Awards

The International Debate Education Association



And



The National Junior Forensics League









2008 National Tournament

Manual









Western Kentucky University – Bowling Green, KY

June 26th – 29th 2007

Table of Contents

General Tournament Information

Registration Fees 3

Entry Restrictions 3

Eligibility 3

Qualifying for the Tournament 3

Judging Responsibilities and Fees 3

Awards 4

General Debate Information and Rules

Events 5

Topics 5

Debate Teams and Entries 5

Prompting 5

Requests for Cases, Cards or Evidence 5

Judging Conflicts 5

Rules Regarding Debate Evidence 6

Instructions for Pairing Debate Rounds 8

Specific Debate Rules

Public Forum Debate 10

Lincoln Douglas Debate 12

Policy Debate 15

General Individual Event Information and Rules

Events 17

Individual Event Entries 17

Scheduling Individual Events 17

Specific Individual Event Rules

Extemporaneous Speaking 20

Original Oratory 22

Prose Interpretation 23

Poetry Interpretation 24

Dramatic Interpretation 25

Humorous Interpretation 26

Impromptu Speaking 27

Duo Interpretation 28

General Judging Instructions

Judging Policy, LD and Public Forum 29

Judging Speech Events 29

Event Specific Judging Instructions

Lincoln Douglas Debate 31

Middle School Policy Debate 33

Public Forum Debate 34

Extemporaneous Speaking 35

Original Oratory 36

Oral Interpretation Events 37

Duo Interpretation 38

Frequently Asked Questions 39

Tournament Schedule 43





2

General Tournament Information



Registration Fees:

Membership Fee – $125

This fee covers the annual organization membership dues for both IDEA and NJFL as all

schools or clubs attending the 2008 IDEA/NJFL National Tournament must be members

in good standing with both organizations. In the event that a school or club is already a

member in good standing with one or both of these organization, those dues may be

deducted from the school fee (for example if a school is a paid member of NJFL that school

can deduct the $35 NJFL membership fee from their school fee).



Event Entry Fee – $30 per student

This fee covers a student entry in up to two events and a lifetime membership in IDEA and

NJFL. Each additional event entry/slot will result in a fee of $20. No student will be

allowed to enter more than two events per speech pattern. Any student entering in a debate

event will not be allowed to enter in events listed in patter A.



Eligibility:



Eligibility for the 2008 IDEA/NJFL national tournament will be based on enrollment

during the 2007-2008 school year. In order to be eligible to compete at the national

tournament, students must have been registered in sixth, seventh, or eighth grade during the

2007-2008 school year. A breakdown of patterns can be found on page 45 of this document.





Qualifying for the Tournament:



IDEA and the NJFL extend an open invitation to all students who meet the eligibility

requirements. There is no qualification process for this tournament.





Entry Restrictions:

Those students entered in any debate format will not be allowed to enter speech events in

Pattern A (Dramatic Interp, Humorous Interp, Poetry, and Prose). Additionally, no student

will be allowed to enter more than 2 events in a particular pattern.





Judging Responsibilities and Fees:

** Every school or club attending the tournament MUST provide at least one judge. **



Judging Commitments –







3

IDEA and NJFL along with Western Kentucky University ask that all schools attempt to

meet their judging commitment whenever possible. Schools will be responsible for the

following judging commitments:

 1 judge for every 5 speech entries

 1 judge for every 3 LD/Public Forum entries or every 2 Policy teams



All judges will be eligible to judge in both speech patterns regardless of their school’s entries.

All judges will be committed through the first elimination round in all events. Judges from a

school with at least one student qualifying for elimination rounds will be committed through

the conclusion of the tournament.





Fees for Uncovered Entries –

Fees for uncovered entries will be assessed as follows:

 $15 per uncovered speech slot (i.e. 6 uncovered slots = $90 judging fee).

 $100 for every two uncovered policy teams or part there of (i.e. 1 uncovered

team = $100, 2 uncovered teams = $100, 3 uncovered teams = $200, 4

uncovered teams = $200, 5 uncovered teams = $300, and so on).

 $100 for every three uncovered LD’ers or Public Forum teams or part there of

(i.e. 1 uncovered LD/PF entry = $100, 3 uncovered LD/PF entries = $100, 4

uncovered LD/PF entries = $200, 6 uncovered LD/PF entries = $200, 7

uncovered LD/PF entries = $300, and so on).



The National Forensics League along with Western Kentucky University are interested in

hiring judges for the National Tournament. There will be a limited number of contracts

offered for this tournament, so if you know of someone interested in being hired to judge at

the IDEA/NJFL National Tournament please have them contact Chris Joffrion at

cjoffrion@nflonline.org



Awards:



Awards will be given to all students advancing to the semifinal and final rounds of all speech

events and quarterfinalists, semifinalists, and finalists in all debate events. The

IDEA/National Junior Forensic League National Tournament does not present

sweepstakes awards. Instead, the Tournament makes use of a School of Excellence Award.

School of Excellence Awards will be determined as follows.



 Only those competitors reaching elimination rounds will count towards School

of Excellence Awards.

 A school will receive one point for each speech event entry qualifying for the

quarterfinal round (if necessary) and one additional point for each subsequent

elimination round reached.

 A school will receive one point for each debater or debate team reaching the

octofinal round (if necessary) and one additional point for each subsequent

elimination round reached.







4

The Debate School of Excellence Award will be presented to the top five point earning

schools with at least one entry in debate. The Individual Events School of Excellence Award

will be presented to the top five point earning schools with at least one entry in a speech

event, and the Overall School of Excellence Award will be presented to the top three point

earning schools with at least one entry in both debate and speech.









5

General Debate Information and Rules

Events:



The IDEA/NJFL National Tournament will offer debate competition in three different

debate formats – Policy, Lincoln Douglas, and Public Forum. No student will be allowed to

enter more than one debate format.



Debate Topics:



The Policy Debate topic shall be the 2007/2008 high school NFL Policy Topic. The LD and

Public Forum topic shall be the topics used by the National Forensics League at the NFL

National Tournament.. All topics for Policy, LD and Public Forum debate are announced on

the NFL website. Please check the NFL website to locate debate topics prior to the

tournament.



Debate Teams and Entries:



A Policy or Public Forum team shall consist of only two students, and an LD entry will be

only one student. No substitutions will be permitted within any team or for and LD debater

once competition has begun.



Prompting:

Oral prompting, except for time signals, by a speaker’s debate partner is not prohibited but is

discourages and may be penalized by some judges. Oral prompting, again except for time

signals, by any person other than the speaker’s debate partner is strictly prohibited and can

result in the disqualification of the debater(s).



Request for Cases, Cards or Evidence:

A debater/team – when asked by the opposing debater/team for a copy of a card, plan text,

case, etc. – is free to decided whether or not to provide the requested information. If a team

refuses to supply the information, they shall not be penalized in anyway. However, in such

instances where a judge requests to see a card, plan text, case, etc. for the purpose of making

his or her decision the debater/team should comply.



Judging Conflicts:

Contestants in any debate event who are scheduled to be judged by someone who has, at any

point in time, coached or taught them or with whom they have a close personal relationship

are responsible for reporting that fact to the ombudsman immediately. Failure to comply

may result in disqualification from the tournament.









6

Rule Regarding Debate Evidence:

Responsibility of the team reading evidence –



 The team is responsible for the validity of all evidence they read in the debate round.

 In all rounds of LD and Public Forum Debate, debaters should, at a minimum, orally

deliver title of the source and the author’s name. In Policy Debate, all debaters shall

orally deliver the name of the author title of source (E.G. title of book, not chapter; title

of journal, not article), and complete date.

