# data[].attributes.body
SPEECH CRITERIA

CONTENT (40%)
ORGANIZATION (30%) Even the most interesting content will fail to convince if the speech is disorganised
LANGUAGE (20)
STYLE (10%) It should be given thought and practiced by the students, so its importance has to be reflected in the grade somewhat

DEBATE CRITERIA
STRATEGY (30) Do they stay on clash or move the clash and are they effective in their choices?
STRENGTH OF ARGUMENT (20%)
STRENGTH OF EVIDENCE (20%) These two are part of a whole but I make a point of judging them separately in the rubric.
LANGUAGE (15%) We're still teaching a language so fluency and accuracy matter
STYLE (15%) I feel in debate it is even more important that in speech giving.

# data[].attributes.body
The argument should be judged using several criteria.
50% should be for the validity of the argument. This is the crux of the issue. Are the claims proven to be true? Are the arguments substantiated with logic and examples + facts.
30% should be for the organization of the argument. This is important because without proper organization the argument is will not understandable and effective even if the basis is valid.
20% of the argument should be whether the argument is on-clash and addresses  the issues that are the main issues of conflict. Without on-clash arguments the arguments mean nothing.

# data[].attributes.headline
Criteria for Adjudication - Oran Avraham

# data[].attributes.subject
Criteria for Adjudication - Oran Avraham

# data[].attributes.body
1. Arguments - I think that the most important part is the arguments. When we listen to the groups` arguments, we actually see if they worked together, if they researched the topic. Moreover, we check if they understood the strategy of choosing points. (50%)
2. Rebuttal - The se4cond part in the dabate itself is to answer your opponent, and that why rebuttal is important. We check the pupils` ability to listen to the other group, to thgink together on a good and affective answer and finally to say it. (30%)
3. Presentation - Finally, the last thing is the presentation. It`s important that the pupils will be confident, will talk with accuracy, will keep eye contact and will be facinating. (20%)

# data[].attributes.headline
Criteria for Adjudication - Elena Rasin Possek 

# data[].attributes.subject
Criteria for Adjudication - Elena Rasin Possek 

# data[].attributes.body
Content and Organization - 50%
The speaker presented a well structured, logical and clearly argumented speech
Rebuttal - 30%
The speaker  produced an effective and adequate response to the opposing side's arguments, thereby exhibiting his attention to others's claims and "quick thinking on his feet".
Presentation/ Delivery - 20%
including: correct language/ grammar/ pronunciation. speech is fluent and spoken, rather than read from notes, due attention is given to body language/ keeping eye contact with the listening audience and judges.

# data[].attributes.body
Criteria for adjudication
ORGANISATION AND CONTENT 50%
- the presentation is clear and structured
- there are examples and facts used to support the arguments
- the examples and facts are given with references
USE OF REBUTTAL 25%
All the arguments made by another team are responded
TEAM WORK, MANNER AND STYLE 25%
- all the participants contribute into the work, give ideas
- proper use of tone and voice
- the styles of speaking are used convinsingly

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.debatingmatters.com/getinvolved/adviceforjudges/

The criteria that I am writing here is based on Debating Matters which is a UK debating competition.  The judging in this debate is a little more formal and at the end of the day the judges need to decide who has won the debate.

Some of the items that the judges must relate to include such things as whether the speaker was able to address difficult questions. A speaker who cannot deal with difficult issues or does not address the main points is missing the whole point of the debate.

In the opening presentations the judges need to consider whether the debaters are clearly presenting a well-structured case with evidence and whether they have a clear understanding of the opposition's position.  During questioning can they debaters think quickly under pressure and give clear answers and respond to the other side.

After looking at some rubrics on the subject I believe that the following points should be given:

Organization and clarity   30 pts      Use of argument   30 pts                Use of cross examination and rebuttal  30 pts
Presentation  10 pts

# data[].attributes.body
Veronica Marshall
Arguments  40%

If there is indeed an argument that is relevant

If it is a logical argument

If the arguments have enough research behind them

Its a consistent argument

Form of Presentation 30%

If   the speech is well written

Delivery of speech with clarity and correct Pronunciation

Ability to captivate the audience eye contact,

Timing especially if using humour

Confidence

Correct Language structure

Rebuttal 20%

There is evidence that the teams have listened to the opposing side and that the arguments are dealt with accordingly.

The points are answered in a satisfactory manner.

Team Work 10%

There is respect between the team members and that each individual understands their role within the team.

