1 ST DACET-INTERSCHOOL DEBATE RULES MODIFIED OXFORD-OREGON FORMAT (for reference use only)
|
|
- Magdalen Little
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 1. DEFINITIONS 1 ST DACET-INTERSCHOOL DEBATE RULES MODIFIED OXFORD-OREGON FORMAT (for reference use only) The following terms have the corresponding meanings: "Tournament Director" means the person appointed to administer the motions, predebate conferences, and assist the teams in defining the terms of the motions and set the parameters of the debate. "Proposition"or Motion means the topic for the debate, subject to the definition of terms to be agreed upon by the parties. Coach means an individual who at any time during the competition has responsibility for organizing or training a Team. Faculty Advisor means a faculty member of a participant school who at any time during the competition advises a Team. "Official Schedule" means the official timetable of the Competition, setting forth all relevant events and deadlines associated with the Competition. "Rules" means these Official Rules of the Competition and any applicable Rules prescribed by the Tournament Director. "Team" means a team of students recognized by the DACET Committee which competes in the Competition. 2. PARTICIPATION AND ELIGIBILITY 2.1 Team Eligibility (a) Students whose schools are member of DACET are eligible to participate in the Competition. All determinations of eligibility are in the discretion of the Makabayan core committee. (b) Each school may enter only one Team. (c) Any Team which utilizes an ineligible Team Member will be disqualified from the Competition. 2.2 Team Composition and Selection. A Team is composed of three (3) debaters.
2 3. DEBATE MECHANICS (3.1) There are two sides (called Affirmative and Negative) and three debaters per side. The motion is announced a week before the debate. The teams agree on the definition of terms and the parameters of the debate on the same date the sides are chosen and the motion is given. (3.2) The burden of proof, while real, is much less significant in this debate format. Because here, there are two cases on the floor The most compelling case wins. The affirmative does not carry a significant burden. Each debater is given two minutes to interpellate (cross-examine) the opposing debater. Each judge is also allowed to ask one question of each debater. (3.3) There are three (3) arguments on both sides Necessity, Beneficiality, Practicability. Each debater has four (4) minutes to deliver a constructive speech, rebut the speaker before him (except the First speaker of the Affirmative) and discuss his assigned argument. (3.4) The first speakers argue on the necessity (affirmative) or non-necessity (negative) of the motion. The second speakers on beneficiality and the third speakers on practicability (feasibility) of the motion. (3.5) The first affirmative speaker must make the affirmative s case crystal clear. He must discuss the status quo (whether they seek to defend it or change it) and why their proposal is necessary. (3.6) The first negative speaker will be given two minutes to interpellate the first affirmative. He must only ask categorical questions (answerable by yes or no) and arrange these questions in a cross-examination style to establish the weakness of the affirmative s case and/or establish the negative s case. He then has four minutes to clash with the points just made by the first affirmative and to advance his argument that the affirmative s proposal is not necessary. (3.7) The first affirmative will then have two minutes to interpellate the first negative speaker (also asking only categorical questions). He may use this opportunity to rebuild his case and/or destroy the negative s case. (3.8) The second affirmative has four minutes to clash with the opposition case and to deliver his constructive speech on the benefits of adopting their proposal. He will then be interpellated by the second negative speaker for two minutes. (3.9) The second negative speaker then has four minutes of his time to divide between clashing with the affirmative case and delivering his constructive speech on the repercussions or harmful effects of adopting the affirmative s proposal. He will then be interpellated by the second affirmative speaker for two minutes. (3.10) The third affirmative has four minutes to clash with the opposition case and to deliver his constructive speech on the feasibility of adopting their proposal. He will then be interpellated by the third negative speaker for two minutes. (3.11) The third negative speaker will then have two minutes of his time to clash with the affirmative case and to deliver his constructive speech on the impracticability of adopting the affirmative s proposal. He will then be interpellated by the third affirmative speaker for two minutes.
