Thank you for your interest in Judging!
Our tournament could not hope to run as successfully as it always does without an incredible showing of support from our parents, faculty/staff, and community. One of the biggest sources of concern is always a large and educated judging pool, and it is my hope that the information on this website will serve as a useful tutorial to the crazy world that is competitive speech and debate. As always, please let us know if you have any questions - before the tournament at [email protected] and/or [email protected] or at the tournament to any CLHS debate student or tournament official. Thanks again, and we'll see you Nov. 15th and 16th, 2024!
-Ryan Nassif & Taryn Gonzalez (Co-Directors, CLHS Speech & Debate)
-Ryan Nassif & Taryn Gonzalez (Co-Directors, CLHS Speech & Debate)
Ready to sign-up to judge?
Head to our volunteer judging form here!

A Guide to Judging on Tabroom | |
File Size: | 55 kb |
File Type: | docx |
Judging Debate events
A student-run organization called Be The Light Youth Association has created training guides in a variety of languages and covering many of the events we offer. To see what languages are available, head to their Google Drive.
At a speech and debate tournament, there are five types of debate running at the same time: Cross-Examination Debate (otherwise known as CX or Policy), Lincoln-Douglas Debate (abbreviated LD), Public Forum Debate (PF), World Schools Debate (WSD), and finally Congressional Debate (sometimes called Student Congress). Though all five are debate events, they have a number of key differences.
In Cross-Examination (CX) or Policy Debate, two teams of two students will be competing against each other. One side, known as the Affirmative, presents a plan on a topic. The topic for the current year regards the US federal government strengthening domestic intellectual property rights. The other side, known as the Negative, presents a number of reasons why the plan is flawed. They might say there are disadvantages to the plan (it causes bad things to happen), they might say that it doesn't solve the problems or that the problems aren't as bad as the Affirmative says they are, or they might say that the plan isn't within the scope of the topic. There is a period of cross-examination after the first four speeches, where the opposing team gets to ask the person who just spoke questions for clarity. Additionally, CX teams like to practice speed reading, or spreading, which can be a bit concerning for new judges. If you don't feel comfortable with speed, please make sure to tell the competitors - they have been taught to adapt to their judge, so make them! At the end of the round, each speaker is given speaker points based on how well you think they spoke in the round, between 25 and 30 (25 being the lowest, 30 being the highest); they will also be ranked, 1-4 (without repeating a rank) on those speaker points, with the best speaker being ranked 1st and the worst speaker being ranked 4th. On the ballot given to you, you should write some tips about what you liked or did not like about their speaking style and arguments. Finally, you need to ensure you've included what's known as an RFD, or Reason for Decision, saying why you vote for the Affirmative or the Negative - make sure to indicate which team won the round as well!
In Lincoln-Douglas (LD) Debate, two teams of only one student each will be competing against each other. One side, known as the Affirmative, has as their job to affirm or support a resolution. The resolution we will be using is "Resolved: The United States ought to adopt a wealth tax." Argumentation in an LD round, on both sides, revolves around a value - or universal truth - and a value criterion, which is how you as a judge can measure how successful the debaters are arguing their value. LD is generally philosophical, with the names and ideas of numerous philosophers both old and new used. As in CX, there is a cross-examination period after the first two speeches where the competitors can question each other. Spreading, or speed reading, is not as prevalent in LD as in CX, but it sometimes does appear; if you are uncomfortable with a high rate of delivery, please let the students know. Just like with CX debate, the ballot you are given is a great place to give tips to the debaters and write what you liked or didn't like about their argumentation. You will also be assigning speaker points to both speakers (25 being the lowest, 30 being the highest). Also just like CX, you'll be asked to give a Reason for Decision on your ballot, letting the competitors (and their coaches!) know why you voted how you did. Generally, LD (as well as Public Forum) is flighted, which means you'll be judging two rounds back to back - please stick around in your room after the first round as the second round should start immediately after!