# data[].attributes.headline
Criteria for Adjucation - Rebecca Nessim

# data[].attributes.subject
Criteria for Adjucation - Rebecca Nessim

# data[].attributes.body
Content and Method- 50%.  Do the arguments show research, are they coherent and well organized? Does the content develop and adapt during the debate, can the debaters bring in depth to their argument when challenged, do they show evidence of having considered the other side of the matter, do they think on their feet? All this is content.
2. Rebuttal 20% is part of the content I suppose, but here I would expect to see the debater relating specifically to the other team's arguments and using them to move his own argument forward; not to be nonplussed ; good rebuttals show good research and a deep knowledge of the subject being debated.
2, Organization - 10% also relevant in content, but more points given for good time management, arguments are built in an organized manner, thread of thought is well presented and easy to follow; no needless repetition
2. Presentation - 20% confident body language, appropriate language, keeping to the time limit, good language skills and spoken rather than read off a page, respectful to other debaters
-

# data[].attributes.headline
Criteria for Adjucation - Joanna Pac-Amsalem

# data[].attributes.subject
Criteria for Adjucation - Joanna Pac-Amsalem

# data[].attributes.body
1. Content - 40% - relevant arguments and examples are presented in an organized way, and the speaker is on clash.
2. Rebuttal - 20% - students listen and respond to the opponent's arguments
3. Presentation - 30% - confident presentation, respectful and fluent speaking style, correct use of language, respectful language, time limit
4. Teamwork - 10% - all team members have contributed to the debate

# data[].attributes.body
1: Content (own position)  (50 %)
-the clash points are clearly defined
- the team's position is made clear.
- the arguments are presented in a clear and coherent way. They are supported by evidence.
- speaker is on clash
- Rebuttal (in Debate):
The speaker
- proofs that he listened to and understood the counterpart's arguments
- rebutted the prior speakers' arguments
- brings convincing arguments that proof (part of) the counterpart's arguments wrong or irrelevant

3: Presentation (20 %)
The speaker
- keeps eye contact with the audience
- body language conveys security
- speaks fluently
- does not read off the page

4: Language (20%)
- fair play: the speaker speaks respectfully when responding to opponents (rebuttal)
- speaker speaks fluently and in overall correct language
- does not read off the page

# data[].attributes.body
Argument Development - clash points and team's positions are clearly defined, well developed and illustrated, and have immediate (rather than tangental) relevance. Any relevant presumptions and definitions are stated. The development of the argument is the basis of the debate. Without proper development the debate devolves into rambling nonsense. 45%
Team Cohesion and Rebuttal- as a unit, the team delivers clear points, building on the previous arguments without contradictions or backtracking. Opposing team's points are properly rebutted without sacrificing the flow and presentation of the speaker's team. The debate hinges on a well developed argument from the team as a single unit. Additionally, the ability to further the team's position through rebuttal is an imperative aspect of the presentation which should serve to "prove" the team's point without derailing their explanation. 40%
Speech/Individual Presentation - each member of the team speaks with reasonable fluency, is able to clearly state his/her point. Each member addresses the opposing team in a sportsman-like fashion, including when asking questions during another's speech. Meaning and message is not sacrificed for dramatic or distracting style. It is important to remember the point of the debate is the argument and rebuttal. Members should not be subject to personal attacks of any kind or silenced by having their speech derailed intentionally or otherwise. The content should not fall victim to style intended to distract the listener from other important points (lack of a point by the speaker or validity of a point by the opposition) 15%

# data[].attributes.body
There are 3 main areas:
1. Matter: (Content) (40 %)
This includes the arguments that are used.  Are they rational, reasonable and supported.  Have they been thought through fully (using the question method we covered in class)? And do the arguments support their overall side of the dabate.

Rebuttal is also part of the matter.   Do students understand and respond to the other team's arguments?

2. Method: (40 %)
How have they structured their argument, within each speaker's speach and also between speakers.  Does each argument have a clear introduction, support and conclussion (TEEL).  Do the speakers repeat each other or expand in different dirrections?

3. Manner: (20%)
How do they present the arguments.  Tone of voice, eye contact, persuasive techniques. Timing should also be considered.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Content 40%
The content needs to be well organized. It needs to be logical. It needs to cover all the bases of the argument, without leaving out obvious pitfalls/answers to counter-arguments.

2. Rebuttal 40%
The rebuttal is as important as content. Students should be graded equally on listening and responding intelligently and thoughtfully to each other's arguments. Without this we are talking about monologues and not debates.

3. Delivery. 20%
This would include style and manners. A student who was rude should lose points.
As well students who don't learn who they should stand when speaking to an audience should be deducted points. Presentation of the argument is an important factor.