3 4. JUDGES 4.1 There are three adjudicators per debate. 4.2 Students may not act as judges, except LL.M. and other post-graduate degree candidates who are not directly affiliated with any Team participating in the debate at which they are judging Team faculty advisors or coaches, or other persons directly affiliated with a Team, may not act as judges in any debate until the Team has been eliminated from the Competition. 4.4 No judge should sit on a panel of any debate round involving a Team from a school with which the judge has an affiliation, acquaintance or other role which would create an appearance of impropriety, except in situations disclosed to and approved by the Tournament Director. Merely being an alumnus of a participating school does not constitute a violation Judges should disqualify themselves from judging a Team if they have a personal or professional relationship with the school or someone affiliated with that Team, and if that relationship might jeopardize their impartiality or create an appearance of impropriety. However, judges should not disqualify themselves from judging a round merely because they have an acquaintance with a Team Member or other affiliation or relationship with the school If a Team competing in a debate round wishes to inform the Tournament Director that a judge assigned to that Round might be disqualified under this Rules, it must inform the Tournament Director prior to the beginning of that debate round. The fact that a Team Member recognizes a judge is not itself sufficient to disqualify the judge. 4.7 Each judge is allowed to ask ONE categorical question (no follow-ups) of each debater, either during his speech or as he is being interpellated. The question and response must fall within the time limits of the speech delivery or interpellation period. 4.8 A Chief Adjudicator will be selected in each panel, whose special function is to rule on any conflicts that may arise during the debate (e.g. whether or not to allow a disputed line of questioning). The Chief Adjudicator is also charged with announcing the winner of the debate at the end of the show. Otherwise, the Chief Adjudicator s role and the weight of his scores are equal to those of the other judges. In the event of a tie, the Chief Adjudicator must confer with his co-adjudicators to break the tie. 5. COMPETITION COMMUNICATIONS 5.1. Only oral communications described in this Rules are permitted. In particular, no written communication or exhibits may be delivered by any Team Member to any judge Written communication during the debate round shall be limited to written communication among Team Members seated at the table. No other written communication may take place among the debaters, spectators or Team Members not present at the table.
4 5.3. During a debate round, debaters at the podium and those seated at the table may not operate laptop, cell phones, handheld or desktop computers or any other computing device for any purpose. 6. MARKING OF DEBATERS 6.1. The total score for each debater should be within the range of 61 to 85 points. It is extremely rare for a good debater to score a perfect 85, and just as rare for a poor debater to score the minimum An average debater will usually get a passing score, i.e. 71. Any grade higher or lower than the passing score is your discretion; provided it does not go beyond 85 or lower than There are four evaluation criteria: Constructive Speech or Matter (40 points), Persuasive Skills or Manner (30 points), Interpellation (30 points) MATTER: Content is marked out of a possible 40 points. The Matter mark is scored as if the speech was submitted in essay form. It has everything to do with logic, preparation, arguments, evidence cited, and analytic skill. It has nothing to do with the presentation. A mark of 28 is indicative of very little success and a mark of 35 is outstanding. A mark of is average Teams are required to conduct research and prepare their speeches. The formula is ARGUMENT + EVIDENCE = PROOF. An argument without citing an evidence to support the same is a mere assertion and does not merit any consideration As law students, the debaters are expected to use provisions of law and relevant jurisprudence in support of their arguments. Judges should also consider the quality of each argument and the relevance of the cited authorities MANNER: Manner or Presentation is marked out of a possible 30 points and judged from a purely public speaking perspective: How did the debater actually deliver the speech? Was the tone correct? The rate of speech? The pitch? The pauses? The eye contact? The confidence? Etc. The range is between 17 and 25 with a score of 17 being very weak and a mark of 25 being spectacular. A mark of is average Clarity and organization. Judges should listen to the debate as an average reasonable person with an understanding of the law. The ability of the debater to convey his/her ideas in a clear manner and with facility of expression are to be considered The use of humor, the manner of delivery, eye contact, voice, posture, and the ability of the debater to convince an audience, are some of the elements within the purview of the Manner criterion INTERPELLATION: This refers to the ability to cross-examine the opposing debater. This is marked on 30 points with the range being between 17 and 25. This refers to the success the debater has in clashing with the arguments of the opposing team. Has he thoroughly understood the presented arguments and have they responded effectively, logically and comprehensively in refutation.
5 6.11. This also includes courtesy and compliance with the rules. Judges should take note of how a debater asks his questions, the logical sequence of these questions, and their relevance. Debaters are advised to ask only categorical questions (i.e., those answerable by yes or no); otherwise broad questions (i.e., how or why questions) will elicit long explanations and sordid answers. Each debater is allowed two (2) minutes each to conduct his/her interpellation. END
GENERAL RULES FOR DEBATE
GENERAL RULES FOR DEBATE 01. A Director appointed by the organization conducting any debating tournament shall prescribe the resolutions, schedules, composition of teams, speaking times, and Procedural
More informationThe 7 th Annual Michael Kirby Contract Law Moot Melbourne, Australia September 2017 THE RULES
The 7 th Annual Michael Kirby Contract Law Moot Melbourne, Australia 25-28 September 2017 THE RULES Organised by: College of Law and Justice, Victoria University Moot Coordinator Vivi.Tan@vu.edu.au Ph:
More informationRound of the Americas
Rules of Procedure Round of the Americas Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University White Plains, New York March 16-18, 2018 International Criminal Court Trial Competition Please note: These rules
More informationSECTION 1001: CROSS EXAMINATION DEBATE
SECTION 1001: CROSS EXAMINATION DEBATE (a) THE CONTEST. (1) Purpose. The purpose of this contest is to train the student to analyze a problem, conduct thorough and relevant research, and utilize principles
More informationNever go to a competition until first reading and learning the contest rules.
