Judges as the Centrality of Forensics: An Examination of Norms & Training in Forensics Adjudication.
Saved in:
| Title: | Judges as the Centrality of Forensics: An Examination of Norms & Training in Forensics Adjudication. |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Jensen, Gina |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 25 |
| Publication Date: | 1997 |
| Document Type: | Reports - Research Speeches/Meeting Papers |
| Descriptors: | Communication Research, Debate, Debate Format, Higher Education, Judges, Oral Interpretation, Pilot Projects |
| Geographic Terms: | U.S.; Missouri |
| Abstract: | A pilot study analyzed oral interpretation ballots collected at two college forensics tournaments to determine the average number and classifications of comments on the ballots. A total of 1,737 comments from 304 ballots of oral interpretation events (prose, poetry, program, duo, and dramatic) were analyzed. Results indicated a mean of 5.71 comments per ballot and a total of 25 classifications of comments (including vocal delivery, introduction, characterization, emotion, and physical delivery). Findings suggest that interpretation ballots are productive tools for facilitating student improvement. On the whole, judges try to use the ballot as an educational tool. Further research should focus on specific events in the hopes of better understanding each of the oral interpretation arenas. (Contains a table of data and 25 references.) (RS) |
| Notes: | Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Communication Association (83rd, Chicago, IL, November 19-23, 1997). |
| Journal Code: | RIEAPR1999 |
| Entry Date: | 1999 |
| Accession Number: | ED424597 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | A pilot study analyzed oral interpretation ballots collected at two college forensics tournaments to determine the average number and classifications of comments on the ballots. A total of 1,737 comments from 304 ballots of oral interpretation events (prose, poetry, program, duo, and dramatic) were analyzed. Results indicated a mean of 5.71 comments per ballot and a total of 25 classifications of comments (including vocal delivery, introduction, characterization, emotion, and physical delivery). Findings suggest that interpretation ballots are productive tools for facilitating student improvement. On the whole, judges try to use the ballot as an educational tool. Further research should focus on specific events in the hopes of better understanding each of the oral interpretation arenas. (Contains a table of data and 25 references.) (RS) |
|---|