In Public Forum (PF) Debate, two teams of two students will be competing against each other. At the start of the round, the two teams will flip a coin to determine who takes which side and who speaks first. There are two sides in PF - the Pro and Con - and similarly to LD, they will be either speaking in favor of or against a resolution. The resolution we will be using is "Resolved: The United States should substantially reduce its military support of Taiwan"; thus, it's the job of the Pro team to argue in favor of this, while the Con team argues against it. PF is designed to be much more real-world than LD or CX, and students are coached to use persuasion, logic, and statistics rather than esoteric arguments or philosophy. There are three periods throughout the round known as Crossfires that allow both teams to question each other, with the third and final Crossfire (known as the Grand Crossfire) allowing all four students to ask and answer questions. As in CX, you'll be asked to give speaker points (25 being the lowest, 30 being the highest) to each individual speaker to judge their delivery, and you'll rank them 1st-4th based on those speaker points. Like with both CX and LD, you'll be asked to give written comments on the round on the ballot, as well as a Reason for Decision. As in LD, PF debates are normally flighted, so you'll actually be seeing two different groups of competitors back to back in the hour and a half you're judging.
In World Schools Debate (WSD), two teams of three students will be competing against each other. Resolutions are either prepared motions (topics that the debaters knew about before the tournament) or impromptu motions (topics that the debaters were given an hour before the round began). The two teams will be assigned a side - either the Prop who is proposing the motion or the Opp who is opposed to it - and the debates will present their position, refute their opponents, and respond to questions throughout the course of the debate.
In Congressional Debate (CD) or Student Congress, a room of students ranging in number from 12-30 take part in a mock Congress. It is very different from the other three debate events. A student will be elected as the Presiding Officer, whose job it is to run the "chamber" (the room). The students will debate on legislation, rising to give speeches either in favor of or against each bill or resolution as it comes up in the docket. As a judge, it is your job to score each speech on a scale of 1-6, with 6 being the highest, and at the end of the round rank each competitor on their total performance, not only speaking but also their activity - for this, you rank the top eight students in order 1-8, with all others receiving a rank of 9. Just like with the other debate events, please be sure to write some constructive criticism of each speech as well as about the competitor's overall performance.
At a speech and debate tournament, there are five types of debate running at the same time: Cross-Examination Debate (otherwise known as CX or Policy), Lincoln-Douglas Debate (abbreviated LD), Public Forum Debate (PF), World Schools Debate (WSD), and finally Congressional Debate (sometimes called Student Congress). Though all five are debate events, they have a number of key differences.
In Cross-Examination (CX) or Policy Debate, two teams of two students will be competing against each other. One side, known as the Affirmative, presents a plan on a topic. The topic for the current year regards the US federal government strengthening domestic intellectual property rights. The other side, known as the Negative, presents a number of reasons why the plan is flawed. They might say there are disadvantages to the plan (it causes bad things to happen), they might say that it doesn't solve the problems or that the problems aren't as bad as the Affirmative says they are, or they might say that the plan isn't within the scope of the topic. There is a period of cross-examination after the first four speeches, where the opposing team gets to ask the person who just spoke questions for clarity. Additionally, CX teams like to practice speed reading, or spreading, which can be a bit concerning for new judges. If you don't feel comfortable with speed, please make sure to tell the competitors - they have been taught to adapt to their judge, so make them! At the end of the round, each speaker is given speaker points based on how well you think they spoke in the round, between 25 and 30 (25 being the lowest, 30 being the highest); they will also be ranked, 1-4 (without repeating a rank) on those speaker points, with the best speaker being ranked 1st and the worst speaker being ranked 4th. On the ballot given to you, you should write some tips about what you liked or did not like about their speaking style and arguments. Finally, you need to ensure you've included what's known as an RFD, or Reason for Decision, saying why you vote for the Affirmative or the Negative - make sure to indicate which team won the round as well!