Rules And TouRnAmenT procedures Never go to a competition until first reading and learning the contest rules. Section 1000: SPEECH (a) EVENTS AND ENTRIES. The UIL speech program shall consist of events
More informationInternational & European Tax Moot Court Competition Official Rules
International & European Tax Moot Court Competition Official Rules 2018-2019 Part I: General Provisions Article 1. The Competition 1.1. The International & European Tax Moot Court Competition (hereafter
More informationOctober 4, rd Annual Dean Jerome Prince Memorial Evidence Competition
Meredith Cohen 2018 Prince Competition Coordinator October 4, 2017 33 rd Annual Dean Jerome Prince Memorial Evidence Competition Dear Moot Court Board Director: The Brooklyn Law School Moot Court Honor
More informationRound of the Americas
Rules of Procedure Round of the Americas Pace Law School White Plains, NY March 1-3, 2013 International Criminal Court Trial Competition Please note: These rules apply to the Round of the Americas held
More informationInaugural Hon. Michael Kirby Contract Law Moot. Melbourne, Australia September 2011 THE RULES
Inaugural Hon. Michael Kirby Contract Law Moot Melbourne, Australia 28-30 September 2011 THE RULES Organised by: Victoria Law School Victoria University 1 INTRODUCTION I. The Hon. Michael Kirby Contract
More informationInternational Migration and Refugee Law Moot Court VU Amsterdam Migration Law Clinic 2019 RULES
International Migration and Refugee Law Moot Court VU Amsterdam Migration Law Clinic 2019 RULES 1 Content 1. General... 4 1.1 Moot court Overview... 4 1.2 Timetable... 4 1.3 Registration... 4 1.4 Team
More informationTHE OFFICIAL BLACK LAW STUDENTS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA (BLSAC) JULIUS ISAAC ALEXANDER DIVERSITY MOOT RULES Academic Year
THE OFFICIAL BLACK LAW STUDENTS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA (BLSAC) JULIUS ISAAC ALEXANDER DIVERSITY MOOT RULES 2012 2013 Academic Year Preamble The BLSAC Diversity Moot is designed to promote advocacy and excellence
More informationRULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE LEIDEN-SARIN INTERNATIONAL AIR LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION (August 2015)
RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE LEIDEN-SARIN INTERNATIONAL AIR LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION (August 2015) Chapter I. General Provisions Article 1 Function a. The present Rules govern the procedure of the Leiden-Sarin
More informationCross-Examination Debating
International Independent Schools Public Speaking Competition 2014 Cross-Examination Debating Directions: Please write comments if there is sufficient time. These sheets will be returned to the students
More informationRules Change PROPOSALS for the OHSSL to consider, April 2018 Official Ballot State Speech
Rules Change PROPOSALS for the OHSSL to consider, April 2018 Official Ballot State Speech 1. Proposal to require the Affirmative to affirm the resolution in Parliamentary Debate Current Rule : 13.3.3.
More informationArticle I. Function. Article II. Organisation
International Rules of Procedure Chapter I. General Provisions Article I. Function 1. The Telders International Law Moot Court Competition (hereinafter to be referred to as the Competition ) shall be held
More informationPREPARED PUBLIC SPEAKING LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT EVENT
PREPARED PUBLIC SPEAKING LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT EVENT RULES AND REGULATIONS INDIVIDUAL COMPETITION ALABAMA FFA ASSOCIATION TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose... 1 Eligibility and Regulations... 1 State Awards...
More informationAn Introduction to Academic Debate
Acknowledgements An Introduction to Academic Debate This paper owes a great deal to many people and organizations, including: David Bennett; Debate and Speech Association of B.C., A Guide to the Elements
More informationRules of Procedure. International Criminal Court Moot Court Competition ICC Moot Court Competition
Rules of Procedure International Criminal Court Moot Court Competition 2015 Table of Contents Chapter 1: General Rules... 3 Art. 1 - Object... 3 Art. 2 - Subject... 3 Art. 3 - Interpretation of the Rules...
