Information for Judges 2011

For Heart of Europe Debating Tournament 2011, Organising Committee appointed George Yeoman (UK/SLO) the Chief Adjudicator.

We strongly encourage independent adjudicators to apply.

Adjudicators

If possible, we would like to have 3 judges for each preliminary debate, made up of judges from the following categories:

CATEGORY 0 - Those with little or short debating experience but familiar with the WSDC format, its rules and possessing knowledge of at least the very basic principles of argumentation, logical, analytical and critical thinking.
CATEGORY 1 – Former debaters having had at least 2 years debating experience and
have now been working or doing further studies for at least 1 year but otherwise having had little to none judging experience.
CATEGORY 2 – Those with some experience of judging.
CATEGORY 3 – Judges with at least 2 years of experience in judging.
CATEGORY 4 – Very experienced judges, especially having judged at the WSDC.

It would be of great help at this stage if those wishing to judge could contact the Chief Adjudicator at ca@heart-of-europe.org with their Details and Categories, as per the Adjudication Resume as soon as possible.

Please do note that nominating judges of categories 0 a 1 - especially 0 - should be only the last resort when in serious troubles concerning the fulfillment of the n+1 rule (number of judges required in order to register = number of teams you are bringing +1).

A Word from the CA

It is a great honour and privilege to be invited as Chief Judge for the 'Heart of Furope'
competition. I especially feel this because I am following in the footsteps of Mr John
Wickham, for whom I have great respect. As you will see from the literature, we will be using
the 'Worlds' format which means that the Judges will confer as to which team has convinced
them. The points sheets will be used as per the WSDC. Please read the rules carefully,
especially in regard to the complaints procedure. We will endeavour to make the motions as
interesting and universal as possible.

We feel it is important not to use coaches as judges. This is particularly important this year
for the coaches of the National teams. In order to ensure a high judging standard, whilst still
encouraging the natural progression of new judges, we would like to invite each team to
bring a judge and each country to invite an independent judge, especially a very experienced
one. In order to ensure our ability to secure panels of 3 adjudicators, we will be applying the n+1 rule for the number of judges required for a team to successfully register. This rule can only be waived at Stage 2 and later and only if given exception by the Chief Organiser, in case that we have enough independent judges already. Apart from that, we feel that having individual school teams from other countries, as well as the home teams, is very important because many of them may become future National team debaters.

A little background on the CA

George Yeoman is a retired native speaker of English from the UK who has worked and lived
in Slovenia for the last 12 years. He has had three careers – 15 years in Finance, 15 years in
Tourism, and 11 years teaching English for Communication. George retired from full-time
employment in October 2009 at the age of 66 but is still active in Slovenia helping people
and students in many different ways. He attended universities in the UK and has BA, MA
and a Postgrauate Cert, his subject areas being 20th century European History (Fascism and
Dictatorship), and his main passion International Studies and Relations.

He started debating at the age of 15 at school. He continued to debate at University and
eventually became the President of the Debate Society. He participated in informal debates
and discussions throughout his 1st two careers. Shortly after arriving in Slovenia, he became
involved in schools' debating by both training and judging. He judged at WSDC in South
Africa, Singapore, and Cardiff and sponsored debaters and young judges re-WSDC. He also
judged at many competitions in Europe. In retirement he is available to Bojana Skrt whenever
she requires his help and participation.

....and a touch of his debating philosophy in his own words

I am rather traditional about my attitude to Formal Debating but am prepared to be flexible.
Here are my main preferences and concerns – I believe in the original concept which is that
Formal Debating is for 'ladies' and 'gentlemen' who wish to learn and practice the skillful art
of debate in order to persuade. I believe that debaters and judges should wear clothes that are
smart/casual, and observe the tradition of good debate manners during debates. But I do want
them to enjoy it.

I believe that participants should show respect to the organizers and judges during a
tournament, especially in regard to complaints. I believe in making it clear that the points
sheet displays the skills or otherwise of the debaters and that the points and comments from
the judges are separate from the decision as to who persuaded them. They are to educate the debaters and help their trainers in the future. Therefore I see nothing wrong with low-point wins. I also believe in the importance of social interaction

...and some of his concerns

Winning is all that matters to some teams
The creeping appearance of bigotted nationalism
The inability to win or lose gracefully

Upon arrival....

On the first day in Olomouc in July, I will be running a judges briefing and training lecture. Attendance to this session is compulsory for all judges. Prior to that day, you will be expected to have read the rules and guidelines for debate. I will not be taking you exhaustively through those rules. You will have to have read them. There will be a short test at the start of the judges briefing to tell me - and you - what particular parts of the rules and guidelines we might need to work on.