In Lincoln-Douglas (LD) Debate, two teams of only one student each will be competing against each other. One side, known as the Affirmative, has as their job to affirm or support a resolution. The resolution we will be using is "Resolved: The United States ought to adopt a wealth tax." Argumentation in an LD round, on both sides, revolves around a value - or universal truth - and a value criterion, which is how you as a judge can measure how successful the debaters are arguing their value. LD is generally philosophical, with the names and ideas of numerous philosophers both old and new used. As in CX, there is a cross-examination period after the first two speeches where the competitors can question each other. Spreading, or speed reading, is not as prevalent in LD as in CX, but it sometimes does appear; if you are uncomfortable with a high rate of delivery, please let the students know. Just like with CX debate, the ballot you are given is a great place to give tips to the debaters and write what you liked or didn't like about their argumentation. You will also be assigning speaker points to both speakers (25 being the lowest, 30 being the highest). Also just like CX, you'll be asked to give a Reason for Decision on your ballot, letting the competitors (and their coaches!) know why you voted how you did. Generally, LD (as well as Public Forum) is flighted, which means you'll be judging two rounds back to back - please stick around in your room after the first round as the second round should start immediately after!
In Public Forum (PF) Debate, two teams of two students will be competing against each other. At the start of the round, the two teams will flip a coin to determine who takes which side and who speaks first. There are two sides in PF - the Pro and Con - and similarly to LD, they will be either speaking in favor of or against a resolution. The resolution we will be using is "Resolved: The United States should substantially reduce its military support of Taiwan"; thus, it's the job of the Pro team to argue in favor of this, while the Con team argues against it. PF is designed to be much more real-world than LD or CX, and students are coached to use persuasion, logic, and statistics rather than esoteric arguments or philosophy. There are three periods throughout the round known as Crossfires that allow both teams to question each other, with the third and final Crossfire (known as the Grand Crossfire) allowing all four students to ask and answer questions. As in CX, you'll be asked to give speaker points (25 being the lowest, 30 being the highest) to each individual speaker to judge their delivery, and you'll rank them 1st-4th based on those speaker points. Like with both CX and LD, you'll be asked to give written comments on the round on the ballot, as well as a Reason for Decision. As in LD, PF debates are normally flighted, so you'll actually be seeing two different groups of competitors back to back in the hour and a half you're judging.
In World Schools Debate (WSD), two teams of three students will be competing against each other. Resolutions are either prepared motions (topics that the debaters knew about before the tournament) or impromptu motions (topics that the debaters were given an hour before the round began). The two teams will be assigned a side - either the Prop who is proposing the motion or the Opp who is opposed to it - and the debates will present their position, refute their opponents, and respond to questions throughout the course of the debate.
In Congressional Debate (CD) or Student Congress, a room of students ranging in number from 12-30 take part in a mock Congress. It is very different from the other three debate events. A student will be elected as the Presiding Officer, whose job it is to run the "chamber" (the room). The students will debate on legislation, rising to give speeches either in favor of or against each bill or resolution as it comes up in the docket. As a judge, it is your job to score each speech on a scale of 1-6, with 6 being the highest, and at the end of the round rank each competitor on their total performance, not only speaking but also their activity - for this, you rank the top eight students in order 1-8, with all others receiving a rank of 9. Just like with the other debate events, please be sure to write some constructive criticism of each speech as well as about the competitor's overall performance.
Judging Speech/Acting Events
Luckily for you as a judge, though each speech and acting event is different they are all judged along the same lines. In each event, you'll be judging a group of 6-8 students (or sometimes pairs) and at the end of the round ranking them from 1st (the best in the room) to 8th (the worst in the room - if you only have 6 or 7, you'll only rank them through that number). Your Tabroom.com ballot will have all of the information you need, giving you a place to fill in an "RFD" which goes to all of the competitors as well as space for you to provide comments to the individual competitors and their coaches.