More informationContest Rules for Lincoln-Douglas Debate
Contest Rules for Lincoln-Douglas Debate Section 1000: SPEECH (a) EVENTS AND ENTRIES. The UIL speech program shall consist of events divided into three basic skill categories: debate, oral interpretation
More informationILLINOIS ASSOCIATION FFA Rules for Prepared Public Speaking CDE
ILLINOIS ASSOCIATION FFA Rules for Prepared Public Speaking CDE Revised August 2004 Eligibility 1. The CDE is open to students who are regularly enrolled in agricultural education classes and who are active
More information7 minutes Interpretation of motion or Prime Minister
SAMBA Worlds Format Debating Guidelines -- DRAFT Drafted by Alfred Snider, University of Vermont Modeled on WUDC rules, with some changes Speech Speaker Length Content 1 1 st Govt Member 7 minutes Interpretation
More informationOfficial Rules of the National Professional Responsibility Moot Court Competition
Official Rules of the National Professional Responsibility Moot Court Competition I. Executive Board A. "Executive Board" Defined The Executive Board is responsible for organizing and administering the
More informationDebate Terms and Conditions
2018-2019 Debate Terms and Conditions In accordance with Section 1.450 of the IHSA Constitution, the Board of Directors has approved the Terms and Conditions governing the 2018-2019 IHSA Debate Tournament
More informationMichigan State University College of Law Moot Court & Advocacy Board
Michigan State University College of Law Moot Court & Advocacy Board Statement of Purpose The Moot Court & Advocacy Board at Michigan State University College of Law is an intensive program of advocacy
More information2018 Tullis Moot Court Competition Rules
2018 Tullis Moot Court Competition Rules 1. Teams 1.1. Every participating student shall participate in this Competition through participation in a Tullis team. Tullis Teams must consist of two second-year
More information9TH GRADE PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE CDE
9TH GRADE PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE CDE PURPOSE The purpose of the 9th Grade Parliamentary Procedure CDE is to encourage 9th grade students to learn to effectively participate in a business meeting and to
More informationChange the amount of time for the additional questions to three minutes.
Contest: Proposed By: Hugh Mooney, CDE The current wording of rule I. is below. Competition shall be at two levels. There shall be a novice contest and a varsity contest. Only FFA members in the 9 th or
More informationDEBATE JUDGING MANUAL
Idaho High School Activities Association Ty Jones, Executive Director Julie Hammons, Assistant Director Tel: (208)375-7027 Fax: (208)322-5505 8011 Ustick Rd. Boise, ID 83704 E-mail: admin@idhsaa.org 2014-2015
More informationC&CR Section 1008: CONGRESS
C&CR Section 1008: CONGRESS (a) (b) THE CONTEST. (1) Purpose. The purpose of this contest is to encourage the student to understand real-world social and political policies debated within the framework
More informationParliamentary Procedure LDE
Parliamentary Procedure LDE Rev. Nov 2018 Purpose The purpose of the Parliamentary Procedure LDE is to encourage students to effectively participate in a business meeting and to assist in the development
More informationThe Wilson Moot Official Rules 2018
W M ilson oot The Wilson Moot Official Rules 2018 Table of Contents Page I. INTERPRETATION... - 1 - A. Purposes and Objectives...- 1 - B. Interpretation of Rules...- 1-1. Referees... - 1-2. Rules...- 1-3.
More informationFRANK A. SCHRECK GAMING LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION
I E T Y O F A D V O C A C S O T E S 3RD ANNUAL FRANK A. SCHRECK GAMING LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2018 COMPETITION RULES 4505 S. Maryland Parkway, Las Vegas, Nevada 89154 SchreckMCC@law.unlv.edu https://www.law.unlv.edu/frank-schreck-gaming-law-moot-court-competition
More informationAPPENDIX B: BRIEF WRITING COMPETITION AMCA BRIEF WRITING COMPETITION RULES AMCA BRIEF WRITING COMPETITION CERTIFICATION FORM
APPENDIX B: BRIEF WRITING COMPETITION The AMCA National Brief Writing Competition is separate from the Oral Argument Competition at the National Tournament. Any two-person team meeting eligibility rules
More informationMOCK TRIAL COMPETITION RULES
MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION RULES The annual Mock Trial Competition is governed by the rules set forth below. These rules are designed to ensure excellence in presentation and fairness in scoring all trials
More informationI. INDIANA HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL RULES OF COMPETITION
I. INDIANA HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL RULES OF COMPETITION A. THE PROBLEM Rule 1. Rules All trials will be governed by the Indiana Mock Trial Rules of Competition and the Federal Rules of Evidence (Mock Trial
More informationThe Julius Alexander Isaac Diversity Moot Official Rules 2016 Black Law Students Association of Canada I. INTERPRETATION
The Julius Alexander Isaac Diversity Moot Official Rules 2016 Black Law Students Association of Canada A. Purposes and Objectives I. INTERPRETATION The Julius Alexander Isaac Moot is administered by the
More informationTHE RULES WILLMS & SHIER ENVIRONMENTAL LAW MOOT OFFICIAL COMPETITION RULES 2017
THE RULES WILLMS & SHIER ENVIRONMENTAL LAW MOOT OFFICIAL COMPETITION RULES 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 PURPOSE...1 2 DEFINITIONS...1 3 INTERPRETATION...1 3.1 REFEREE... 1 3.2 AUTHORITY TO INTERPRET THE RULES...
