Judging Gradings

[kdc4]

Could anyone interested in being graded as a judge by the SSDC please send your debating CVs to kdc4.

Cheers,
-Doug

[exnihilo]

I see these and I often wonder what happens to those who were once graded but who for some unexplained* reason in the 2002-2004 period were simple airbrushed from the record? Should persons like myself, Mr Bibby, Mr Duthie and Mr Wilson resubmit ourselves for approval by the current apparatchiks? Should we stand by our earlier Grade 2 ratings or should we simply eschew?


(* and I use the word 'unexplained' quite wrongly)

[ChrisH]

According to the SSDC website gradings lapse after a set period of time:

Grade 1 - 5 years
Grade 2 - 2 years
Grade 3 - Must compete / adjudicate in at least one full IV per academic year, or grading is surrendered.
Grade 4 - Base level of adjudicator. Removed after 2 years unless re-registered.

The rules on re-registering are rather vague, Doug might know more

[kdc4]

I'm not entirely sure. From what I can gather, the SSDC's rules are fairly flexible.

I imagine that individuals who continue to judge events following graduation can retain their status fairly easily.

[exnihilo]

Yes, it wasn't so much retaining it after as during my time in St Andrews, the rules changed and those who had gradings under the old rules could keep them if their institution backed them, mine chose not to. I am far from being alone in this situation.

[exnihilo]

Yes, it wasn't so much retaining it after as during my time in St Andrews, the rules changed and those who had gradings under the old rules could keep them if their institution backed them, mine chose not to. I am far from being alone in this situation. Incidentally, having been around as long as I have, and helped fund, revive and keep alive the SSDC, I don't actually give a monkey's about what grade they do or do not give me.

[Mr Comedy]

Can I go to grade 2 please

[hr]

"I am in no way interested in immortality, but only in the taste of tea. " -Lu Tung

[John Stewart]

Well, seeing as I defined the judging criteria, a quick explanation:

After a couple of years you drop off the list to reflect:

1. The fact that you aren't likely to be up to date with judging practice on the circuit. (It does change)
2. The fact that you are inherently less likely to turn up at a random competition to judge (so you don't need a grading - assuming you are invited to judge something, the organiser will have a good idea how good a judge they think you are).
3. Sheer practicality - an ever lengthening list of judges is very hard to maintain, leading to discrepancies and omissions. It's also that much harder to verify judging credentials that are a decade old. Who can verify you were a semi-finalist at the Random IV?

So how do you get on the list / maintain your listing?

You have to be nominated by an SSDC institution, who will either:

1. Put you on the list as a grade 3/4 judge, as this list is determined by institutions themselves.
2. Propose you to the SSDC for grade 1/2 status, which will be voted on by the SSDC.

And the basic gist of the criteria is:

Grade 1: Worlds/Euros break judge standard.
Grade 2: IV Final judge standard.
Grade 3: Competent and experienced.
Grade 4: Beginner

There are various pre-requisite criteria for grade 1 and 2 status - for example, to be considered for Grade 1 you must have won multiple IVs, broken at Euros/Worlds as a speaker or a judge etc. Likewise, for Grade 2 you would be expected (generally) to have judged external IVs/internationals, broken at IV level/judged break rounds at IV level etc.

The whole idea of grading judges isn't anything sinister - it stems from the Mace and the need to have a grade 1 judge chair every round, and at least one grade 2 judge on the panel to ensure the quality of adjudication given the distributed nature of the competition.