|
  |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
betsy_in_va
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 1:10 am Post subject: TI's policy on judging |
 |
|
Speaking about judging, here's something I've wondered about:
Does anyone know why TI has a policy of asking contest judges to assign
points without comparing the speaker to the speakers that went before?
I'm sure there is a good reason, I'm just wondering. I personally find
it much easier to use the first speaker as a standard, but I've been
told that's against TI policy. But when I try to do it the suggested
way, all my contestants get ratings of 9 or 10 in every category
because, let's face it, to get to a contest you've got to be pretty
good. Then everyone ends up with the same score and some relatively
unimportant factor like dress code will decide the whole thing. I often
find the numbers add up higher for someone even though I didn't think
he was the best speaker. Any suggestions out there?
Thanks, Betsy |
|
| Back to top |
|
Colin William
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:52 am Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
betsy_in_va wrote:
| Quote: | Speaking about judging, here's something I've wondered about:
Does anyone know why TI has a policy of asking contest judges to assign
points without comparing the speaker to the speakers that went before?
|
I'd guess it's so that you have a mindset of evaluating each speech in
and of itself, on its own merits and demerits, rather than in comparison.
| Quote: | I'm sure there is a good reason, I'm just wondering. I personally find
it much easier to use the first speaker as a standard, but I've been
told that's against TI policy.
|
"Policy" seems like a strong word; after all, the numerical part of the
ballot is there only as a "guide", and you're not bound by your counting
to actually put the finalists in that order.
The problem with the comparatice approach is that the later you get into
the round, the more things you're watching for or paying attention to
that you've picked up as you go along. These would be things you weren't
watching for as you watched the fist person, and it's hard to rely on
memory. Memory distorts things over time, so if you don't treat the
contestants individually, you set up the potential (as a psychologist
I'd say "likelihood') that you'll hold different contestants to evolving
standards and misremember how earlier contestants held up to those
standards.
Colin |
|
| Back to top |
|
rich.hopkins@gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:56 am Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
Judging is an unenviable task, and one of the toughest in TM,
particularly at the higher levels.
Since it is all subjective, who is to say is truly "best speaker" or
"world champion"? At my first TM club, we'd annually watch a WCPS tape,
with most in the audience unawares as to the winner, and judge for
ourselves. The "winner" didn't always win. Rarely, in fact.
| Quote: | From my vantage point, I think its relatively easy to narrow 10 down to
3 or 4. The order of those 4 is the hairy part. But a judge is not to |
choose who they think everyone else likes, or who spoke on a subject
the judge liked, but who spoke and delivered a message the most
effectively with the most value.
Oh, that sure clears it up....In the end, go with your gut. Not who
should win, or who you want to win, but the one speaker you will
remember positively, that you would pay to see (or pay the most to
see), and hasn't faux pas'd on any basic TM requirements.
18-20 judges will identify a trend - and ultimately a winner. And not
everyone will ever agree. As Randy Harvey likes to tell me - after he
won a woman came up to him and said "I didn't like your speech." His
reply: "So you're the one." You can't please everyone.
Rich Hopkins - ATM-G
District 9, Region I
www.richhopkins.net
betsy_in_va wrote:
| Quote: | Speaking about judging, here's something I've wondered about:
Does anyone know why TI has a policy of asking contest judges to assign
points without comparing the speaker to the speakers that went before?
I'm sure there is a good reason, I'm just wondering. I personally find
it much easier to use the first speaker as a standard, but I've been
told that's against TI policy. But when I try to do it the suggested
way, all my contestants get ratings of 9 or 10 in every category
because, let's face it, to get to a contest you've got to be pretty
good. Then everyone ends up with the same score and some relatively
unimportant factor like dress code will decide the whole thing. I often
find the numbers add up higher for someone even though I didn't think
he was the best speaker. Any suggestions out there?