More informationEuropean Law Moot Court The Rules
European Law Moot Court Rules Overhaul made by Georges Vallindas, President, Elske Raedts, Written Proceedings Phase Manager, and the European Law Moot Court Society in 2015. To use, reproduce and get
More informationCHARTER. In order to further these aims, all participating nations agree that:
WORLD SCHOOLS DEBATING CHAMPIONSHIPS CHARTER The aims of the World Schools Debating Championships are: To achieve excellence in debating To encourage debating throughout the world To promote international
More informationStudent Text Student Practice Book Activities and Projects
English Language Arts III Correlation with TEKS 110.39. English Language Arts and Reading, English IV (One Credit), Adopted 2017. Knowledge and skills. Student Text Student Practice Book Activities and
More informationPolicy Debate Guidance Information
Policy Debate Guidance Information SCOPE This document contains guidance information for coaches, parents and competitors. The information contained herein, although developed by the CCA Debate Committee
More informationFair Play Policy and Procedures
1 Fair Play Policy and Procedures Issued: February 1998 1 st Revision: September 1998 2 nd Revision: November 1999 3 rd Revision: August 2006 Approved by the Board of Directors Basketball Ontario August
More informationFFA Creed Speaking CDE
FFA Creed Speaking CDE Regional Event: Regional FFA Day Purpose The FFA Creed outlines the organization s beliefs regarding the industry of agriculture, FFA membership and the value of citizenship and
More informationPARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE DOROTHY L. TRAVIS AWARD
PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE DOROTHY L. TRAVIS AWARD The Dorothy L. Travis Award recognizes FBLA members who demonstrate knowledge of the principles of parliamentary procedure. This event is based on team rather
More informationT EXAS HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL C OMPETITION R ULES OF THE C OMPETITION
T EXAS HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL C OMPETITION R ULES OF THE C OMPETITION 2017-2018 The Texas High School Mock Trial Competition is governed by the Rules of the Competition and the Texas High School Mock Trial
More informationWORLD SCHOOLS DEBATING CHAMPIONSHIPS TOURNAMENT COMMITTEE AND DEBATE RULES
WORLD SCHOOLS DEBATING CHAMPIONSHIPS TOURNAMENT COMMITTEE AND DEBATE RULES Part One - The Status of These Rules 1.1 The Status of These Rules These rules govern - any debating tournament organised by the
More informationParliamentary Procedure Handbook
Parliamentary Procedure Handbook 2017-2021 PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE HANDBOOK 2017 2021 2 Purpose The purpose of the parliamentary procedure leadership development event is to encourage students to learn
More informationThe American Legion High School Oratorical Scholarship Program
The American Legion High School Oratorical Scholarship Program A Constitutional Speech Contest 2018 General information The purpose of The American Legion High School Oratorical Scholarship Program A Constitutional
More informationORGANIZING YOUR FFA MEETINGS. Objective: Understanding parliamentary procedure and public speaking skills.
ORGANIZING YOUR FFA MEETINGS Objective: Understanding parliamentary procedure and public speaking skills. WHAT IS PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE? Parliamentary procedure is a systematic way of organizing meetings.
More informationCONSTITUTION OF AN ORGANIZING COMMITTEE CONDUCT OF THE INTERNAL TRIAL ADVOCACY RANKING ROUNDS
RULES INTERNAL TRIAL ADVOCACY RANKING ROUNDS 2016 2017 CONSTITUTION OF AN ORGANIZING COMMITTEE 1. An organizing committee independent of the participants of the Internal Trial Advocacy Ranking Rounds2016
More informationKYA CHAIR & PARLIAMENTARIAN PACKET
KYA CHAIR & PARLIAMENTARIAN PACKET Thank you for serving as a Chair or Parliamentarian at KYA! This packet includes everything you ll need to successfully lead and facilitate your committee or chamber.
More informationINSTRUCTIONS TO DISTRICT DIRECTORS
TO: Directors of District Speech Contests FROM: Debra Velder, Associate Director SUBJECT: District Speech Contest DATE: January 2018 It is the intent of the NSAA and the Board of Directors to conduct the
More informationCLOSING ARGUMENT COMPETITION 2014 RULES
CLOSING ARGUMENT COMPETITION 2014 RULES PRESENTED BY HOSTED BY Northwestern University School of Law Table of Contents RULE I. ORGANIZATION... 3 RULE II. PARTICIPATION... 3 A. Competitor Eligibility....
More informationPARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT EVENT
PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT EVENT RULES AND REGULATIONS TEAM COMPETITION ALABAMA FFA ASSOCIATION TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose...2 Eligibility & Regulations...2 State Awards...2 Sponsors...2
More informationRULES OF THE WORLD SCHOOLS DEBATING CHAMPIONSHIPS
RULES OF THE WORLD SCHOOLS DEBATING CHAMPIONSHIPS Part Five Debating and Adjudication 11. Format 11.1.1 The format for debates in the Championships is three speakers a side with only two teams in each
More information4 TH UPES NATIONALTRIAL ADVOCACY COMPETITION RULES, 2018
4 TH UPES NATIONALTRIAL ADVOCACY COMPETITION RULES, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 TH UPES NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY COMPETITION, 2018... 1 CHAPTER 1: THE COMPETITION... 3 I. AIM AND PURPOSE... 3 II. LANGUAGE:...
More informationTHE LASKIN 2018 OFFICIAL RULES
THE LASKIN 2018 OFFICIAL RULES Table of Contents 1. GENERAL... 1 1.01 Overview... 1 1.02 Purposes and Objectives of the Competition... 1 1.03 Definitions... 1 1.04 Administration of the Competition...
More information2 nd DR. GURJEET SINGH MEMORIAL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY AND JUDICIAL ACADEMY, ASSAM 20 th - 22 nd APRIL, 2018
2 nd DR. GURJEET SINGH MEMORIAL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2018 NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY AND JUDICIAL ACADEMY, ASSAM 20 th - 22 nd APRIL, 2018 RULES & REGULATIONS KNOWLEDGE PARTNERS PART I DEFINITIONS
More informationAsia-Pacific Moot Court Rounds 2013 OFFICIAL RULES (2013)
Asia-Pacific Moot Court Rounds 2013-4th d Inter-university Round in Japan - OFFICIAL RULES (2013) GENERAL 1. The Moot Court Competition shall be conducted under the auspices of the International Committee
More informationRULES AND REGULATIONS 2 ND OIC INTERVARSITY DEBATING CHAMPIONSHIP 2012
RULES AND REGULATIONS 2 ND OIC INTERVARSITY DEBATING CHAMPIONSHIP 2012 1. GENERAL 1.1 This guideline is applicable for the OIC Intervarsity Debating Championship 2012 hosted by the International Islamic
More informationIndiana High School Mock Trial 2018 Rules of Competition
Indiana High School Mock Trial 2018 Rules of Competition Article I Article II Article III Article IV Article V Article VI Indiana High School Mock Trial Competition Teams Case Trial Judges and Scoring
More informationNCTA Disciplinary Procedure
NCTA Disciplinary Procedure The Nebraska College of Technical Agriculture (NCTA) Disciplinary Procedure is adapted for NCTA from Article IV: Student Code of Conduct Disciplinary Procedures of the UNL Student
More informationREPUBLICAN PARTY OF MINNESOTA Proposed 2018 State Convention Rules
REPUBLICAN PARTY OF MINNESOTA Proposed 2018 State Convention Rules Preface The Constitution of the Republican Party of Minnesota (the Constitution ) mandates several Convention rules that can neither be
More informationARCHDALE DEBATING COMPETITION
ARCHDALE DEBATING COMPETITION Operations Manual Version 3.9 May, 2015 Revised Guidelines 290515.Docx Page 1 of 30 Last Updated May 2015 PART I: INTRODUCTION 3 1 The Role of AHIGS 3 PART II: THE CONDUCT
More informationOur topics. Disclaimer. Unanimous consent. I. Meeting discussion. Thank you ENDURIS for your sponsorship of this presentation!
Mastering PFD Board Meetings Ann G. Macfarlane, Professional Registered Parliamentarian Jurassic Parliament Association of Washington State Public Facilities Districts September 28, 2017 Lynnwood, Washington
More informationANIMAL SCIENCE PUBLIC SPEAKING
ANIMAL SCIENCE PUBLIC SPEAKING Individual Event IMPORTANT NOTE Please thoroughly read the General CDE Rules Section at the beginning of this handbook for complete rules and procedures that are relevant
More informationPennsylvania High School Speech League BYLAWS
Pennsylvania High School Speech League BYLAWS Revised: January, 2018 Pennsylvania High School Speech League Contents Article B1 - Cross-Exam Debate Rules... 3 Article B2 Novice Debate... 5 Article B3 Lincoln
More informationIntegrity Matters ROLE OF THE MODERATOR
Integrity Matters ROLE OF THE MODERATOR The role of The Moderator is to control the debate and ensure it is conducted in an orderly and effective manner. The Moderator should sit between the two teams.