The speaking events are below.
Extemporaneous Speaking, otherwise known as Extemp, comes in three varieties: Foreign Extemp (FX), Domestic Extemp (DX), and Novice Extemp (NX). In each variety, students will come in to the room one (in speaking order as listed on the master ballot) at a time after taking thirty minutes to prepare a speech on a topic in current events, where they will then deliver a seven minute speech (with a thirty-second grace period). In Foreign Extemp, they will be speaking on topics regarding foreign affairs; in Domestic Extemp, they will be speaking on topics regarding domestic affairs; and in Novice Extemp, the topics will be mixed. You should judge these students on how well they present their information, whether or not they actually answer the question posed in their topic, and how good and deep their analysis of the topic is.
Impromptu Speaking (IMP) is a limited-prep event similar to Extemp. Instead of coming in one at a time as in Extemp, all competitors should be in the room. In speaking order (as listed on the master ballot), they will draw three topics from an envelope of topics you were provided when you were given your ballots. They have a very short amount of time (read: 10-15 seconds) to choose one of those topics, and then will have seven minutes to divide between preparing to speak and delivering a speech. Similarly to Extemp, you are judging the competitors on how well they speak and their response to the topic. They can read off their topic slip but nothing else.
Original Oratory (OO or simply, Oratory) is a speaking event where each competitor has chosen a topic that is important to them and written a ten minute (with a thirty-second grace period) speech about it. Going in the speaking order listed on the master ballot, the students will then deliver their speech (which is memorized). As a judge, you're ranking the competitors in the room on their speaking style and how well they support the argument central to their topic (using analysis, research, and logic).
Informative Speaking (Info) is a speaking event very similar to Oratory; each competitor has written an informative speech on a topic and will be delivering it in ten minutes (with a thirty-second grace period). They have the option of using some sort of visual aid. Otherwise, judging this event is the same as in Oratory (above).
Prose (PR) and Poetry (PO) are two very similar events where competitors will read a story/stories (in Prose) or poem(s) (in Poetry) from a small black binder, like in the other events going in speaking order as listed on the master ballot. This is not a memorized event, and the students have seven minutes with a thirty-second grace period in which to perform. The students should be judged on their vocal style, their use of hand gestures (though they cannot move from the spot they start from), and their facial expression.
Program of Oral Interpretation (POI) is an exciting event where the speaker combines at least two different genres (non-fiction and fiction, for example, or a news article and a poem) woven together along a common theme. This isn't a memorized event - much like in Prose or Poetry, the student can use a binder - and is ten minutes (with a thirty-second grace period) in length. The judging criteria should be similar to Prose and Poetry.
The acting events, also known as the interp or interpretation events, are below.
Duet Acting (Duet) and Duo Interpretation (Duo) are another two very similar events where pairs of competitors will perform a memorized scene which can be either comedic, dramatic, or both. Duet Acting is 10 minutes in length with a 30-second grace period and the actors can interact with each other. Duo is also 10 minutes in length (and also has a 30-second grace period) but the actors cannot touch or look at each other. In both events, competitors may use two chairs but no other props. Judges should look for how well the two competitors work together (being mindful they cannot touch or look at each other in Duo), their facial expressions, their hand gestures/body movement, and their vocal delivery.
Dramatic Interpretation (DI) and Humorous Interpretation (HI) are the final two events you might see and, much like Prose & Poetry or Duet & Duo, are very similar. In both, individual competitors will perform a memorized 10-minute (with 30-seconds grace period) selection. In a DI, the subject matter tends to be serious, while in HI it tends to be lighter. Much like in Duo/Duet, the competitor may use a chair but no other props. Depending on the selection, the one competitor may need to portray multiple characters. Both DI and HI are judged on the quality of the performance by the competitor, their vocal delivery, their facial expression, their hand gestures/body movement, and (if applicable) how well they differentiate between different characters.