(Note that language and grammar are not criteria. This is not an English test. This is a matter of being basically understood. If the English grammar is so bad it can't be understood, then that is graded as content/delivery)

# data[].attributes.body
Ina Bartash
1.Content
Content of the presentation is logical,relevant  to the clash,examples and statistics are presented,.40%
2.Form of delivery
Message is conveyed clearly and fluently,.relevant vocabulary is used,
presentation is well developed,
correct body language and eye content are used 40%
3.Rebuttal
refers to the ideas and arguments of the opponent 20%

# data[].attributes.body
1.  content of argument - 45 %- information is logical and pertinent, the examples are original and relelvat
2.  Form or presentation - 40 % - The message is conveyed in a clear and persuasive manner
3.  Class - 15% - the speaker is on clash with points given

# data[].attributes.body
1. Arguments: 50% students have worked as a team and developed clear arguments with examples. The clashes should be clear. The speeches should be well organised and the argument should be clear to the audience.
The 50% - can be broken down to the following- 20% clash points, 20% critical questions, 10% illustrations.
2. Rebuttal 10% Students have listened to the opposite team and have written a sensible rebuttal.
3. Presentation: 30% Clarity of speech, presentation style, eye contact, fluency of material, confidence and language.
4. Teamwork: 10% Has every member of the team made a contribution. Have they shared out the workload.
Paula Lieberman

# data[].attributes.body
Kais B. Shahin
1- Content in my opinion should get the highest percentage when adjudicating a public speech in a debating frame. should the information presented be valid and relevant to the core of the issue. T clashes made should be clearly met and presented to the crowd after being organized in a way that clearly conveys the sequence of the ideas to the crowd. Rebuttals of the opponent presented ideas should also be clearly enunciated. 50%
2- Presentation should count for thirty percent of the mark. The speaker should be able to convey the messages clearly and in an organized manner that could take the audience to his side of the debate, the speaker should prove confidence instead of hesitation and smoothness in transition between ideas and implying mastery of the subject and the ideas presented. 30%
3- Language: the speaker should show mastery of using accurate well organized language in terms of grammar, least amount of mistakes and no hesitation.
20%

# data[].attributes.body
dalitkoresh
Content:45% well developed arguments, relevant examples, organized information
language:30% lspeaks accurately and fluently, correct basic sentence structure
rebuttlal: 10% - rebuttals directly the opposition's arguments
delivery:15% speaking style,  body language, rhetorical device

# data[].attributes.headline
Knowledge -  Information presented in this debate was clear, accurate and thorough. The team clearly understood the topic in depth and presented their information forcefully and convincingly (40%)Reasoning - Arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight, logical fashion. Reasons are given to support the resolution. (20%)Rebuttal- Rebuttal directly addressed each of the opponents’ arguments with counterevidence. (20%)Communication-  Respect for Other Team, tone of voice, clarity of expression, precision of arguments all contribute to keeping audience’s attention and persuading them of the team’s case. (20%)

# data[].attributes.subject
Knowledge -  Information presented in this debate was clear, accurate and thorough. The team clearly understood the topic in depth and presented their information forcefully and convincingly (40%)Reasoning - Arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight, logical fashion. Reasons are given to support the resolution. (20%)Rebuttal- Rebuttal directly addressed each of the opponents’ arguments with counterevidence. (20%)Communication-  Respect for Other Team, tone of voice, clarity of expression, precision of arguments all contribute to keeping audience’s attention and persuading them of the team’s case. (20%)

# data[].attributes.body
Michal Kremer

# data[].attributes.body
Natalie Davis

1. Arguments are convincing. Explanation provides information and expands on message. Critical questions are asked until reach an answer. Have a relevant, clear and connected illustration. 40%
2.Presentation is clear, eye contact with the audience, no reading off a page, correct use of language 30%
3. Speaker is on clash (debate) or on point (public speaking) 20%
4.Speaker abides by time limits 10%

The main difference between a debate and public speaking is that in a debate, speakers, except for the first, should begin with a rebuttal. 10% - part of argument

# data[].attributes.headline
Criteria for adjudication1.	Content, 40%– what clashes were chosen by the debater, to what extend the debater knows and understands the subject matter. The argument and examples are well presented. 2.	Rebuttal, 30% – the rebuttal is well organized, to the point, gives appropriate examples. 3.	Presentation, 15% – the debater is fluent and coherent, maintains eye contact with the audience, uses visual aids when needed. He also has a relaxed body language and respectful appearance.4.	Language, 15% – the debater maintains the grammar rules, uses rich and appropriate vocabulary