More information(B) Serve as a point of contact between the Board and the University of Richmond School of Law (the Law School );
Moot Court Bylaws, last updated January 18, 2016. I. The Executive Board. A. Officers. The Executive Board of the Moot Court Board (the Executive Board ) shall consist of the following officers: 1. President.
More informationMOOT COURT BOARD CONSTITUTION
I. Statement of Purpose MOOT COURT BOARD CONSTITUTION The University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law Moot Court Board (the Board ) is a self-governing body composed of third year day and fourth
More informationSPEECH/DEBATE Policies & Guidelines
2017 18 UHSAA HANDBOOK SPEECH & DEBATE/THEATRE SPEECH/DEBATE Policies & Guidelines CHAPTER I UHSAA Policies Article I Recommendations Section 1: Region Representative Each region shall elect one member
More informationCONSTITUTION OF THE FACULTY SENATE 3/26/01 (amended 03/07/17)
CONSTITUTION OF THE FACULTY SENATE 3/26/01 (amended 03/07/17) PREAMBLE The faculty of the University of Wisconsin-Superior, acting under its authority in Chapter 36 of the Wisconsin Statutes, hereby adopts
More informationCENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW AND JUSTICE INTERNATIONAL MOOT COMPETITION ON MARITIME ARBITRATION MARCH 2011 THE RULES MOOT DIRECTOR DMYTRO KOVAL
CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW AND JUSTICE INTERNATIONAL MOOT COMPETITION ON MARITIME ARBITRATION 18-20 MARCH 2011 THE RULES MOOT DIRECTOR DMYTRO KOVAL EMAIL: dmytriy.koval@gmail.com MOOT COORDINATOR ANTHONY
More informationNovice Judge 1 Area: Opening ceremonies (100 points) Judge 1 Area: Discussion (40 points) Judge 1 Area: Conclusion (40 points)
Minnesota FFA Parliamentary Procedure Judging Manual (2013) The purpose of this manual is to ensure quality, uniform judging of the Parliamentary Procedure Event. Teams may also use the manual as a guide
More informationARTICLE XI: The State Tournament - Debate Rules
ARTICLE XI: The State Tournament - Debate Rules Section 1. Rules for All Forms of Debate A. Resolutions 1. Policy Debate The policy debate resolution shall be the national high school debate resolution.
More informationTwo team members may repeat and may have entered this event at a previous Region Leadership Conference.
Parliamentary Procedure Dorothy L. Travis Award The Dorothy L. Travis Award recognizes FBLA members who demonstrate knowledge of the principles of parliamentary procedure. This event is based on team rather
More informationAsia-Pacific Moot Court Rounds 2017 OFFICIAL RULES (2017)
Asia-Pacific Moot Court Rounds 2017-8 th Inter-university Round in Japan - OFFICIAL RULES (2017) GENERAL 1. The Moot Court Competition shall be conducted under the auspices of the International Committee
More informationOregon School Activities Association. Speech Handbook. Peter Weber, Publisher Brad Garrett, Editor
2017 2018 Oregon School Activities Association Speech Handbook Peter Weber, Publisher Brad Garrett, Editor Published by OREGON SCHOOL ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATION 25200 SW Parkway, Suite 1 Wilsonville, OR 97070
More informationKSHAN 13 th NATIONAL TRIAL & APPELLATE MOOT COURT COMPETITION th, 17th & 18th MARCH 18 RULES
KSHAN 13 th NATIONAL TRIAL & APPELLATE MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2018 16th, 17th & 18th MARCH 18 RULES VENUE G. H. RAISONI LAW SCHOOL 345, SHRADDHA HOUSE, KINGSWAY, NAGPUR- 440014, MAHARASHTRA E- mail:- raisonilawschool@gmail.com
More informationSenior Parliamentary Procedure
Senior Parliamentary Procedure Objective Students will be able to demonstrate knowledge of parliamentary procedure in order to conduct an orderly and efficient meeting; transact business and present logical,
More informationRULES OF THE COMPETITION
19 TH D.M. HARISH MEMORIAL GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE INTERNATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018 9 TH - 11 TH FEBRUARY, 2018 RULES OF THE COMPETITION HOSTED BY: IN ASSOCIATION WITH: D. M. HARISH FOUNDATION
More informationRULES AND REGULATIONS
RULES AND REGULATIONS Introduction Moot courts or mock trials are usually based on hypothetical cases involving emerging or unsettled areas of law. I. Aim and Purpose a. To expose students pursuing the
More informationPARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT EVENT
PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT EVENT RULES AND REGULATIONS TEAM COMPETITION ALABAMA FFA ASSOCIATION TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose...2 Eligibility & Regulations...2 State Awards...2 Sponsors...2
More informationThe Constitution of the Mock Trial Association of Notre Dame Updated 10/18/2010
The Constitution of the Mock Trial Association of Notre Dame Updated 10/18/2010 I. Organization and Membership A. Name; Purpose 1. The name of this organization shall be the Mock Trial Association of Notre