 In all rounds of debate, complete citations for each piece of evidence introduced in the

round must be available in the round. Written citations must include name of the author,

qualifications, complete title of source (E.G. title of book, not chapter; title of journal,

not article), and complete date. Online sources must also include the title of the site,

database, or access point, the date accessed, and the web address. The additional citation

required for online sources must appear on all evidence, but is not required to be read.

Should two or more quotations be used from the same source, the author and title need

be given orally only for the first piece of evidence from that source. In the subsequent

oral citation, only the author’s name is required.

 No internal ellipsis (Ellipses occur after the first word of the quotation and before the

final word) may be used in evidence cited on a card, or ellipses may be shown on cards,

if the original source or a Xerox copy is present. The evidence may be read in ellipsed

form, but the entirety of the evidence must be available in one of the two ways

previously cited.

 Personal letters, emails, interviews and telegrams are not be admissible as evidence.



Challenging evidence cited in a debate –



 Definitions of Non-existent evidence or evidence which seriously distorts the intention

of the original source –

o "Serious Distortion" exists when the evidence itself contains added or deleted

word(s) which do not clarify but in fact change the position of the author with

respect to the issues in question.

o "Non-existent evidence" means that

 Reasonable search is unable to produce the original source and/or the

team reading the evidence is unable to provide the original source or a

Xerox copy of the relevant pages.

 The evidence cited is not located in the original source cited.

 Typographical errors in citation will not automatically result in the

evidence being labeled non-existent, if the team reading the evidence can

produce the correct information.

 Procedures for initiating and reviewing evidentiary challenges –

o Responsibilities of teams challenging evidence:

 Indictments or protests of the validity of evidence must be made on

substantive grounds.

 A challenger must have either the original source or a Xeroxed copy of

the source being cited, or







7

 A challenger must demonstrate that reasonable search has not been able

to locate the source – Xeroxed copies of relevant pages in Books in Print,

Readers Guide, P.A.I.S., etc.

o Initiating and reviewing protests:

 Any official protest on the validity of evidence citing specific violations

must be presented in writing to the Tournament Director, the school

being challenged, and the tournament ombudsman immediately following

the round in which the contested evidence was used and prior to the

beginning of the next round of debate.

 The Tournament Director shall rule on the protest no later than 7 days

of its receipt.

o Appeals:

 Appeals of the Tournament Director’s decision shall be made in writing

within 5 days to the Tournament Protest Panel.

 The Protest Panel shall use whatever means necessary in making the final

decision on the dispute.

o Penalties:

 Evidence lacking the required citation and challenged by the opposition

shall be disregarded by the judge unless said citation is proffered

immediately in the subsequent speech. At the conclusion of a challenge

related to the oral presentation of or the in round availability of a

citation, the judge is the sole determiner of the level of penalty in the

round in relationship to the level of the violation, not to exceed a

maximum penalty of a loss with zero points, as part of the judge’s

decision making process.

 If an evidence violation is presented where a debater is found to have

committed a “serious distortion” or to have used “non-existent

evidence,” at the conclusion of due process, the offending debater(s) may

be disqualified from the tournament at the Tournament Committee’s

discretion.

 Depending on the severity, an offense MAY result in notification of said

offense to their school administration, loss of all tournament award,

including trophy and School of Excellent participation points for the

offending student(s), and/or revocation of membership.

o Tournament Adjustments:

 Under no circumstance shall a tournament or part of a tournament be re-

run because of a violation of these rules.

 In the case of a disqualification of a contestant, all previous ranks and

decisions of other contestants stand and no revision of past round ranks

will take place.









8

Instructions for Pairing Debate Rounds:



Preliminary Rounds –



 The National Tournament shall consist of no fewer than five preliminary rounds for

each debate category in which all entries are guaranteed participation (except in the

even of a bye).

 In the event of an odd number of entries in a given debate format one team in each

round will be awarded a bye. That bye will be tabulated as a win, and debater/team

receiving the bye will be awarded speaker points equal to their speaker point average in

the other four rounds of competition. The bye will be assigned randomly in rounds one

and two. In rounds three, four and five the bye will go to the lowest seed. In the event

that the lowest seed has already received a bye the bye will advance to next lowest seed

as no debater/team will receive more than one bye.

 Debaters/teams will be constrained from meeting other debaters/teams from their

school or club.

 Debaters/teams will be constrained from meeting other debaters/teams they have

previously met in prelims.

 Rounds one and two of all debate divisions will be paired randomly with exception of

the previous mentioned constraints. All rounds following round two will be paired using

a high-low with in brackets method of powering.

 For Policy and LD sides will be randomly assigned for odd numbered rounds (1,3 and

5). In even numbered rounds (2 and 4) side constraints will be enforced and the

debater/team will be assigned to the side opposite from the side assigned in the previous

round.

 For Public Forum a coin toss will be used to determine sides and speaker order.

 Scheduling judges for preliminary rounds –

o All preliminary rounds of debate will be decided by one judge.

o No coach shall be scheduled to judge his or her own debater/team.

o When possible a judge will not be scheduled to judge a debater/team more than

once at the National Tournament.



Elimination Rounds:



 The number of entries in each debate division will determine if the number of teams in

that division that will break to elimination rounds. Any division with less than 24 entries

will break directly to semifinals (top four debaters/teams). Any divisions with more than

24 entries but less than 40 will break to quarterfinals (top eight debaters/teams), and any

division with more than 40 entries will break to octofinals (top 16 debaters/teams).

Under no circumstances will the National Tournament break more than 16

debaters/teams in a given division of debate.

 Once elimination rounds begin, school or club constraints will no longer apply. A

debater/team may be paired to debate another debater/team from the same school or

club. In such situations the coach of record for debaters/teams involved may opt to

advance either debater or team without holding the actual debate, or the coach may

decide to require his or her debaters to debate the round. In which case the tournament

will provide the necessary judges for the round to take place.





9

 For elimination rounds all debaters/teams will be seeded and paired accordingly.

Debaters/teams will be ranked using the following formula:

o First – total number of wins.

o Second – Single adjusted speaker points with the highest and lowest single-ballot

points dropped.

o Third – Unadjusted speaker points.

o Fourth – Opposition win-loss record.

o Fifth – Double adjusted speaker points with the first and second highest and

lowest single-ballot points dropped. At this point if the tie is still unbroken,

speaker points will continue to be adjusted to triple adjusted then quadruple

adjusted if necessary.

o In the event of an unbreakable tie, the seeding of the teams in questions will be

determined by a coin toss.

 The following guidelines will be used to pair elimination rounds.

o In the first elimination round the highest seed will debate the lowest seed, the

second seed will debate the second lowest seed, so on. For example in octofinals

the 1st seed would debate the 16th seed, the 2nd seed would debate the 15th seed,

the 3rd seed would debate the 14th seed, the 4th seed would debate the 13th seed,

and so on ending with the 8th seed debating the 9th seed.

o Elimination round brackets are not reseeded following each round. This means if

the 16th seed defeats the 1st seed in octofinals then the they assume the 1st seed.

o For Policy and LD - If the debaters/teams paired to debate in out rounds met in

prelims then they will debate on opposite sides in the elimination round. If the

two debaters/teams have not met previously at the National Tournament then

they will flip a coin for sides. Sides in Public Forum will always be determined by

the coin toss.

 Scheduling judges for elimination rounds –

o All elimination rounds of debate will be judged by a minimum of three judges.

o No coach shall be scheduled to judge his or her own debater/team.

o When possible a judge will not be scheduled to judge a debater/team more than

once at the National Tournament.









10

Specific Debate Rules



Public Forum Debate:



Public Forum Debate is a team event that advocates or rejects a position posed by the

resolution. A central tenet of the debate is that the clash of ideas must be communicated in a

manner persuasive to the non-specialist or “citizen judge”, i.e. a member of the American

jury.