Thanks, Betsy |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Nigel Reed
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:50 am Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
betsy_in_va <b7760@keogan.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Does anyone know why TI has a policy of asking contest judges to assign
points without comparing the speaker to the speakers that went before?
|
Attend judges training at TLI :)
| Quote: | I'm sure there is a good reason, I'm just wondering. I personally find
it much easier to use the first speaker as a standard, but I've been
told that's against TI policy. But when I try to do it the suggested
way, all my contestants get ratings of 9 or 10 in every category
because, let's face it, to get to a contest you've got to be pretty
good. Then everyone ends up with the same score and some relatively
unimportant factor like dress code will decide the whole thing. I often
find the numbers add up higher for someone even though I didn't think
he was the best speaker. Any suggestions out there?
|
Be sure to give the very best speaker a medium score. That way if the
next way is way better than the very best, you can rate them up. For
example, if they have excellent vocal variety, then I'd rate them in the
middle, because that is what is expected.
If someone then comes on and uses vocal variety to do impressions, or
something else which really pushes the limit, I can rate them up.
Talking of judges training, anyone who is entering a competition would
do well to attend judges training. You will know what they're looking
for so you can tailor your speech for that.
Talking of training...what was everyone's District TLI like? (Officer
training for those who don't use "Toastmasters Learning Institute"
Regards
Nigel
--
Nigel Reed CTM, CL
President - Plano Talkers Toastmasters
Incoming Area 42 Govenor (Plains Division, District 50, Incoming Region III) |
|
| Back to top |
|
Colin William
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 7:20 am Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
"Nigel Reed" <see@www.nelgin.nu-slash-qconfirm.html.invalid> wrote
| Quote: | Talking of judges training, anyone who is entering a competition would
do well to attend judges training. You will know what they're looking
for so you can tailor your speech for that.
|
I think I've mentioned it before, but it was ballot awareness that probably
won me a district level eval contest. Just before it started I saw that the
ballot had points for a summation. So I made sure to include one. I went
last and didn't get to see the others, but afterward one of the judges came
up and told me that what set me apart as the winner was I was the only one
who did a summation.
| Quote: | Talking of training...what was everyone's District TLI like? (Officer
training for those who don't use "Toastmasters Learning Institute"
|
Ours had at least one excellent presentation - the one I gave :-)
Colin |
|
| Back to top |
|
rich.hopkins@gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 7:58 am Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
The summation portion did the same for me. A lot of competitors just
never look at those ballots! I think the Int'l ballot is a bit better
understood....
Rich Hopkins - ATM-G
District 9, Region I
www.richhopkins.net
Colin William wrote:
| Quote: | "Nigel Reed" <see@www.nelgin.nu-slash-qconfirm.html.invalid> wrote
Talking of judges training, anyone who is entering a competition would
do well to attend judges training. You will know what they're looking
for so you can tailor your speech for that.
I think I've mentioned it before, but it was ballot awareness that probably
won me a district level eval contest. Just before it started I saw that the
ballot had points for a summation. So I made sure to include one. I went
last and didn't get to see the others, but afterward one of the judges came
up and told me that what set me apart as the winner was I was the only one
who did a summation.
Talking of training...what was everyone's District TLI like? (Officer
training for those who don't use "Toastmasters Learning Institute"
Ours had at least one excellent presentation - the one I gave :-)
Colin |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
betsy_in_va
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:33 am Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
TLI training's great, but we don't tend to get answers or explanations
behind the policies. Mostly we just learn what the policies are. I'll
have to come out to Plano one of these days and check out your training
sessions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Nigel Reed
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 10:10 am Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
betsy_in_va <b7760@keogan.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
TLI training's great, but we don't tend to get answers or explanations
behind the policies. Mostly we just learn what the policies are. I'll
have to come out to Plano one of these days and check out your training
sessions.
|
I think they're all pretty much the same, however they make a day of it.