# data[].attributes.subject
Criteria for adjudication1.	Content, 40%– what clashes were chosen by the debater, to what extend the debater knows and understands the subject matter. The argument and examples are well presented. 2.	Rebuttal, 30% – the rebuttal is well organized, to the point, gives appropriate examples. 3.	Presentation, 15% – the debater is fluent and coherent, maintains eye contact with the audience, uses visual aids when needed. He also has a relaxed body language and respectful appearance.4.	Language, 15% – the debater maintains the grammar rules, uses rich and appropriate vocabulary

# data[].attributes.body
Carmit Lempert

# data[].attributes.body
1. ARGUMENTS - This regards both the content of the speech and the research done for it.
2.  PRESENTATION - You have to judge how the content is put over (e.g.: Speaking style, Structure of the speech, Timing, Use of rhetorical devices, Humor, Eye contact, Body language).
3.   TEAMWORK AND STRATEGY -  Teamwork regards the linking with one’s team, the presence of a coherent team line. Strategy concerns the handling of points of information and the line of attack adopted.

Tatiana Iskin

# data[].attributes.body
Criteria for Adjudicating Debate by Victoria Yaretsky
1.Organization and clarity -50%
Viewpoints and responses are outlined both clearly and orderly.
2. Use of arguments -20%
Relevant reasons are given to support viewpoint.
3.Examples and facts are given to support reasons -10%
4. Use of Rebuttal -10%.
Arguments made by the other team are responded to and dealt with with effectively.
5. Presentation style -10%.
Tone of voice, use of gestures and level of enthusiasm convincing.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Content of the speech -
The speaker has chosen solid arguments that have been well researched and developed.  They have also included rebuttal.

2. Organisation and presentation - The speech is well-structured, the speaker presents himself well, is confident and maintains eye-contact with the audience.

3. Language - excellent use of persuasive techniques, rich vocabulary, hardly any errors of grammar.

Leah Silverman

# data[].attributes.headline
criteria for adjudicating debate/ Orit Gazit

# data[].attributes.subject
criteria for adjudicating debate/ Orit Gazit

# data[].attributes.body
Content (50%)

The topic is relevant

A topic that provide new insights for the audience

The ideas being expressed need to be organized in a logical way

Points are clearly stated and supported by examples

Presentation: (50%)

Use of voice -Speak clearly

Control of language -The language used should be appropriate to the topic, the audience and the situation

Deportment- a neat appearance, eye contact with the audience

# data[].attributes.body
1. Content = 50%: what you have to say, how convincing, logical, and to the point you are.
2. Presentation = 30%: it isn't enough to have something to say, but how you say it is just as crucial, in my eyes. This includes, body language, eye contact with audience members (and not just looking in the air), confidence, and true passion.
3. Language = 20%: vocabulary, grammar and correct sentence structure. Ultimately, the ability to convey a message.

# data[].attributes.body
1.       Organized and clear presentation – This criterion is very important as the messages have to be conveyed clearly so that all listeners can follow and understand fully. 50%

2.       Compelling arguments based on proficiency of the discussed material – This criterion is very important as the speaker should provide illustrations and examples based on gathered data which eventually enables participants to refute and rebuttal opposing arguments when necessary. 50%

Yaeli Davidov

# data[].attributes.body
1. Content 40% - Well researched and developed arguments (more than one) are clear, relevant to the topic and convincing. The arguments are supported by evidence/examples and include rebuttal to the other group when necessary.

2. Language 30% - The speaker uses the necessary and appropriate terms/vocabulary; conveys ideas clearly, uses correct sentence structures, correct grammar and speaks fluently.

3. Presentation 30% - Eye-contact with the audience, appropriate body language and intonation, polite behavior and respect the opinions of others. Information is delivered in a confident and convincing manner.

Elena Even-Simkin

# data[].attributes.body
Content 50%- The content of the speech addresses the matters being debated. The clash points are the focus of the speech. Examples are provided to substantiate points.
Rebuttal 20%- The speaker can speak spontaneously. The speaker responds well to points raised by the opposing team.
Proficiency 15%- The speaker speaks fluently using advanced grammar and vocabulary.
Presentation 15%- The speaker maintains eye contact with the audience and the opposing team. The speaker talks and does not read his/her speech. The speaker speaks  loudly and confidentially. The correct tone is used. Body language is also very important.