The debate should:



 display solid logic, reasoning, and analysis

 utilize evidence but not be driven by it

 present a clash of ideas

 counter the arguments of the opponents (rebuttal)

 communicate ideas with clarity, organization, eloquence, and professional decorum



Public Forum is a unique debate form. While Policy Debate focuses on a plan to solve the

problem(s) posed by the resolution, and Lincoln Douglas Debate focuses on the core value

of the resolution, Public Forum Debate focuses on advocacy of a position derived from

issues presented in the resolution, not a prescribed set of burdens.



In Public Forum Debate, a plan or counter plan is defined as a formalized, comprehensive

proposal for implementation. Neither the pro or con side is permitted to offer a plan or

counter plan; rather, they should offer reasoning to support a position of advocacy. Debaters

may offer generalized, practical solutions.



New arguments in the “final focus” should be ignored. The “final focus” must be based on

argument and issues previously addressed in the debate.



Logical reasoning, maturity of thought, and effectiveness of communication are of primary

consideration. Evidence, examples, and analogies are to be used for the purpose of

illustration.



In making a decision, a judge should be as objective as possible. Remember these are

propositions upon which they may have strong feelings of which the debaters are unaware.

Judges should adjudicate the round as it is debated, not as they personally feel.





Format of the Debate –



Speech Time

First Speaker — Team A 4 minutes

First Speaker — Team B 4 minutes







11

Crossfire 3 minutes

Second Speaker — Team A 4 minutes

Second Speaker — Team B 4 minutes

Crossfire 3 minutes

Summary — First Speaker — Team A 2 minutes

Summary — First Speaker — Team B 2 minutes

Grand Crossfire 3 minutes

Final Focus — Second Speaker — Team A 1 minute

Final Focus — Second Speaker — Team B 1 minute

Prep Time 2 minutes per team





Public forum debate teams consist of two speakers; no substitution is permitted during the

tournament.



The Public Forum Debate topic will be the same topic used at the National Forensic League

National Tournament in June of 2008. It will appear on NFL Online in May of 2008.









12

Lincoln Douglas Debate:



Lincoln-Douglas Debate concerns itself with what ought to be instead of what is. A value is an

ideal held by individuals, societies, governments, etc. Debaters are encouraged to develop

argumentation based upon a values perspective. To that end, no plan (or counter plan) will be

offered by the debaters.



In Lincoln Douglas Debate, a plan is defined by the NFL as a formalized, comprehensive

proposal for implementation. Neither the affirmative nor negative side is permitted to offer a

plan; rather, they should offer reasoning to support a general principle. Debaters may offer

generalized, practical examples or solutions to illustrate how the general principle could guide

decisions.



The hallmarks of Lincoln Douglas debate include:



 Parallel Burdens

 Value Structure

 Argumentation

 Cross Examination

 Effective Delivery



Parallel Burdens –



No question of values can be determined entirely true or false. This is why the resolution is

debatable. Therefore neither debater should be held to a standard of absolute proof. No debater

can realistically be expected to prove complete validity or invalidity of the resolution. The better

debater is the one who, on the whole, proves his/her side of the resolution more valid as a

general principle



 Burden of proof: Each debater has the equal burden to prove the validity of his/her side

of the resolution as a general principle. As an LD resolution is a statement of value, there

is no presumption for either side.

 Burden of clash: Each debater has an equal burden to clash with his/her opponent’s

position. After a case is presented, neither debater should be rewarded for presenting a

speech completely unrelated to the arguments of his/her opponent.

 Resolutional burden: The debaters are equally obligated to focus the debate on the

central questions of the resolution, not whether the resolution itself is worthy of debate.

Because the affirmative must uphold the resolution, the negative must also argue the

resolution as presented.



Value Structure –



The value structure (or framework) is established by the debater to serve two functions: a) to

provide an interpretation of the central focus of the resolution, and b) to provide a method for

the judge to evaluate the central questions of the resolution. The value structure often consists

of a statement of the resolution (if affirming), definitions (dictionary or contextual), the value







13

premise (or core value), and the value criterion (or standard). This structure is commonly but not

always employed.



Definitions: The affirmative should offer definitions, be they dictionary or contextual, that

provides a reasonable ground for debate. The negative has the option to challenge these

definitions and to offer counter-definitions.



Value Premise/Core Value: A value is an ideal held by individuals, societies, governments, etc.

that serves as the highest goal to be protected, respected, maximized, advanced, or achieved. In

general, the debater will establish a value, which focuses the central questions of the resolution

and will serve as a foundation for argumentation.



Value Criterion/Standard: In general, each debater will present a value criterion (a standard),

which the debater will use to:



 explain how the value should be protected, respected, maximized, advanced, or achieved.

 measure whether a given side or argument protects, respects, maximizes, advances, or

achieves the value.

 evaluate the relevance and importance of an argument in the context of the round.



The relationship between the value premise and the criterion should be clearly articulated.



During the debate, the debaters may argue the validity or priority of the two value structures.

They may accept their opponent’s value structure, prove the superiority of their own value

structure, or synthesize the two.



Argumentation –



Because Lincoln Douglas debate is an educational debate activity, debaters are obligated to

construct logical chains of reasoning which lead to the conclusion of the affirmative or negative

position. The nature of proof may take a variety of forms (e.g., a student’s original analysis,

application of philosophy, examples, analogies, statistics, expert opinion, etc.).



Arguments should be presented in a cohesive manner that shows a clear relationship to the value

structure. Any research should be conducted and presented ethically from academically sound

and appropriately cited sources.



Cross-Examination –



Cross-examination should be used by the debater to clarify, challenge, and/or advance

arguments in the round.



Effective delivery –



Lincoln Douglas debate is an oral communication activity that requires clarity of thought and

expression. Arguments should be worded and delivered in a manner accessible to an educated

non-specialist audience. This encompasses:





14

 Written communication: Cases and arguments should be constructed in a manner that is

organized, accessible, and informative to the listener. The debater should employ clear

logic and analysis supported by topical research.

 Verbal communication: The debater has the obligation to be clear, audible and

comprehensible, and to speak persuasively to the listeners. Additionally, debaters should

strive for fluency, expressiveness, effective word choice, and eloquence.

 Non-verbal communication: The debater should demonstrate an effective use of

gestures, eye contact, and posture.



Throughout the debate, the debaters should demonstrate civility as well as a professional

demeanor and style of delivery.



The Topic –



The question to be debated will be the high school NFL LD National Tournament topic which

will be announced on NFLOnline in May of 2008.



Format of the Debate –



Speech Time

Affirmative Constructive 6 Minutes

Negative Cross Examination 3 Minutes

Negative Constructive 7 Minutes

Affirmative Cross Examination 3 Minutes

Affirmative Rebuttal 4 Minutes

Negative Rebuttal 6 Minutes

Affirmative Rebuttal 3 Minutes



Timing –



Timekeeping is required. If no timekeeper is used, debaters may time for their opponent or the

judge may keep time.



Prep Time –



Prep time for each debater is 4 minutes.









15

Policy Debate:



Policy debate focuses on the advocacy of a plan or policy action. The affirmative team should

outline the harms in the current system or some sort of need. Then they should present a policy

that would satisfy the need they have outlined. In addition the affirmative may discuss additional

advantages to the policy.



The negative team may argue that the affirmative policy fails to meet the need they have outlined

(i.e. the affirmative does not solve). The negative also has the option to present a disadvantages

to the policy (sure the policy will solve the problem, but it will replace that problem with new

ones).



Other ways do exist for structuring an affirmative case or negative strategy, but in the end the

debate should focus on whether or not a particular policy is an appropriate course of action.



Speaker Order –



Each speaker shall have eight minutes for constructive argument, alternating affirmative to

negative. Following each constructive speech, one opponent shall cross-examine the speaker for

three minutes.