They'll usually have two sets of officer training and then some other
seminars. I attended one on how to effectivly handle table topics, one
on choosing and going forward with your HPLP, another on Sponsoring,
mentoring and coaching clubs and conducting speech contests. Others
included Powerpoint, revitalising clubs, and information on the tall
tales and humourous speech contest...of course there's all the "we must
get new members and start new clubs" blah blah let's pat ourselves on
the back.
Regards
Nigel
--
Nigel Reed CTM, CL
President - Plano Talkers Toastmasters
Incoming Area 42 Govenor (Plains Division, District 50, Incoming Region III) |
|
| Back to top |
|
John Fleming, DTM
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 10:44 am Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
On 31 Jul 2006 11:10:06 -0700, while chained to a desk in the
scriptorium, "betsy_in_va" <b7760@keogan.com> wrote:
| Quote: | $Speaking about judging, here's something I've wondered about:
$
$Does anyone know why TI has a policy of asking contest judges to assign
$points without comparing the speaker to the speakers that went before?
|
I don't think I've ever seen it written out as a policy. If it is an
official policy, then it has to be in writing somewhere, and perhaps a
person who "knows" it is a policy can provide me with a copy.
The guideline I have come across in judges training is to compare each
speaker against a model speaker, and ideally not one of the competitors.
While there is no reason why you can't use the first speaker as the
"model speaker" and rank each speaker against the first speaker, keeping
the first speaker's presentation fresh in your mind in a contest with,
say, eiight other speakers can be tricky. Whereas if you are very
familiar with the speaking style of another speaker, say George W Bush,
and can easily picture him in your mind giving a talk, then it is easier
to compare speakers to him
| Quote: | $I'm sure there is a good reason, I'm just wondering. I personally find
$it much easier to use the first speaker as a standard, but I've been
$told that's against TI policy. But when I try to do it the suggested
$way, all my contestants get ratings of 9 or 10 in every category
$because, let's face it, to get to a contest you've got to be pretty
$good. Then everyone ends up with the same score and some relatively
$unimportant factor like dress code will decide the whole thing. I often
$find the numbers add up higher for someone even though I didn't think
$he was the best speaker. Any suggestions out there?
|
I start everybody in the middle of each category, then either add points
for things they do well or subtract points for things they are a bit
more lacklustre.
Someone looking at one of my judges guides might be appalled at how
"severe" I am with the contestants, but I seem to produce consistently
good results most of the time in selecting a first, second and third
place winner (which is the entire aim of the whole exercise after all).
--
John Fleming, DTM
Edmonton, Canada
Attitude Boosters Toastmasters (7022-42) - Member
Chamber Toastmasters (5594 - 42) - Immediate Past President
A scientist can discover a new star but he
cannot make one. He would have to ask an
engineer to do it for him.
- Gordon L. Glegg |
|
| Back to top |
|
Rod Taylor
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 1:54 pm Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
"betsy_in_va" <b7760@keogan.com> wrote in message
news:1154369406.898883.230620@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | Speaking about judging, here's something I've wondered about:
Does anyone know why TI has a policy of asking contest judges to
assign
points without comparing the speaker to the speakers that went before?
I'm sure there is a good reason, I'm just wondering. I personally find
it much easier to use the first speaker as a standard, but I've been
told that's against TI policy. But when I try to do it the suggested
way, all my contestants get ratings of 9 or 10 in every category
because, let's face it, to get to a contest you've got to be pretty
good. Then everyone ends up with the same score and some relatively
unimportant factor like dress code will decide the whole thing. I
often
find the numbers add up higher for someone even though I didn't think
he was the best speaker. Any suggestions out there?
|
I've never seen this written as policy, Betsy, but there seems to be a
common belief that this is a requirement. If it were so, I'd expect to
find in in the Speech Contest Rules or the Speech Contest Manual, or
perhaps the (rather poor, IMO) canned module on judging.
I've seen people use the Judge's Guide from right to left, covering
previous entries, and I've seen judges carefully creating multiple folds
to hide existing entries. Somehow the feeling is that such actions
might make a very subjective process a little more objective.
