ADJUDICATION

STANDARDS FOR
BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
A DEBATE IS JUDGED ON THE BASIS OF:
1. Matter:
What you present (i.e. the content)
2. Manner:
How you present (i.e. the style)
3. Method:
Organisation/ structure of your presentation
1. Definitions:
- Set up of the debate
2. Arguments:
-Must be logical
-Must be relevant
3. Evidences:
-Must be relevant
- Evidential value
(strength)
ELEMENTS OF MATTER
4. Rebuttals:
Must be logical
Must be relevant
Must be prompt
Explain the key-words in the topic.
Identify what you want to prove
and what is your stand. This is
called the theme of your team.
If there is a measurement
involved, set up the yardstick or
criteria for such measurement.
DEFINING A TOPIC
It must bear a close relation to the motion.
It must not be truistic.
It must not employ time or place setting.
It must not be based on overly specific knowledge
Characteristics of a Proper Definition:
RULES OF DEFINITION
You can only challenge a definition if it
violates any of the criteria stated earlier.
Frequently used terms in challenging
definitions are: wholly unreasonable,
squirrel, time-place set, truistic.
You cannot challenge a definition simply
because you have a more reasonable or
better definition.
Grounds for Challenge:
CHALLENGING A DEFINITION
Challenge must come from the
leader of the opposition, not later.
Leader of the opposition must
provide an alternative definition.
In most of the cases, the teams must
introduce an 'even if argument.
CHALLENGING A DEFINITION
An `Even if' argument is not possible in some
cases. (e.g. truistic definition & definition
running counter to the resolution i.e. where
govt. has taken the oppositions case).
In a definition debate, all the speakers except
the PMargue the following:
Why challenge?
Validity/ invalidity of the two definitions.
Even if we are to accept the other side's definition,
these are the weaknesses of their case.
Positive case under their own definition.
CHALLENGING A DEFINITION
First, identify what you have to prove
under the topic.
Then, identify what helps you to prove it.
Put them in the format of an argument or
a set of arguments.
Not everything that you know on the
subject is relevant.
Anticipate the questions that may be
raised against your arguments and see if
you have good answers to them.
GETTING THE RIGHT ARGUMENTS
Block the opportunity for those
questions to be raised by addressing
them briefly as you explain the argument.
Present the arguments in order of
their strength.
Avoid empty rhetoric and
emotionalism - be rational.
GETTING THE RIGHT ARGUMENTS
Basic statement
Conclusion / how it proves
your teams theme
Proofs/ evidences/ examples that
factually establish your basic statement
Logical explanations of why and
how the basic statement stands
ESTABLISHING AN ARGUMENT
Attacks
(Rebut the Arguments)
Defence
(Rebut the Rebuttals)
Rebuttals
EFFECTIVE REBUTTALS
Do not rebut the example, attack the very premise of
the argument of the other side. Only then
contrary examples can be supplemented.
It is advisable to provide multiple rebuttals to
each argument of the other side.
Rebuttals should also be in conformity with your case.
Rebut the rebuttals of your case by the other
side in order to defend your case.
EFFECTIVE REBUTTALS
Respectable attitude towards the judges
and the other team.
Vocal style: volume, clarity, pace, intonation etc.
Use of notes: not to read a written text.
Eye contact.
Body language: hand gestures, pacing,
standing etc.
Impression of sincerity.
Humour, wit, appropriate and healthy sarcasm.
ELEMENTS OF MANNER/STYLE
Team Structure
- Continuity of teams theme in all the speeches.
- Consistency among all the speakers (no contradictions)
- Reinforcement of team members' arguments
- Clear & logical separation between arguments.
Individual Structure
- Attractive opening/outline of the speech.
- Proper organisation& priority of the arguments.
- Organisation of rebuttals.
- Appropriate timing of the speech
- Summary of the speech.
ELEMENTS OF METHOD
Responses to the dynamics of the debate
- Right thing at the right time.
- Ability to follow the progression of
and changes in the debate, and to re-act
accordingly.
ELEMENTS OF METHOD
- Defines
- Builds a positive case to
support the motion
- Responds to the Opp.s case.
- Responds to the
governments case
- Builds a case to oppose
the motion
-Supports the Opening Gov.s case,
- Adds new dimensions,
arguments to further
substantiate the
governments case.
- Responds to the Opp.s case
-Supports the Opening
Oppositions case
- Adds new dimension,
arguments in Opp.s case
- Responds to governments case
OPENING GOV.
CLOSING GOV. CLOSING OPP.
OPENING OPP.
TEAM ROLES
A POI can be in a question or
statement form and should not
take more than 15 seconds.
Each speaker should accept at
least two POIs.
All three members of the team
should try to give POIs, but they
must not be disruptive.
POINTS OF INFORMATION (POIs)
POINTS OF INFORMATION (POIs)
POIs are judged on the basis of:
the threat they pose to the strength of
the argument of the debater.
value of its wit and humour.
Responses to the POIs are judged on the basis of:
promptness and confidence in answering.
strength of the response.
value of wit and humour in the response.
THE
END