More informationNational Christian Forensics and Communications Association. Judging Team Policy Debate Manual
National Christian Forensics and Communications Association Judging Team Policy Debate Manual Judging A Debate Round Thank you for your willingness to judge debate. Your support is greatly appreciated
More informationFLORIDA FORENSIC LEAGUE, INC. CONGRESSIONAL DEBATE MANUAL
FLORIDA FORENSIC LEAGUE, INC. CONGRESSIONAL DEBATE MANUAL 2015-16 This document governs all Congressional Debate competitions sanctioned by Florida Forensic League, Inc. These guidelines have been prepared
More informationPARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE
PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE PURPOSE The purpose of the Parliamentary Procedure Event is to encourage proficient participation in the conduct of the business of an organization. OBJECTIVES** Students will be
More informationRULES OF THE COMPETITION
20 TH D.M. HARISH MEMORIAL GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE INTERNATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2019 8 TH - 10 TH FEBRUARY, 2019 RULES OF THE COMPETITION HOSTED BY: IN ASSOCIATION WITH: D. M. HARISH FOUNDATION
More informationDebating English Language Arts Mr. Mansour
What is a debate? Debating English Language Arts Mr. Mansour A Debate is an argument with rules. It is a formal process which allows two or more individuals with opposing views to discuss and decide issues
More informationTwelfth Annual WILLEM C. VIS INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION MOOT. Vienna, Austria. October March Oral Arguments March 2005
Twelfth Annual WILLEM C. VIS INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION MOOT Vienna, Austria October 2004 - March 2005 Oral Arguments 18-24 March 2005 THE RULES Organized by: Institute of International Commercial
More informationMinnesota FFA NOVICE PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE EVENT
Minnesota FFA NOVICE PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE EVENT PURPOSE: The Novice Parliamentary Procedure Event is designed to introduce FFA members to parliamentary procedure and how to conduct efficient meeting.
More informationLOCAL ARBITRATION MOOT COMPETITION 2017 PROCEDURAL RULES. TITLE I General Rules
LOCAL ARBITRATION MOOT COMPETITION 2017 PROCEDURAL RULES TITLE I General Rules PART I Organization and structure Art. 1 The Local Arbitration Competition (hereinafter LAMC ) is a team Moot Court Competition
More informationCompetencies This event is composed of two (2) parts: completion of an objective test and a performance.
Parliamentary Procedure Dorothy L. Travis Award The Dorothy L. Travis Award recognizes FBLA members who demonstrate knowledge of the principles of parliamentary procedure. This event is based on team rather
More informationThe American Legion High School Oratorical Scholarship Program
The American Legion High School Oratorical Scholarship Program A Constitutional Speech Contest 2019 General information The purpose of The American Legion High School Oratorical Scholarship Program A Constitutional
More informationVITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION
VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON MARCH 1-3, 2019 PRIZE MONEY RS. 100000 /- IS SPONSORED BY THE COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA. CONTENT MOOT PROPOSITION.. 2 RULES OF THE COMPETITION....6 IMPORTANT
More information42 nd Annual ROBERT F. WAGNER NATIONAL LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION
N EW Y O R K L A W S C H O O L M OO T C O U RT A S S O C I AT I O N 42 nd Annual ROBERT F. WAGNER NATIONAL LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2018 COMPETITION RULES N EW Y O R K L A W S C H
More informationDebate. Time Limits for Policy Debate 8 minutes constructive speeches 3 minutes cross-examination 5 minutes rebuttal 5 minutes down time
Debate Season Tournament Limitations 1. A school or individual may compete in up to ten tournaments for both speech and debate (ex. 3 debate only, 5 speech/debate combined, and 2 speech only). A tournament
More informationThe Middle Tennessee State University Electoral Act Student Government Association
The Middle Tennessee State University Electoral Act Student Government Association Purpose: To establish clear, proper, and equitable procedures for conducting university elections and to establish minimum
More informationFor questions not answered here, please contact the national office at or call (920)
2018-2019 Updated December 5, 2018 SECTION 3: Pilot District Tournament Operations Manual The National Speech & Debate Association is committed to providing every student with the opportunity to qualify
More informationChapter A3 Debate Rules
This chapter addresses the framework, standards, and requirements for CCNW Team Policy Debate. It is intended to cover issues related to what occurs within the debate round. Unless otherwise stated, the
More information