Many parts of contest procedure, rules, and judging have changed over
the years, but there are some that haven't. I assume there are sound
reasons for not changing things that don't need to be changed. Among
the things that haven't changed is the title of the form: Judge's Guide
and Ballot. It's not a scoresheet, it's a guide (and a very good one)
to help judges to complete their ballot. Another thing that hasn't
changed is the heading above the category points scale: Suggested point
values. These are suggested ranges, not absolutes.
As a guide, judges may use it in any way they choose. Indeed, if a
judge chose not to use the guide and just completed a ballot, who would
know? [having written that, let me state clearly that I don't think
it's a good idea not to use the guide!]
At the end, the only thing that matters is the ballot. This must
reflect the individual judge's honest and unbiased opinion of the
relative merit of her or his choice of the best three speakers. So,
we're talking about comparisons anyway! I don't believe that it matters
when and how these comparisons are made. Individual judges must make
choices, since ties are not permitted on the ballot. After all, no-one
ever sees the individual Judge's Guides, only the ballots. My
suggestion is to use the Judge's Guide as a guide and complete the
ballot to reflect your honest opinion, irrespective of the numbers. Of
course, you can go back and change the numbers if it helps you to feel
better about it, but no-one's going to see your numbers anyway. As a
judge, you are contributing to the overall result. Other judges,
perhaps with different opinions, are also contributing to the overall
result. It's extremely unlikely, unless the differences are vast or the
judges few, that all the judges will agree in their rankings.
Diversity of opinion is normal and healthy. Professional speech coaches
will probably all agree on positive and negative qualities of voice, but
ask a group of such professionals to rank the merits of ten good voices,
and you'll find the same diversity of opinion we see in Toastmasters.
The same is true of humour and (something you've raised recently in
another thread) - good taste. What's fresh and original to one judge
may be tired and stale to another. What crosses your boundary for good
taste may be perfectly acceptable to others. This is neither good nor
bad, right nor wrong, just different.
Since we cannot ignore diversity, we should incorporate it into our
judging process by having a large number of judges who are
representative of the audience as a whole.
If you're interested in a more comprehensive discussion on judging, I've
written a booklet on the subject and I'll gladly e-mail you a copy if
you're interested.
Rod Taylor (rodt iafrica - don't forget the @ and the dotcom)
Transformers Toastmasters Club
District 74, Southern Africa |
|
| Back to top |
|
Rod Taylor
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:14 pm Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
"Colin William" <colintwilliam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4j75clF6mmkiU1@individual.net...
| Quote: |
The problem with the comparatice approach is that the later you get
into
the round, the more things you're watching for or paying attention to
that you've picked up as you go along. These would be things you
weren't
watching for as you watched the fist person, and it's hard to rely on
memory. Memory distorts things over time, so if you don't treat the
contestants individually, you set up the potential (as a psychologist
I'd say "likelihood') that you'll hold different contestants to
evolving
standards and misremember how earlier contestants held up to those
standards.
|
There's a common belief that speaking order makes a difference. In the
judging workshops that I run around our District, the final part is a
practical exercise judging five videotaped speeches. I have eleven such
taped speeches and I can vary the selection and 'speaking order' from
workshop to workshop. The speakers don't change, but the audiences do.
Current trends and fashions also change over time. Other than the
training benefits for District, this workshop has allowed me to research
such matters as speaking order and to date, with over 100 such workshops
behind me, I have found no evidence that speaking order makes any
difference at all. This data only applies to International Speech
Contest speeches and may not hold true for contests such as the Humorous
Speech contest, where the earlier speakers may help later speakers by
'warming up' the audience.
