Judging your first round: a guide for volunteer judges

What a judge is for

Students argue. You decide which side argued better, and you tell them why in writing. Your written ballot is the single most valuable thing a student takes home from a tournament, often more valuable than the result. Take it seriously and be specific.

Before the round

You will receive a ballot with the round, the room, the two sides, and the speech times. Arrive at the room a few minutes early, confirm the students' names and sides, and tell them how you would like them to debate: "Speak at a pace I can follow. Explain your evidence. Tell me why your arguments matter more than theirs." Students adapt to judges, so say what you want.

During the round: flow

Take notes in columns, one per speech, so you can see whether each argument was answered. Write the claim, the source, and the response, in short phrases. Do not worry about capturing every word. See How to flow a debate round. Keep time if there is no timekeeper; a phone timer is fine. Do not react, nod, or shake your head during speeches.

Deciding

Decide on the arguments made in the round, not on your own opinion of the topic. A useful sequence:

What did each side say the round was about in their final speech?
Which of their main arguments survived? An argument that was never answered stands. An argument that was answered stands only if the answer was answered.
Of the arguments that survived, which side explained why theirs mattered more? That comparison (bigger, more likely, sooner, harder to reverse) usually decides the round.
If both sides' arguments survived and nobody compared them, decide which argument you found more persuasive on the evidence and reasoning presented, and say so.

Do not vote for a speaker because they were more confident, faster, or more polished if the other side had the better arguments. Do note delivery in the speaker points and comments.

Writing the ballot

The best ballots have three parts:

The reason for decision. Two or three sentences: "I voted Con because the Pro's price-increase argument was answered by the Con's evidence on cost-sharing rules, and the Pro never explained why their evidence should be preferred. The Con's competitiveness argument was never directly answered."
One thing each debater did well. Specific: "Your crossfire question about the moratorium's duration was excellent."
One thing each debater should work on. Also specific: "Your final focus introduced a new argument about jobs that was not in your summary, so I could not consider it."

Speaker points are usually on a scale set by the tournament; the ballot will explain it. Reserve the top of the scale for exceptional performances and the bottom for conduct problems, and put most students in the middle.

Conduct

Students may ask you after the round who won and why. Follow the tournament's rules on disclosure; many CUDL events allow a brief, kind explanation. Never berate a student, never discuss another judge's decision, and never share a ballot with anyone other than the tab room.

Volunteer judges are the reason a school with no budget can compete. Sign up to judge, and we will brief you before your first tournament.

A sample ballot, annotated

Decision: Pro. Reason: The round came down to whether data center demand raises household prices. Con argued the pro's price evidence assumed no new generation; pro answered in summary that two of the three states in their source did build generation and prices still rose. Con did not respond to that in final focus. Pro weighed prices as more probable than con's competitiveness harm, and con did not weigh back. Pro: good extension in summary; slow down in the rebuttal. Con: strong evidence; you needed to answer the summary's point about generation and to weigh in final focus.

The ballot names the deciding issue, explains who won it and why, notes what was dropped, and gives each side one specific improvement. Any volunteer can write this after a single training session.

Common judge mistakes

Voting for the team you agree with rather than the team that argued better. Your opinion on data centers is not in the round.
Rewarding volume or speed. Persuasion is the standard.
Deciding the round on an argument neither side made. If you noticed a flaw the other team did not raise, it does not count.
Writing "good job" with no reason. Students improve from specifics.

Volunteer judging with CUDL

CUDL trains every volunteer judge before their first round, provides the flow sheet and the ballot, and pairs first-time judges with novice rounds. Corporate volunteers, parents, teachers, and college students all judge with us. A Saturday of judging gives sixty students written feedback they would not otherwise get. Sign up to judge.