The questioner shall control the use of the time and may interrupt the respondent, but may not

comment on the answers or make any statement of his/her own views. Each debater shall

question one opponent.



Following the four constructive speeches and questioning, each speaker shall have five minutes

for rebuttal, alternating negative to affirmative.



Format of the Debate –



Speech Time



Affirmative Constructive speech 8 Minutes





Affirmative is questioned by a Negative speaker 3 Minutes





Negative Constructive speech 8 Minutes





Negative is questioned by an Affirmative Speaker 3 Minutes





Affirmative Constructive speech 8 Minutes









16

Affirmative is questioned by the other Negative speaker 3 Minutes





Negative Constructive speech 8 Minutes





Negative is questioned by other Affirmative speaker 3 Minutes





Negative Rebuttal 5 Minutes





Affirmative Rebuttal 5 Minutes





Negative Rebuttal 5 Minutes





Affirmative Rebuttal 5 Minutes





Prep Time –



Each debate team has a total of 8 minutes of prep time.



Timing –



Timekeeping is required. If no timekeeper is used, debaters may time for their partners or the

judge may keep time.









17

General Individual Event Information and Rules

Events:



The IDEA/NJFL National Tournament will offer competition in eight individual speech events.

These events will include Dramatic Interpretation (DI), Humorous Interpretation (HI), Poetry

(POE), Prose (PRO), Extemporaneous Speaking (EXT), Original Oratory (OO), Impromptu

Speaking (IMP), and Duo Interpretation (DUO). These eight events will be divided into two

sections of four. Section A will consist of DI, HI, POE, and PRO. Section B will consist of

EXT, OO, IMP, and DUO.



Individual Event Entries:



Entry Restrictions –



Students entering a debate event will only be allowed to enter individual events in Section B. No

student will be allowed to enter more than two events in each section.



Event Size Requirements –



The National Tournament will not impose a cap on the size of any event, however, an each

event must have a minimum of 18 entries. If fewer than 18 participants sign up for a particular

event, then the event will be cancelled unless that event is Prose, Poetry, Humorous

Interpretation, or Dramatic Interpretation. In the case that either prose or poetry (or both) fail

to attract the minimum number of entries the events will be collapsed into one event. The same

is true for Humorous and Dramatic Interpretation.



Scheduling Individual Events:



Preliminary Rounds –



 Each contestant is guaranteed three randomly sectioned preliminary rounds of competition.

 When possible no student should be placed in a section with another student from his or her

school or club.

 Each student should meet a variety of opposition in each round.

 Each student should be assigned a variety of speaker positions in preliminary rounds.

 If a student is cross-entered, she or he should be schedule as the first speaker (or as close as

possible) in one event and last speaker (or as close as possible) in the other event.

 Scheduling judges for preliminary rounds –

o Preliminary rounds of speech events will be evaluated and ranked by one judge.

o No coach shall be scheduled to judge a student from her or his school or club.

o No judge shall judge the same student more than once during prelims.

o Contestants in any speech event who are scheduled to be judged by someone who

has, at any point in time, coached or taught them or with whom they have a close

personal relationship are responsible for reporting that fact to the ombudsman

immediately. Failure to comply may result in disqualification from the tournament.





18

Elimination Rounds –



 The number of entries in each speech event will determine the number of individuals that

can advance to elimination round competition in that event. If an event has fewer than 24

entries then the event will break directly to a final round of six competitors. If an event has

more than 24 but fewer than 60 entries that event will break to semifinals, and any event

with more than 60 entries will break to a quarterfinal round.

 Prelim scores will not carry over to elimination rounds except that for the purpose of

scheduling the first elimination round. From that point on scores will reset following each

round.

 School constraints will no longer apply once elimination rounds begin.

 Scheduling judges for preliminary rounds –

o Elimination rounds of speech events will judged by at least three judges.

o No coach shall be scheduled to judge a student from her or his school or club.

o No judge shall judge the same student more than once during prelims.



Quarterfinals:



 In the event that a quarterfinal round is necessary (for events with more than 60 entries),

the top 24 contestants after prelims will advance to a quarterfinal round.

 The top 24 contestants will be determined using the following formula.

o First – lowest cumulative ranks from the three prelims

o Second – Ties in ranks will be broken based on the highest number of speaker points

o Third – If a tie still exist it will be broken based on the number of firsts in prelims,

then seconds, then thirds, etc. if needed.

o If a tie is unbreakable by this formula, all tied contestants shall be included in the

quarterfinal round.

 Quarterfinals will consist of four sections with six contestants in each section. Sectioning

will be completed as follows:



Section A Section B Section C Section D



1. 24th seed 23rd seed 22nd seed 21st seed

2. 17th seed 18th seed 19th seed 20th seed

3. 16th seed 15th seed 14th seed 13th seed

4. 9th seed 10th seed 11th seed 12th seed

5. 8th seed 7th seed 6th seed 5th seed

6. 1st seed 2nd seed 3rd seed 4th seed



Semifinals:



 In the event that a quarterfinal round was held, the top 3 participants from each

quarterfinal section will advance to semifinals. Placement in each section will be

determined first by lowest composite rank. If a tie exist then preference will be given

to the contestant with the highest composite speaker points, and if a tie still exist it

will be broken based on the number of 1st in quarters, then 2nd, then thirds and so on if

needed. In the event that the tie can not be broken those tied will all advance to





19

semifinals. Once the top three from each section are determined they will be seeded

1-12 using the same formula as was used to determine top three in each section.

 If no quarterfinal round is held, the top 12 contestants after prelims will advance to

semifinals. The same formula used to determine quarterfinalists (see the section on

quarterfinals) will be used for semifinals.

 Semifinals will consists of two sections with six contestants in each. Sectioning will

be completed as follows.



Section A Section B

1. 12th seed 11th seed

2. 9th seed 10th seed

3. 8th seed 7th seed

4. 5th seed 6th seed

5. 4th seed 3rd seed

6. 1st seed 2nd seed



Finals:



After semifinals the top six contestants (3 from each section) will advance to the final

round. The process for determining these contestants is the same as determining

semifinals (see section on semifinals). Finals will consist of a single section with six

contestants. Finals should be sectioned as follows.



Section A

1. 6th seed

2. 2nd seed

3. 5th seed

4. 4th seed

5. 3rd seed

6. 1st seed









20

Specific Individual Event Rules



Extemporaneous Speaking:

Topics –



 Topics will cover United States domestic policy, United States foreign policy, and the

foreign policies of foreign nations.

 The tournament director shall obtain a list of topics phrased for contest use and based

on subjects discussed in standard periodicals during the current school year. Each topic

must be in the form of a question. The contents of the list shall not be disclosed except

as contestants draw topics. Topics should be age-appropriate for middle school students.



Drawing –



Thirty minutes before the round is to begin, the first speaker shall draw three topics, choose one,

and return the other two. Other contestants shall draw in like manner, in the order of speaking,

at intervals of seven minutes.



Preparation –



As soon as a topic is chosen, the contestant shall withdraw and prepare a speech without

consultation and without references to prepared notes. Students may consult published books,

magazines, newspapers, and journals or articles, provided…



 They are originals or Xeroxed copies of originals.

 Original articles or copies must be intact & uncut.

 There is no written material on original or copies.

 Topical index without annotation is allowed.



No other material shall be allowed in the extemp prep room other than stated above. Extemp

speeches, handbooks, briefs, and outlines shall be barred from the extemp prep room.

Underlining or highlighting on materials will be allowed if done in only one color on each article

or copy.



No electrical retrieval device may be used, but printed material from “on line” computer

services may be used. Source citations of such materials must meet MLA standards.



