Account

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

Serial10
Date Updated05/05/2023
CategoryImpromptu Speech
Contestant Name(s)Jordan Betzle
Nature of Concern
  • Point deduction for the same issue under different criteria, WITHOUT connecting that issue to each criterion
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/Time4/21/23

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 Number0