The “resolution” column will show the outcome of the committee’s deliberations, once added by the chair/Speech Advisor.
Number of records to review: 13
Serial | 10 |
---|---|
Date Updated | 05/05/2023 |
Category | Impromptu Speech |
Contestant Name(s) | Jordan Betzle |
Nature of Concern |
|
Describe concern | She was double docked / had double jeopardy for topic and content/organization. If you wouldn’t mind taking a look at it to see if she should be getting points back? |
What adjudicator specifically wrote or did | “You were lacking a central point, so it felt like you were wandering around a bit, which makes having a clear intro, body and conclusion difficult. *You stayed on topic but there was a lack of focus. Be sure to have a plan in mind. |
Evaluation Sheet(s) | Betzle.pdf |
Round/Time | 4/21/23 |
Committee Review | |
Initial Advisor Comments | The deductions are related to the criteria being addressed. The first deduction was for a lack of focus. The second area of deduction was for lack of a central point which led to an unclear, introduction, body, and conclusion. |
Resolution: | Denied |
Disposition | The deductions are related to the criteria being addressed. The first deduction was for a lack of focus. The second area of deduction was for lack of a central point which led to an unclear, introduction, body, and conclusion. The referee committee believes the adjudicator could have written comments more clearly to communicate the difference between central point and lack of focus. But, the adjudicator does link comments about central point to an unclear, introduction, body, and conclusion. The first deduction is for a lack of focus in addressing the prompt and response not being well-defined. |
Result Number | 0 |