An adjudicator's perspective *

2003-04-25 6:17 p.m.

If Wee Jian had more specific details on the adjudicator's workshop that was held in mid February, I would not have held the thought that it was another boring trip. However, it turned out to be a once in a life time experience which I would never forget.

It all started with some workshop held at VJC from 6pm to 8pm in the second week of February. Since I was not held back by Economics S paper like Zhilin and Chi Hoong, there was no reason not spent my Friday night at a JC on the other side of the island. Although we were all disheveled and hungry, we arrived there only to find out the real objective of this gathering of JC debaters.

Two sessions were held, providing us with a crash course in adjudicating a Worlds Schools style debate. Not every one was there, mainly ACJC, NJC, RJC and AJC (I think) debaters. Of course, the National team (Shengwu & Co.) was down half ignoring it since they were experts at it. Nevertheless, it was an enriching experience, watching video clips on the Worlds Debate held in South Africa in 2001.

The Julia Gabriel Debating Championships is the most prestigious competition for secondary school debaters in Singapore. It started of under the auspices of RGS ELDDS in the early 1990s and the Juliet Gabriel speech and drama centre took over in 1999. From a small group of debaters, it expanded to cover the majority of secondary schools in our tiny little island, making a grand total of 96 teams in this year's competition alone. Hence, we were called in to help out in the judging.

The first round was held at ACS (Barker Road), the brother school of my alma mater. It was bustling with activity as I stepped inside, filled with a myriad of colours. I must digress here to talk about the formal attire of secondary schools. I knew the uniforms of the independent schools like RGS, RI and ACS; however, it was the formal uniform of others that caught my attention. CHIJ St.Nicholas had a perfect match of red and blue for their blazer, while the juxtaposition of yellow and green in SCGS formal uniform was a wonderful match. (If Grace, Louisa and Marianne are going to criticise me over this...)

Anyway, I made my way to the briefing room only to find that I would be judging Wee Jian's former school. I had no qualms about that, except that I wondered what he would say if I gave it to the opposing team. As such, all three judges gave it to his alma mater, with my margin of around 2.5. They were arguing about the negative influence of Hollywood on society, and although they were C division, it was a credible case setup. Still, Joshua (my chief adjudicator) and Gowri gave best speaker to the second opposition.

The next two rounds were not entirely bad, except that we found a small lack of substance in their speeches. Being used to 8 minutes of arguing and POIs, it was a challenge to award marks. The last motion on the influence of the Internet was one I looked forward too; however, their cases were not what I expected. It was indeed a pleasure to work with Joshua (a star ACS (I)/ACJC debater) and Gowri.

The second round of the debates was at Yusof Ishak secondary school, forcing me to leave my house extra early. What troubled me was not the motion on broadcasting criminal trials, but the fact that the proposition was late by a full half hour. Mr. Gabriel (the chief organiser) said that a walk over would be declared after 6:25 pm, however, it proposition made it in the nick of time (they came at 6:24 pm). By some stroke of luck, all three judges gave it to the proposition, although I thought that something was just not right. The next debate saw ACS (Barker Road) on the opposition. They were brilliant, tearing down the proposition’s case left right and center. They held the smooth eloquence that an ACSian is famous for. Afterwards, they were the only ones who came around to listen to our comments. How nice.

The final motion had to do with increasing creativity in schools, a topic which I had little interest in. Nevertheless, Commonwealth Secondary School produced astonishing counter arguments, and they were almost on the par of a worlds debating team.

So what did I learn from these debates? Although the students were green to debating, they did hold a high amount of potential for this unknown sport. They produced cases on topics that were unusual, pushing themselves to think beyond their usual scope. If any of them made it into NJC, I would love to have them on our team.

previous - next