Recusal –



A contestant may not leave the prep area without first checking out with the proctor. A student

leaving without permission will be ranked last in that round.









21

The Speech:



Time: Contestants shall speak not more than seven minutes. No minimum time is mandated.

Judges should provide time signals at 6:00 and 6:30. A competitor who exceeds this time limit by

more than :30 seconds is not eligible for a first place rank. Speakers may use one 3-inch by 5-

inch index card per round. These cards must be prepared in the preparation area.









22

Original Oratory:



This contest shall comprise only memorized orations actually composed by the contestants and

not used in any previous contest year. No visual aids are permitted.



Subject –



Any appropriate subject may be used, but the orator must be truthful. Any non-factual reference,

especially a personal one, must be so identified.



Length –



Delivery shall require not more than 10 minutes. Judges should provide time signals at 9:00 and

at 9:30. A competitor who exceeds this time limit by more than :30 seconds is not eligible for a

first place rank.



Quotation –



Not more than 150 words of the oration may be direct quotation from any other speech or

writing and such quotations shall be identified in a printed copy of the oration supplied prior to

registration. Extensive paraphrasing from other sources is prohibited.



Script –



The Tournament Director must receive a copy of the orator’s script by Friday, June 15, 2007.

The Tournament Director’s contact information will be posted on IDebate. The script should

identify the quoted materials, state the number of quoted words, and both the orator and the

coach must attest by signature that the oration is the original work of the contestant.









23

Prose Interpretation:



Prose expresses thought through language recorded in sentences and paragraphs: fiction (short

stories, novels) and non-fiction (articles, essays, journals, biographies). During the presentation

the contestant must name the author and the book or magazine from which the cutting was

made.



Selections –



Only published, printed works may be used. No plays or other dramatic materials may be used.

In prose, a student may not use the same source s/he used in Duo, Dramatic or Humorous at

any IDEA/NJFL/MSFL tournament. Adaptations of television skits or other non-published

material are prohibited.



Time –



Presentations shall not last more than 7:00 minutes. Judges should provide time signals at 6:00

and at 6:30. A competitor who exceeds this time limit by more than :30 seconds is not eligible

for a first place rank.



Presentation –



Performances must be from a manuscript (which will be in a folder). Reading from a book or

magazine is not permitted. Movement below the waist is not allowed.



Focus –



In Prose, use of focal points and/or direct contact with the audience should be determined by

the requirements of the literature being interpreted









24

Poetry Interpretation:



Poetry is writing which expresses ideas, experience, or emotion through the creative

arrangement of words according to their sound, their rhythm, their meaning. Poetry may rely on

verse and stanza form. During the presentation the contestant must name the author and the

book or magazine from which the cutting was made.



Selections –



Only published, printed works may be used. No plays or other dramatic materials may be used.

In poetry, a student may not use the same source s/he used in Duo, Dramatic or Humorous at

any IDEA/NJFL/MSFL tournament. Students may use one poem or multiple poems in their

selection.



Time –



Presentations shall not last more than 7 minutes. Judges should provide time signals at 6:00 and

at 6:30. A competitor who exceeds this time limit by more than :30 seconds is not eligible for a

first place rank.



Presentation –



Performances must be from a manuscript (which may be in a folder). Reading from a book or

magazine is not permitted. Movement below the waist is not allowed.



Focus –



In Poetry, use of focal points and/or direct contact with the audience should be determined by

the requirements of the literature being interpreted.









25

Dramatic Interpretation:



Each selection is presented as a memorized selection without the use of physical objects, script,

or costume. Presentation shall not exceed 10 minutes. Judges should provide time signals at 9:00

and at 9:30. A competitor who exceeds this time limit by more than :30 seconds is not eligible

for a first place rank.



Selections –



Selections used in these contests shall be cuttings from published, printed novels, short stories,

plays or poetry. A cutting must be from a single work of literature: one story, or one play, or one

novel. No school publications or recorded material that is not printed and published is

acceptable. Adaptations may be made for the purpose of transition. Monologues are acceptable

in Dramatic Interpretation. During the presentation the contestant must name the author and

the book or magazine from which the cutting was made. Adaptations of television skits or other

non-published material are prohibited.



Focus –



In Dramatic Interpretation, use of focal points and/or direct contact with the audience should

be determined by the requirements of the literature being interpreted









26

Humorous Interpretation:



Each selection is presented as a memorized selection without the use of physical objects, script,

or costume. Presentation shall not exceed 10 minutes. Judges should provide time signals at 9:00

and at 9:30. A competitor who exceeds this time limit by more than :30 seconds is not eligible

for a first place rank.



Selections –



Selections used in these contests shall be cuttings from published, printed novels, short stories,

plays or poetry. A cutting must be from a single work of literature: one story, or one play, or one

novel. No school publications or recorded material that is not printed and published is

acceptable. Adaptations may be made for the purpose of transition. Monologues are acceptable

in Humorous Interpretation. During the presentation the contestant must name the author and

the book or magazine from which the cutting was made. Adaptations of television skits or other

non-published material are prohibited.



Focus –



In Humorous Interpretation, use of focal points and/or direct contact with the audience should

be determined by the requirements of the literature being interpreted.









27

Impromptu Speaking:

Topics –



Impromptu topics will include proverbs, abstract words, events, quotations, and famous people.



Drawing –



Five minutes before the round is to begin, the first speaker shall draw three topics, choose one,

and return the other two. The other contestants shall draw in like manner, in the order of

speaking, at intervals of six minutes. The same list of topics shall be used for the drawing by

each section. A different subject area will be used for each round.



Preparation –



As soon as a topic is chosen, the contestant shall withdraw and prepare a speech without

consultation and without references to prepared notes. Students may consult published books,

magazines, newspapers, and journals or articles, provided:



 They are originals or Xeroxed copies of originals.

 That original article or copy is intact and uncut.

 There is no written material on original or copy.

 Topical index without annotation is allowed.



No other material shall be allowed in the impromptu prep room other than stated above.

Speeches, handbooks, briefs, and outlines shall be barred from the prep room. Underlining or

highlighting in materials will be allowed if done in one color on each article or copy. No

electrical retrieval device may be used, but printed materials from “online” computer services

may be used.



Recusal –



A student may not leave the impromptu prep room without permission of the proctor.



Notes –



Speakers may use one 3-inch by 5-inch index card per round. These cards must be prepared in

the preparation area.



Time –



There is no minimum qualifying time, but the contestant must cover the subject adequately.

Maximum time is five minutes. Judges should provide time signals at 4:00 and at 4:30. A

competitor who exceeds this time limit by more than :30 seconds is not eligible for a first place

rank.









28

Duo Interpretation:



Each selection is presented as a memorized selection without the use of physical objects, script,

or costume. Presentation shall not exceed 10 minutes. Judges should provide time signals at 9:00

and at 9:30. A competitor who exceeds this time limit by more than :30 seconds is not eligible

for a first place rank.



Selections:



Selections used in these contests shall be cuttings from published, printed novels, short stories,

plays or poetry. A cutting must be from a single work of literature: one story, or one play, or one

novel. No school publications or recorded material that is not printed and published is

acceptable. Adaptations may be made for the purpose of transition. During the presentation the

contestants must name the author and the book or magazine from which the cutting was made.

Adaptations of television skits or other non-published material are prohibited. In duo

interpretation, each of the two performers may play one or more characters, so long as

performance responsibility in the cutting remains as balanced as possible. (If the selection is

prose or poetry and contains narration, either or both of the performers may present the

narration.)



Focus:



In Duo Interpretation, use of focal points and/or direct contact with the audience should be

determined by the requirements of the literature being interpreted. In Duo Interpretation, focus

may be direct during the introduction and the performers may look at each other but must be

indirect (off-stage) during the performance itself.









