In which we offer a document defining expectations of judges

It's taken me a while to get around to this. Sorry about that.

I wrote this myself, for myself, after the NDCA conference. I say that because I do not offer this as as a guide from that organization, nor do I expect that organization to adapt it. There has been a lot of discussion on this, and roles assigned for further analysis and the like, and I have no desire to get involved in that. What I've tried to do is extract the relatively objective aspects of what we want from judges, and formalize that in such a way that a document can be distributed to judges in advance of a tournament so that everyone at the event is on the same page.

---

Judge Expectations

A judge’s primary responsibility is education. While all judges are not literally teachers/educators, in the context of a debate round they do take on this role. While they are obviously in the room to make a competitive assessment of the debate, they are also in place to provide education to the students who are debating or auditing the round; the competitive aspect of the round is simply in aid of this education. As educators, judges have an obligation to insure that the rounds remain within the boundaries of an acceptable educational experience, and that they, as the responsible individuals, conduct the proceedings in a professional manner.

New judges should familiarize themselves with training materials before the tournament. Many of these materials are available here: http://www.debatecoaches.org/tournament-directors-toolkit/

It is the judge’s responsibility for rounds proceeding in a timely fashion, beginning with rounds starting at the posted time. In order for this to happen, judges themselves need to be in the rooms at that time. This means, in cases of paper ballots, that they have their ballots in hand before they arrive. When a tournament is using e-ballots, this means clicking start when all the competitors are in place in the room. The following is recommended as a best practice: If the competitors aren’t in the room at the start time, the tab room should be notified. If the debaters do not start debating within five minutes of the posted start time, timing of the rounds should begin, as there is no excuse for long lead times after the posted start time.

At the end of the round we do expect meaningful, educational critiques. But to keep the tournament moving, all critiques should take place after ballots have been entered/sent to tab, and should take no longer than 10 minutes. If a judge has more to say than can fit into this time period, it can be added to the ballot later.

While debate is at its core a free speech activity, it is the judge’s obligation as the educator in the room to check certain activities (physical assault, use of pornographic materials or actions, etc.) that clearly go beyond the boundaries of acceptability in a high school environment. These are usually clearly delineated in (and easily inferred from) the students’ own high school rules handbook. Judges uncertain about a situation should seek the counsel of the tournament directors.

Judges have an implicit contract with the tournament to act according to the sense of this document. Judges whose behavior is unacceptable (missed rounds, late rounds, inappropriate behavior) will be fined and/or removed from the tournament. Hired judges will not be paid, and school judges will be charged the full cost of a judge replacement or, in extreme cases, asked to leave the tournament.

---