In the case of a speech, I would adjudicate as follows:
Content 60%
Proficiency 20%
Presentation 20%
by Denise Cohen.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Content 50% - the arguments are clear and relevant. They are illustrated by examples and include rebuttal to the other group.
2. Organization 15% - there is a clear structure from introduction to the presentation of additional reasons until the ending which summarizes the above.
3.  Presentation/delivery - Speech is clear, body language confident, eye contact is maintained including smiling occasionally.
4. Language - correct grammar is used as well as relevant and rich vocabulary.
Mikaela Lewak Feniger

# data[].attributes.body
1. Content /Organization
50% - the arguments given are sensible and on topic. The arugemts are supported by evidence or examples. The arguments are presented in a logical sturcture.
2. Presentation: 30% The information is presented in a clear convincing manner, speech is clear and engaging. Body language is appropriate, eye contact is used.
3. Language 20%. Is the language appropriate, the lexicon and register suitable. Have the students utilized their language skills.

# data[].attributes.body
(Debate)
1.Content  /30%/- how clear and original presented arguments are and how consistent the speech is. How pertinent or relevant to reality examples are, if they are used properly to illustrate the arguments. Is it easy to follow the speaker?
2. Presentation/25%/
Speaking style. Structure of the speech ( simple short sentences, repetition of the main arguments). Eye contact, body language, intonation.
3. Language /10 %/
Use of appropriate vocabulary and grammar structures.
4. Rebuttal /35%/
the way how the arguments of the opposing team are acknowledged and dealt with.

Criteria for adjudication a speech will not have a rebuttal section, it will be replaced by the timing. Percentages will be changed accordingly.

Victoria Oleshko

# data[].attributes.body
1. Organization: There is a clear introduction followed by supporting claims, evidence, examples and proof and finally a conclusion which sums up and rephrases the main claims. 50%
2. Proficiency: They speakers knew their topics very well and were able to give over what they prepared as well as responding to arguments raised by the opposition. 30 %
3, Delivery: information given over in a confident and convincing manner. With body language that matches. 10%
4. Language skills: use of appropriate level of language and lexicon. As well as proper pacing and modulation of the voice. 10%

Chava Magence

# data[].attributes.body
Organization- the arguments each argument is supported by illustration and examples. The transition between the arguments is clear. Using connectors such as first, in addition etc is beneficial with the sequence.  25%

Language- engaging variety of vocabulary. Another important component is accuracy especially syntax and grammar. 12%

Body language- keeping an eye contact. Making gestures. Acting naturally. 18%

Clarity- speaking at the right phase, not to slow or fast. Pronouncing the words correctly not omitting sounds and syllables.        22%

Relevance- all the arguments, illustration and in general everything which is said during the debate has to be relevant to the motion otherwise the audience loose the connection.       23%

All these criteria are crucial for understanding the debate. A debate has a saying and in order to convey it we must keeping sequences, the connection and making sure that what is said id clear.

# data[].attributes.body
50% - Content. Points made are logical and relevant to the issue being debated. There are no internal contradictions.
30% - Organization. Points are presented in a logical order and the presentation flows smoothly from point to point.
10%- Delivery. Arguments (rebuttals)  are presented with self-confidence and in a convincing manner. Important points are emphasized.
10%- Language Skills. Correct English is used including a rich vocabulary and advanced grammar structures

Boaz Falk

# data[].attributes.headline
Criteria for Adjudication:    1.Speaking Style - includes such elements as structure of the speech, use of rhetorical devices, use of humor or other emotions to capture the audience's attention. Eye contact is important, the speaker shouldn't read notes.          2.Content of a speech – how consistent the speech is, how original the arguments are. Relevancy to the topic.                          3.Timing - Being aware that time constraints necessitates members to craft their ideas into succinct messages, constructed for maximum impact, and presented with authority and confidence

# data[].attributes.subject
Criteria for Adjudication:    1.Speaking Style - includes such elements as structure of the speech, use of rhetorical devices, use of humor or other emotions to capture the audience's attention. Eye contact is important, the speaker shouldn't read notes.          2.Content of a speech – how consistent the speech is, how original the arguments are. Relevancy to the topic.                          3.Timing - Being aware that time constraints necessitates members to craft their ideas into succinct messages, constructed for maximum impact, and presented with authority and confidence

# data[].attributes.body
Elizabeth Muzikovskaya

# data[].attributes.body
1. Delivery- the tone, the voice, and the overall frame of the speech/ arguments is pleasant to the ear and things are said calmly, eloquently,  and respectfully without a belligerent attitude. 20

2. Relevancy- the speech/ arguments meet the other side of the coin and actually discuss the issue/ matter/argument without
avoiding or pointing fingers. 20

3. Content- short and simple things are said which enables the listener to follow and therefore to draw conclusions, to active critical thinking and to make a judgment based on things that were said sufficiently. 20

4. Coherency- examples, and illustrations are provided accordingly and concisely. 20

5. Grammar-20 (a cgroup's colleague)

Dafna Pinhas