29

General Judging Instructions

 All judges should report to the ballot pick-up location at least 15 minutes before the round is

scheduled to begin.

 All judges should report to their assigned room at least five minutes before the round is

scheduled to begin.

 All ballots should be retrieved from tournament officials by the individual scheduled to

judge. Please do not pick-up ballots for other individuals.

 All rounds should be judged by the individual scheduled to judge unless otherwise informed

by the tournament staff. DO NOT TRADE BALLOTS!!!

 All judges should read the instructions located on the back of the ballot for any event with

which they are unfamiliar.

 All judges should make their decisions independently even when the round is judged by a

panel. DO NOT CONFER WITH OTHER JUDGES until after all decisions are compete.

 Judges should in no way intervene in or interrupt a performance. Judges are to act as

SILENT evaluators.

 Judges should refrain from revealing their decisions to contestants. DISCLOSURE IS NOT

PERMITTED!!!



Judging Policy, LD and Public Forum

 During the questions phase (cross-examination) of Policy and LD, the time belongs to the

debater asking the questions. The questions should be brief and the answer short and

specific. The person asking questions should not attempt to refute answers provided by the

other team/debater, nor should the team/debater answering questions attempt to argue with

or question the individual asking the questions.

 At the judge’s discretion, policy debaters may opt for an open cross-examination where all

four debaters participate in the cross-examination.

 During crossfire in Public Forum, the time is to be shared by both sides. The team speaking

first in the debate should be given the chance to ask the first question. Both questions and

answers should be brief and specific. Speakers should stand during regular crossfire and

remain seated during the Grand Crossfire.

 Judges must render their decision within ten minutes of the end of the final speech in the

round.



Judging Speech Events



 If a contestant is not present when his/her number is called, the judge is to go on to the next

one. When the tardy contestant arrives, s/he should be heard next. Some students are

participating in another event scheduled for the same time, and they cannot avoid being late.

For the same reason, a student may have to leave immediately after speaking.

 As students announce their subjects, the judge is to please write the title of the selection in

the designated space on the ballot.

 If a contestant exceeds the time limit indicated for each event, the contestant is not to be

disqualified, but if the speaker is more than :30, that speaker is not eligible to receive a 1st

place ranking





30

 If a contestant does not arrive by the end of the contest, the judge is to inquire about the

absent contestant before s/he marks the ballot. Every contestant should be heard.

 After all contestants have been heard, they are to be ranked 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5, in order of

excellence. Number 1 is the best speaker. You may have more than one competitor with a

5th place ranking.

 The judge must be sure to double check the ballot, sign it, and return it to the ballot table.









31

Event Specific Judging Instructions

Lincoln Douglas Debate:



This activity is designed to teach excellent critical thinking and public presentation skills. Your

role as a judge is to determine which debater did a better job of convincing you that his/her side

of the resolution more valid as a general principle.



Before the Round –



 Find out the exact wording of the debate resolution and write it down.

 Read and follow the instructions on the judging ballot you will receive.

 Read any additional Lincoln Douglas instructions that are provided to you.

 Talk with debaters before the round starts if you wish, but the conversation should not

demonstrate favoritism toward a debater.

 Debaters should always be respectful of one another and of you, and you should set a

tone of decorum and professionalism.



To Begin the Round –



 You will be instructed as to which side the debaters have been assigned.

 The Affirmative debater should be listed on the left side of the ballot and you may ask

the debater to sit on the left side of the room as you, the judge, look at the debaters.

 The Negative debater should be listed on the right side of the ballot and you may ask the

debater to sit on the right side of the room as you, the judge, look at the debaters.

 Record each debater’s code and side. You can confirm this information with the

debaters.

 When both debaters are ready, the Affirmative debater will stand in the front of the

room to deliver the initial speech.



During the Round –



 While the debaters may keep track of their own time, judges need to monitor speaking

times during the round. Speech times and order are listed on the ballot.

 Each debater has five minutes of preparation time (total) in each round, which can be

used prior to any of that debater’s speeches or cross-examination period. Judges need to

monitor how much preparation time has elapsed for each debater.

 During the debate, you are encouraged to take notes of the arguments made by the

debaters to assist you in making your decision at the end of the round.

 You should also keep track of what a debater says, if anything, in response to the other

debater’s arguments. To ensure fairness, your notes should help you determine if a

debater is improperly making brand new arguments in the final rebuttal speeches to

which the opposing debater has no opportunity to respond.

 Judges should not ask questions during the round.









32

After the Round –



 Check your codes carefully. This is especially important when marking the winner of the

debate.

 In your written comments, please be as constructive and educational as possible. Provide

a detailed justification of your decision, referring to the central issues the debaters

presented in the round. Evaluate the round based only on the arguments that the

debaters made and not on personal opinions or on arguments that you would have

made.

 Please completely fill out the ballot and return it promptly to the designated location.



Your decision about which team wins SHOULD NOT be based upon –



 Personal bias: A judge’s preference for a side of the resolution or a topic bias should not

enter into the decision. A judge must decide the round based on the arguments presented in

that round. Objectivity is the primary responsibility of any judge.

 Partiality: The judge should not be influenced by the reputation of or relationship with the

debaters, schools, or coaches. If a situation arises where impartiality is in doubt, the judge

has the responsibility to report this potential conflict of interest to the tab room.

 New arguments introduced in rebuttals: The judges shall disregard new arguments

introduced in the rebuttals. This does not include the introduction of new evidence in

support of points already advanced or the answering of arguments introduced by opponents.



A decision SHOULD BE based upon any or all of the following -



 Burden of proof: Which debater has proven his/her side of the resolution more valid as a

general principle by the end of the round? No debater can realistically be expected to prove

complete validity or invalidity of the resolution. A judge should prefer quality and depth of

argumentation to mere quantity of argumentation. A judge should base the decision on

which debater more effectively resolved the central questions of the resolution rather than

on insignificant dropped arguments.

 Value structure: Which debater better established a clear and cohesive relationship between

the argumentation and the value structure?

 Argumentation – Which debater better presented his/her arguments with logical reasoning

using appropriate support? Which debater best utilized cross-examination to clarify,

challenge, or advance arguments?

 Resolutionality: Which debater best addressed the central questions of the resolution?

 Clash: Which debater best showed the ability to both attack his/her opponent’s case and to

defend his/her own?

 Delivery: Which debater communicated in a more persuasive, clear, and professional

manner? A judge should give weight only to those arguments that were presented in a

manner that was clear and understandable to him or her as a judge.









33

Middle School Policy Debate:



Judges are expected to carefully and fairly decide the outcomes of a debate. Any judge who

cannot fairly decide a particular debate should notify a tournament director, competition

coordinator, or other responsible person and remove herself from judging. Judges are never

assigned to judge students from their own school.



Judges are ultimately responsible, however, for making sure that they will judge debates in a fair

manner. There are two outcomes for a debate. The judge must decide the winning side of the

debate. That is the team that argued successfully on the topic. If the proposition team proves its

case, the judge should reward the proposition team. If the proposition team did not prove its

case, the judge should declare the opposition team as the winner. There are no ties in debates.

Neither can two teams win a debate or both teams lose a debate.



In addition to deciding the winning team in the debate, a judge must award individual points to

each of the six debaters. Student are rated on a scale of 0-30 points, with “30” points awarded

for a perfect performance. The judge should consider public speaking, argumentation, and

teamwork skills in assigning individual speaker points. It is possible to give the same speaker

points to more than one student.



After careful deliberation of the outcome of the debate, the judge will complete a ballot, a record

of the debate, given to her by the tournament host. The judge will then announce the outcome

of the debate to the participating teams. The judge will explain the reasons that a particular side

has won the debate.



The judge will provide some constructive criticism to help debaters improve in future debates.