Rod Taylor (rodt iafrica - don't forget the @ and the dotcom)
Transformers Toastmasters Club
District 74, Southern Africa |
|
| Back to top |
|
Rod Taylor
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:28 pm Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
"John Fleming, DTM" <nospam@sprynet.com> wrote in message
news:l0jtc2t7frok3aufqomuike9f9g0i5scnk@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
Someone looking at one of my judges guides might be appalled at how
"severe" I am with the contestants, but I seem to produce consistently
good results most of the time in selecting a first, second and third
place winner (which is the entire aim of the whole exercise after
all).
|
True, John. Since each judge only ballots first, second and third, and
only the first three places are ever announced, it's difficult to assess
the statistical validity of such comparative rankings.
I now you're numerate, so you might like to look up Spearman's
Coefficient of Rank. In my judging workshops, each judge ranks all five
speakers and I get a consensus result of all five placings. I can then
use this coefficient to give each judge feedback as to how their
individual ranking compared with the collective result.
Rod Taylor (rodt iafrica - don't forget the @ and the dotcom)
Transformers Toastmasters Club
District 74, Southern Africa |
|
| Back to top |
|
Rod Taylor
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:48 pm Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
"Nigel Reed" <see@www.nelgin.nu-slash-qconfirm.html.invalid> wrote in
message news:s0a2q3-ci9.ln1@wibble.nelgin.nu...
| Quote: |
Be sure to give the very best speaker a medium score. That way if the
next way is way better than the very best, you can rate them up. For
example, if they have excellent vocal variety, then I'd rate them in
the
middle, because that is what is expected.
If someone then comes on and uses vocal variety to do impressions, or
something else which really pushes the limit, I can rate them up.
|
We might not agree on that point, Nigel, although it might be a matter
of degree. For me, the question is whether the vocal variety used is
appropriate to speaker, subject, and audience, rather than being based
on quantity. I've seen speakers bellow and whisper to try to gain
points. Vocal range and appropriate use of vocal variety are not
necessarily the same thing.
The same applies to body language and gestures. In my opinion, a
paraplegic in a wheelchair should be capable of scoring as highly as an
Olympic gymnast who turns a triple back somersault. The somersault
itself need not be wrong - the question is whether it's appropriate to
speaker, speech, and audience.
One of the examples I use in my training is of a speaker who jumps onto
a chair and bursts into song. About six years ago, I ran the workshop
in the morning and the Division speech contest was held after lunch.
One speaker, who wasn't at the workshop, stood on a chair and sang. The
audience (most of whom had been at the workshop) roared with laughter
and the poor speaker had no idea why.
Rod Taylor (rodt iafrica - don't forget the @ and the dotcom)
Transformers Toastmasters Club
District 74, Southern Africa |
|
| Back to top |
|
Rod Taylor
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:30 pm Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
"Nigel Reed" <see@www.nelgin.nu-slash-qconfirm.html.invalid> wrote in
message news:s0a2q3-ci9.ln1@wibble.nelgin.nu...
| Quote: |
Talking of training...what was everyone's District TLI like? (Officer
training for those who don't use "Toastmasters Learning Institute"
|
I ran the whole thing in Malawi, and didn't get to the other training
sessions, so I can't comment on those.
I have a concern at the moment. Our District has just formalised TLI.
As such we have a team of 'approved TLI trainers'. Having seen some of
these in action, and having evaluated the feedback forms from previous
COT sessions, I believe I have some credible assessments of their
capability. In one particular case, a certain 'trainer' produced the
following responses by category from the Likert scale responses of a
large audience:
Excellent Good
Satisfactory Inadequate Poor
Subject knowledge 7% 29%
54% 11% 0%
Support material 7% 39%
32% 18% 4%
Presentation 7% 21%
36% 29% 7%
In my opinion, this is a pretty poor assessment. Perhaps the audience
was critical, but the same audience rated the two 'best' presenters as
follows:
Excellent Good
Satisfactory Inadequate Poor
Subject knowledge 86% 14%
0% 0% 0%
Support material 43% 57%
0% 0% 0%
Presentation 71% 29%
0% 0% 0%
Excellent Good
Satisfactory Inadequate Poor
Subject knowledge 71% 29%
0% 0% 0%
Support material 35% 59%
6% 0% 0%
Presentation 53% 41%
6% 0% 0%
For me, there's a huge difference and the first set of figures are
barely adequate. We now see this 'trainer' as part of the TLI. I also
noted from a job description/qualification document that it had been
edited to allow the inclusion of this individual, who would otherwise
have been excluded. Another example of position, popularity, and ego
outranking talent?
