)
Rank # _1_
SchoolName AB (5 wins) (290 speaker points)
Rank # _3_
SchoolName CD (4 wins) (270 speaker points)
Short Response - Write 3 – 5 sentences that provide a clear answer to each question.
3 points
4. Explain the difference between “adjusted speaker points” and “total speaker points,” and identify why adjusted
points are more often the first way that individual speakers are ranked when determining speaker awards.
3 points
Answers include correct and meaningful difference and no incorrect or trivial differences (see below) AND a
correct explanation why adjusted speaker points are more often the first way that individual speakers are ranked.
- “adjusted speaker points” do not count the highest and lowest scores (or some other predetermined rule)
- “total speaker points” is the sum of all speaker points for a particular student at that tournament
2 points
Answers include some correct and meaningful difference and at most one incorrect or trivial differences AND a
partial correct explanation
1 point
Answer includes partial correct difference but no explanation why the latter is used for ranking speakers
0 points
Answer includes no correct or meaningful difference or explanation
2 points
5. Explain the difference between a “close out” and “locked sides” in the context of elimination rounds.
2 points
Answers include correct difference and no incorrect differences, such as:
- “close out” refers to teams from same school being paired to debate according to the bracket
- must describe “locked sides” as both that sides are predetermined and that the reason for this is because the
two teams (from different schools) already met in preliminary round of that same tournaments with teams
switching sides from previous round.
1 point
Answer includes correct difference but answer is incomplete or includes minor incorrect information OR answer
correctly identifies what either term means, but not both
0 points
Answer includes no correct difference
2 points
6. What are judge strikes, why are they used, and why is using them not considered poor sportsmanship?
2points
-Correctly identifies judge strikes as the ability for a team to decline the use of a specific judge AND explains
the utility of selecting a panel most suited to your arguments or alternatively logical justification for why this is
considered proper sportsmanship.
1point
-Correctly defines “judge strikes” but little or poorly justified explanation of how it not unsportsmanlike.
0 points
-No correct definition or explanation.