The judge will then complete the written ballot, providing a detailed description of the reason(s)

for the outcome, as well as listing any additional comments to help debaters improve their public

speaking and debate skills.









34

Public Forum Debate:



 Public Forum Debate is a team event that advocates or rejects a position posed by the

resolution. A central tenet of the debate is that the clash of ideas must be communicated in a

manner persuasive to the non-specialist or “citizen judge”, i.e. a member of the American

jury.



 The debate should:

o display solid logic, reasoning, and analysis

o utilize evidence but not be driven by it

o present a clash of ideas

o counter the arguments of the opponents (rebuttal)

o communicate ideas with clarity, organization, eloquence, and professional decorum



 Public Forum is a unique debate form. While Policy Debate focuses on a plan to solve the

problem(s) posed by the resolution, and Lincoln Douglas Debate focuses on the core value

of the resolution, Public Forum Debate focuses on advocacy of a position derived from

issues presented in the resolution, not a prescribed set of burdens.



 In Public Forum Debate, a plan or counter plan is defined by the NFL as a formalized,

comprehensive proposal for implementation. Neither the pro or con side is permitted to

offer a plan or counter plan; rather, they should offer reasoning to support a position of

advocacy. Debaters may offer generalized, practical solutions.



 New arguments in the “final focus” should be ignored. The “final focus” must be based on

argument and issues previously addressed in the debate.



 Logical reasoning, maturity of thought, and effectiveness of communication are of primary

consideration. Evidence, examples, and analogies are to be used for the purpose of

illustration.



 In making a decision, a judge should be as objective as possible. Remember these are

propositions upon which there may have strong feelings of which the debaters are unaware.

Judges should adjudicate the round as it is debated, not as they personally feel.









35

Extemporaneous Speaking



The extemporaneous speech should not be regarded as a memory test of the material contained

in any one magazine article, but rather as an original synthesis by the speaker of the current fact

and opinion on the designated topic as presented by numerous sources.



The contestant therefore should be held accountable for strict adherence to the precise

statement of the topic drawn and discounted severely for shifting to some other phase of the

topic on which s/he might prefer to speak.



The information presented should be well-chosen, pertinent, and sufficient to support the

central thought of the topic. The material should be organized according to some logical plan to

produce a complete speech within the time allowed. Delivery should be free from marked

defects in the mechanics of speech -- poise, quality and use of voice, enunciation, fluency, bodily

expressiveness -- and should be effective in enlisting and holding the interest of the audience.



The best extemporaneous speech combines clear thinking, good speaking, and interesting

presentation to establish a definite thought with respect to the subject chosen. Do not require a

contestant speaking on a controversial subject to take a personal stand on that issue.



S/He may do so, or s/he may elect to present both sides of the controversy as currently set

forth in the his/her own plan. There is NO minimum qualifying time for the extemp speech. Do

not penalize a contestant for brevity unless s/he fails to cover adequately the subject s/he has

chosen.



Maximum time is seven minutes. Impose no penalty for slight overtime, but if the speaker

exceeds the maximum speaking time by more than :30 seconds, S/He is not eligible to receive a

1st place ranking.









36

Original Oratory



Since these orations have been written by the contestants delivering them, the judges should

consider Thought, Composition, and Delivery. However, since this is a contest in speech rather

than in essay writing, the emphasis should be placed on the speech phase. Thought and

composition should be considered primarily in the way they are employed to make effective

speaking possible.



The orator should not be expected to solve any of the great problems of the day. Rather, s/he

should be expected to discuss intelligently, with a degree of originality, in an interesting manner,

and with some profit to his/her audience the topic s/he has chosen. Any appropriate subject

may be chosen but the orator must be truthful. Any non-factual reference, especially a personal

one, MUST be so identified.



Although many orations deal with a current problem and propose a solution, the judge is

expressly reminded that this is not the only acceptable form of oratory. The oration may simply

alert the audience to a threatening danger, strengthen its devotion to an accepted cause, or

eulogize a person. The orator should be given free choice of subject and judged solely on the

effectiveness of its development and presentation.



The composition should be considered carefully for its rhetoric and diction. The use of

appropriate figures of speech, similes and metaphors, balanced sentences, allusions, and other

rhetorical devices to make the oration more effective should be noted especially. Use of

American English should be more than correct; it should reveal a discriminating choice of words

and altogether fine literary qualities. It should be especially adapted to oral presentation.



Delivery should be judged for mastery of the usual mechanics of speech -- poise, quality and use

of voice, bodily expressiveness, and for the qualities of directness and sincerity which impress

the oration upon the minds of the audience. An orator should not be penalized for a few

seconds overtime but if the speaker exceeds the maximum speaking time by more than :30

seconds, s/he is not eligible to receive a 1st place ranking.



No particular style of delivery is to be set up as the one correct style to which all contestants

must conform. Rather, each contestant is to be judged upon the effectiveness of his/her

delivery, free to choose or develop whatever style will best give him/her that effectiveness with

his/her particular oration. No visual aids are permitted.









37

Oral Interpretation Events



The art of interpretation is to be regarded as recreating the characters in the story presented and

making them seem living and real to the audience. Presentation shall be from memory and

without the use of physical objects or costume.



A selection for interpretation must be a cutting from a single literary work: one novel, or one

short story, or one play, or one or more poems. Monologues are acceptable. During the

presentation, the contestant must name the author and the book or magazine from which the

cutting was made.



Adaptation may be for the purpose of transition. The selection should be judged for its

appropriateness as contest material and its suitability to the particular contestant using it. The

use of good literature should be noted favorably and a selection devoid of literary merit graded

lowest.



This is a contest in interpretation. The contestants should be evaluated on poise, quality and use

of voice, inflections, emphasis, pronunciation, enunciation, physical expression, and especially

the ability to as to be an interesting and integral part of the story rather than just "filler" between

portions of dialogue. A speaker that exceeds the maximum speaking time for the event by more

than :30 seconds is not eligible to receive a 1st place ranking.



The final test of good interpretation is the ability to use all these factors so successfully and

unobtrusively that the hearer forgets that this is a contest and in a created atmosphere is carried

away to the time and place of the story being unfolded.









38

Duo Interpretation



The art of interpretation is to be regarded as recreating the characters in the story presented and

making them seem living and real to the audience. Presentation shall be from memory and

without the use of physical objects or costume.



A selection for interpretation must be a cutting from a single literary work: one novel, or one

short story, or one play, or one or more poems. In Duo Interpretation each of the two

performers may play one or more characters, so long as performance responsibility in the cutting

remains as balanced as possible. [If the selection is prose or poetry and contains narration, either

or both of the performers may present the narration.]



During the presentation, the team must name the author and the book or magazine from which

the cutting was made. Adaptation may be for the purpose of transition. The selection should be

judged for its appropriateness as contest material and its suitability to the particular contestant

using it. The use of good literature should be noted favorably and a selection devoid of literary

merit graded lowest.



This is a contest in interpretation. The contestants should be evaluated on poise, quality and use

of voice, inflections, emphasis, pronunciation, enunciation, physical expression, and especially

the ability to interpret characters correctly and consistently. Narrative, if included, should be

vivid and animated so as to be an interesting and integral part of the story rather than just "filler"

between portions of dialogue.



The final test of good interpretation is the ability to use all these factors so successfully and

unobtrusively that the hearer forgets that this is a contest and in a created atmosphere is carried

away to the time and place of the story being unfolded. A team that exceeds the maximum

speaking time for the event by more than :30 seconds is not eligible to receive a 1st place

ranking.









39

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the role of the MSFL in the tournament?



 Advise IDEA and NFL on policies and procedures that will overcome shortcomings of past

tournaments to establish a respectable and consistent annual event.

