JUDGING POLICY DEBATE

GOALS

1. The Basics of a Policy Debate
2. How to Choose a Winner
3. How to Assign Speaker Points
4. How to Fill out a Ballot

​

1. THE BASICS OF POLICY DEBATE

THE BASICS OF A POLICY DEBATE

- There are four 8-minute Constructives

- Each Constructive is followed by a 3-minute Cross-Ex.

- There are then four 5-minute Rebuttals.

• Debaters use these speeches to refute or defend already existing arguments

- Debaters have 8-minutes of Prep Time to use before speeches.

THE BASICS OF POLICY DEBATE: TWO JUDGE DUTIES

• 1. You are the official time-keeper
• The one-pager you rec’d has speech order, speech responsibilities and speech times.

​

• 2. You should disregard new arguments made in the rebuttals.
• New debaters (or tricky debaters) may try to slip in a new argument in a rebuttal. Please disregard this.

​

BE A CREATOR OF COMMUNITY

• Facilitate introductions
• Greet debaters �throughout the day
• Listen actively
• Share your reactions to students’ work and ideas
• Push students and celebrate growth

During �the Round

• Keep time
• Listen actively
• Take notes

After �the Round

• Congratulate students but DO NOT give verbal feedback
• Determine a winner and write an RFD

​

YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES AS A JUDGE

Head to the room number indicated on your text

Open your ballot and press “Start Round”

Before�the Round

2. HOW TO CHOOSE A WINNER

THE RESOLUTION

• Resolved: The United States federal government should significantly strengthen its protection of domestic intellectual property rights in copyrights, patents, and/or trademarks.
• ​
• ​

THE TEAMS

Affirmative: For the policy change!

Negative: Against the policy change!

ONLINE DEBATE!

Second Affirmative

First Affirmative

Second Negative

First Negative

Judge

Judge

Judge

Here is a screen shot from a recent online debate held by SVUDL and their partners.

​

The zoom room has become a classroom!

​

You can have students label their “names” by their last name and speech order to make judging easier.

HOW TO CHOOSE A WINNER:�THE AFFIRMATIVE BURDEN OF PROOF

The Affirmative typically should win the stock issues:(but is not limited to )

• There is a significant harm, i.e. a problem causing suffering
• The harm is inherent i.e. current laws or attitudes fail to resolve it.
• A topical plan can address the problem, i.e. a proposal to change the current laws and attitudes
• The plan solves, i.e. it is sufficient to resolve the problem.

​

Alternative paradigms

Through role of the ballot arguments, the round can have many other paths to victory than the traditional stock issues. Any team seeking this route will provide in detail justification and weighing to enable you to vote for them not limited to theory arguments, Kritiks and really any criteria they are able to convince you to use.

HOW TO CHOOSE A WINNER: THE NEGATIVE BURDEN OF REJOINDER

• The Negative can win by doing ANY of the following:

​

• The Negative can refute a stock issue by showing the affirmative harm isn’t significant, or isn’t inherent, or that the plan cannot solve the harm.

​

• The Negative can argue that the AFF plan is not a topical example of the resolution.

​

• The Negative can present a plan that is preferable to the affirmative (a “counterplan”)

​

• The Negative can demonstrate that the AFF has disastrous unintended consequences

What to Consider

• Strength of arguments
• Claims, reasons, and supporting evidence
• Refutation of opponent’s arguments

What Not to Consider

DETERMINING A WINNER

• Your personal opinion
• Presentation skills or style
• Pronunciation, accent, or reading fluency
• Arguments not explicitly made by debaters
• Arguments made during cross-ex
• Minor points made at the beginning of the round

COMMON HABITS IN NEW DEBATERS

MORE EXPERIENCED DEBATERS

4. HOW TO FILL OUT A BALLOT

HOW TO FILL OUT A BALLOT

• To see your current ballots, log-in and go to your account dashboard by clicking your username/email in the upper part of the page.
• Make sure to click "Start Round" to let the tournament know that you're aware you're judging.

HOW TO FILL OUT A BALLOT

• For each ballot, fill out the speaker points, choose a winner and the corresponding school, then click "Submit Ballot."

HOW TO FILL OUT A BALLOT

• During the round, before you submit your ballot, you should fill out a Reason for Decision (RFD) below the ballot.
• This will be saved and available to competitors and their coaches.
• A good RFD is specific. It is typically at least a paragraph, often longer.
• A good RFD describes either how the affirmative met their burden of proof or how the AFF was defeated by a NEG strategy.
• A good RFD always explains to the losing side what they could have done to win the debate.

HOW TO FILL OUT A BALLOT

• After submitting your ballot the first time, you must confirm the ballot - you'll be shown the data you entered the first time, and then the option to confirm or re-enter if you made a mistake.

WRITING A REASON FOR DECISION (RFD)

Strong RFD

​

• At least 2 sentences
• States strongest arguments
• Compares or weighs arguments
• Explains how enacting the plan would make the world a better place

Weak RFD

​

• 1-2 sentences
• Vague, generic
• Doesn’t compare or weigh arguments
• Discusses superficial items (presentation, clarity)

EXAMPLE RFD

I vote Neg in this debate because they won a significant risk of the Elections Disadvantage. They won that Trump would use criminal justice reform to win undecided voters in swing states, tipping the election. This would have dire consequences, as a second Trump term would make it impossible to address global warming.

The aff won that passing their body cameras reform would enhance police accountability and decrease police violence towards minority communities., but I felt the magnitude of the disadvantage outweighed the case impact.

The affirmative could have won the debate if they demonstrated that the probability of a Trump victory was lower than the Negative argued. They also could have won if they demonstrated that decreasing police brutality against minority communities ought to take precedence over hypothetical future climate impacts.

POSITIVE FRAMING…

• “You could have been anywhere this Saturday, perhaps you wish you were in your bed sleeping. But you worked hard and came here to participate in the most venerable tradition of American democracy, the public debate. I salute you for it.”
• -- Fred Sternhagen
• Director of Debate, Concordia University