The speaking events are below.
Extemporaneous Speaking, otherwise known as Extemp, comes in three varieties: Foreign Extemp (FX), Domestic Extemp (DX), and Novice Extemp (NX). In each variety, students will come in to the room one (in speaking order as listed on the master ballot) at a time after taking thirty minutes to prepare a speech on a topic in current events, where they will then deliver a seven minute speech (with a thirty-second grace period). In Foreign Extemp, they will be speaking on topics regarding foreign affairs; in Domestic Extemp, they will be speaking on topics regarding domestic affairs; and in Novice Extemp, the topics will be mixed. You should judge these students on how well they present their information, whether or not they actually answer the question posed in their topic, and how good and deep their analysis of the topic is.
Impromptu Speaking (IMP) is a limited-prep event similar to Extemp. Instead of coming in one at a time as in Extemp, all competitors should be in the room. In speaking order (as listed on the master ballot), they will draw three topics from an envelope of topics you were provided when you were given your ballots. They have a very short amount of time (read: 10-15 seconds) to choose one of those topics, and then will have seven minutes to divide between preparing to speak and delivering a speech. Similarly to Extemp, you are judging the competitors on how well they speak and their response to the topic. They can read off their topic slip but nothing else.
Original Oratory (OO or simply, Oratory) is a speaking event where each competitor has chosen a topic that is important to them and written a ten minute (with a thirty-second grace period) speech about it. Going in the speaking order listed on the master ballot, the students will then deliver their speech (which is memorized). As a judge, you're ranking the competitors in the room on their speaking style and how well they support the argument central to their topic (using analysis, research, and logic).
Informative Speaking (Info) is a speaking event very similar to Oratory; each competitor has written an informative speech on a topic and will be delivering it in ten minutes (with a thirty-second grace period). They have the option of using some sort of visual aid. Otherwise, judging this event is the same as in Oratory (above).
Prose (PR) and Poetry (PO) are two very similar events where competitors will read a story/stories (in Prose) or poem(s) (in Poetry) from a small black binder, like in the other events going in speaking order as listed on the master ballot. This is not a memorized event, and the students have seven minutes with a thirty-second grace period in which to perform. The students should be judged on their vocal style, their use of hand gestures (though they cannot move from the spot they start from), and their facial expression.
Program of Oral Interpretation (POI) is an exciting event where the speaker combines at least two different genres (non-fiction and fiction, for example, or a news article and a poem) woven together along a common theme. This isn't a memorized event - much like in Prose or Poetry, the student can use a binder - and is ten minutes (with a thirty-second grace period) in length. The judging criteria should be similar to Prose and Poetry.
The acting events, also known as the interp or interpretation events, are below.
Duet Acting (Duet) and Duo Interpretation (Duo) are another two very similar events where pairs of competitors will perform a memorized scene which can be either comedic, dramatic, or both. Duet Acting is 10 minutes in length with a 30-second grace period and the actors can interact with each other. Duo is also 10 minutes in length (and also has a 30-second grace period) but the actors cannot touch or look at each other. In both events, competitors may use two chairs but no other props. Judges should look for how well the two competitors work together (being mindful they cannot touch or look at each other in Duo), their facial expressions, their hand gestures/body movement, and their vocal delivery.
Dramatic Interpretation (DI) and Humorous Interpretation (HI) are the final two events you might see and, much like Prose & Poetry or Duet & Duo, are very similar. In both, individual competitors will perform a memorized 10-minute (with 30-seconds grace period) selection. In a DI, the subject matter tends to be serious, while in HI it tends to be lighter. Much like in Duo/Duet, the competitor may use a chair but no other props. Depending on the selection, the one competitor may need to portray multiple characters. Both DI and HI are judged on the quality of the performance by the competitor, their vocal delivery, their facial expression, their hand gestures/body movement, and (if applicable) how well they differentiate between different characters.