 One MSFL member will serve on the three member Tournament Committee (which also

includes one person from IDEA and the NFL) that will be responsible for making final

decisions on matters not solved through the ombudsman office at the tournament.



How have the rules been determined?



 Rules were decided by IDEA in consultation with NFL and other relevant forensics

organizations.

 Rules were based upon existing NFL and IDEA rules and standards, but have been modified

in some cases to more appropriately suit the middle school competitor.

 The rules published in this handbook are the final rules and this handbook should be used

by competitors and coaches in preparation for the tournament.



Which events will be offered?



 The tournament shall consist of contests in Public Forum Debate, Policy Debate, Lincoln-

Douglas Debate, Extemporaneous Speaking, Impromptu Speaking, Original Oratory,

Dramatic Interpretation, Humorous Interpretation, Prose Interpretation, Poetry

Interpretation and Duo Interpretation.



Is there a minimum/maximum number of participants?



 The minimum number of participants per event is 18. If fewer than 18 participants sign up

for a particular event, the event will either be cancelled, or in the case of Dramatic

Interpretation/Humorous Interpretation and Poetry/Prose the events will be collapsed into

a combined event. There is no maximum number of participants.



Who will be responsible for paying for judges, awards, food etc?



 IDEA will collect all registration and judging fees as well as cash sponsorship contributions

and IDEA will be responsible for paying for all costs associated with the tournament such as

judges’ fees, awards, etc.

 The tournament host will arrange and IDEA will pay for a reasonable amount of food and

beverages for the judges, tab room etc.

 The tournament host is responsible for arranging for food and beverages sales to event

participants at reasonable rates. Food sales can be a revenue generating activity for the

tournament host.



Who will manage the tab room and run the tournament?



 The tab room will be managed by IDEA and the NFL





40

 IDEA and NFL will appoint a tournament director



Who will server as the ombudsman, and what will her/his responsibilities be?



 IDEA and the NFL will assign an ombudsman

 The role of the ombudsman will be to investigate and adjudicate protests of alleged

violations of tournament rules and standards.

 Protests must be presented by a school’s designated adult or “coach of record” – student

complaints and protests will not be acknowledged.

 Protests must be presented in writing in a timely manner and include:

o The Complaint

o Identification of the judge and school affiliation

o A signature of the coach presenting the complaint

o Details of the event violation including: Event, Round Number, Section, Room

Number, Student Contestant Code and the Time of the alleged infraction.

o When there is disagreement with the ombudsman’s decisions regarding protests, a

three person committee representing IDEA, NFL, and MSFL will make the final

ruling on the protest.



How many awards will be awarded?



 Individual events: 12 semifinalists and 6 finalists.

 Debate: 4 quarterfinalists, 2 semifinalists, 2 finalists.

 Schools of Excellence: 5 Debate Schools of Excellence, 5 Speech Schools of Excellence, and

3 Overall Schools of Excellence.



How will schools register for the tournament?



 Schools can download an application form on IDebate or request an application from Aaron

Fishbone.

 Completed registration forms should be emailed as attachments to Aaron Fishbone.

 Payments can be made by credit card or checks.



Will there be a limit on the number of spectators in a room?



 The tournament will limit the number of spectators per room in accordance with fire safety

codes and the maximum capacity assigned to each room.



Are their supervision requirements?



 Each student at the National Tournament shall be under the immediate supervision of an

adult who may be his/her speech coach, parent, or other adult approved by the school

principal. Coaches with entries from their school may not also supervise students from

another school district, without written permission of both district superintendents.

 Students are not allowed to enter competition rooms without judges being present. Students

are required to wait outside the room until judge(s) arrive.







41

What constitutes a forfeit?



 A contestant who does not appear at the scheduled time to speak shall be marked last. A

debate team more than 15 minutes late shall forfeit the decision. The ombudsman may waive

these penalties for valid reasons such as students who are double entered.



What happens if a student competes in the wrong section?



 If a student/team competes in the wrong contest section of a speech event or against the

wrong opponent in a round of debate, at no fault of their opponent or the tournament

officials, that student/team will automatically receive last in the section to which they were

assigned and zero speaker points for that round. Any score assigned in the wrong section

shall be ignored. Debaters will receive a loss for that particular round and zero speaker

points. Any decision or speaker points from the assigned in that round will be ignored.



How many Judges in the round?



 Preliminary debates and contests shall be judged by one judge; elimination rounds including

semi-finals and finals shall be judged by a minimum of three judges



How can Protests be lodged and how are they adjudicated?



 See rule number 7-8 regarding the role of the Ombudsman. The Tournament will provide a

form in the Main Room on which all protests must be filed. These protests will be reviewed

first by the ombudsman and, in the event that a decision is not possible or the decision is

challenged, the protest will be forwarded to the three person Tournament Committee.

 The Tournament Committee’s decision shall be final.



What happens if a student/team is disqualified?



 In case of a disqualification of a contestant in the national tournament, all previous ranks

and decisions of other contestants stand and no revision of past round ranks will take place.



What are the rules regarding the use of computers and Electronic Retrieval Systems?



 The use by contestants of any computer or electronic retrieval system (recording or

information retrieval system) now known or to be invented is prohibited during any rounds

at the National Tournament (this includes preparation for extemporaneous and impromptu

speaking). Electric or electronic devices may be used for the sole purpose of keeping time.

Judges may use a computer to take notes while judging during competition at the National

Tournaments. Materials printed from “on line” services are permitted in debates and the

extemp prep room. Electronically retrieved evidence used in any IDEA contest must

conform to the citation standard of the Modern Language Association.

 Exceptions will be made to this rule only to comply with ADA standards.



Under what circumstances will an event be canceled?







42

 In the case of an individual event or debate event with insufficient entries for a reasonable

competition, the Tournament Director may decide to cancel that event. The minimum

number of individual events contestants or debate teams required will be 18.

 If there are fewer than 18 students entered in an Oral Interpretation of Literature event, the

Tournament Director may decide to collapse related events together. Collapsible Events are:

o Prose Interpretation and Poetry Interpretation

o Dramatic Interpretation and Humorous Interpretation



Will individual events scoring be cumulative?



 No. Competitors scores in preliminary rounds will not carry into the out rounds.

 Once outrounds begin, scores will again reset prior to the start of each subsequent round.









43

Tournament Schedule



Thursday, June 28, 2007

5:00pm-7:00pm Early Registration (location TBA)





Friday, June 27, 2008

7:30am – 8:30am Registration



9:00am – 10:30am Debate Rd 1



11:00am – Noon Lunch



Noon – 1:30pm Debate Rd 2

Speech Section A Rd 1



2:00pm – 3:30pm Speech Section B Rd 2



4:00pm – 5:30pm Debate Rd 3

Speech Section A Rd 2





Saturday, June 28, 2008

8:00am – 9:30am Debate Rd 4



9:30am - 11:00am Speech Section B Rd 2



10:45am – 12:15pm Debate Rd 5

Speech Section A Rd 3



1:30pm - 3:00pm Speech Section B Rd 3



3:00pm - 4:30pm Debate Quarterfinals

Speech Section A Quarterfinals



5:00pm – 6:30pm Speech Section B Quarterfinals









44

Sunday, June 29, 2008

9:00am – 10:30am Debate Semifinals

Speech Section A Semifinals



11:00am – 12:30pm Speech Section B Semifinals



1:00pm – 2:30 Debate Finals

Speech Section A Finals



2:30pm – 4:00 Speech Section B Finals

4:15pm Awards Ceremony





Event Patterns –

Debate: Policy Debate, Public Forum Debate, and LD Debate

Section A: Dramatic Interp, Humorous Interp, Poetry, and Prose

Section B: Extemp Speaking, Original Oratory, Impromptu, and Duo Interp









45