Is there a norm or guidelines for the TLI trainers job
description/qualification, or does each District create their own from
scratch?
Do others have or perceive this kind of problem, or am I being unduly
cynical?
Rod Taylor (rodt iafrica - don't forget the @ and the dotcom)
Transformers Toastmasters Club
District 74, Southern Africa |
|
| Back to top |
|
Jean
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 9:21 pm Post subject: Re: TI's policy on judging |
|
|
Hello Rod
As I am starting a new club and our goal is to make a difference would
you be kind enough to email me a copy of your judging booklet. It is a
bone of contention in my neck of the woods and, though I have judged at
club, area and district levels, it never ceases to amaze me how people
who have never judged before are always told not to worry about the
judges guide sheet just vote for the one you think was best... it
defeats the purpose of objectivity in judging and disregards the value
of the criteria.
My email is jean underscore hf at yahoo dot co dot uk.
I appreciate your help with this.
Warmest regards
Jean
Rod Taylor wrote:
| Quote: | "betsy_in_va" <b7760@keogan.com> wrote in message
news:1154369406.898883.230620@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Speaking about judging, here's something I've wondered about:
Does anyone know why TI has a policy of asking contest judges to
assign
points without comparing the speaker to the speakers that went before?
I'm sure there is a good reason, I'm just wondering. I personally find
it much easier to use the first speaker as a standard, but I've been
told that's against TI policy. But when I try to do it the suggested
way, all my contestants get ratings of 9 or 10 in every category
because, let's face it, to get to a contest you've got to be pretty
good. Then everyone ends up with the same score and some relatively
unimportant factor like dress code will decide the whole thing. I
often
find the numbers add up higher for someone even though I didn't think
he was the best speaker. Any suggestions out there?
I've never seen this written as policy, Betsy, but there seems to be a
common belief that this is a requirement. If it were so, I'd expect to
find in in the Speech Contest Rules or the Speech Contest Manual, or
perhaps the (rather poor, IMO) canned module on judging.
I've seen people use the Judge's Guide from right to left, covering
previous entries, and I've seen judges carefully creating multiple folds
to hide existing entries. Somehow the feeling is that such actions
might make a very subjective process a little more objective.
Many parts of contest procedure, rules, and judging have changed over
the years, but there are some that haven't. I assume there are sound
reasons for not changing things that don't need to be changed. Among
the things that haven't changed is the title of the form: Judge's Guide
and Ballot. It's not a scoresheet, it's a guide (and a very good one)
to help judges to complete their ballot. Another thing that hasn't
changed is the heading above the category points scale: Suggested point
values. These are suggested ranges, not absolutes.
As a guide, judges may use it in any way they choose. Indeed, if a
judge chose not to use the guide and just completed a ballot, who would
know? [having written that, let me state clearly that I don't think
it's a good idea not to use the guide!]
At the end, the only thing that matters is the ballot. This must
reflect the individual judge's honest and unbiased opinion of the
relative merit of her or his choice of the best three speakers. So,
we're talking about comparisons anyway! I don't believe that it matters
when and how these comparisons are made. Individual judges must make
choices, since ties are not permitted on the ballot. After all, no-one
ever sees the individual Judge's Guides, only the ballots. My
suggestion is to use the Judge's Guide as a guide and complete the
ballot to reflect your honest opinion, irrespective of the numbers. Of
course, you can go back and change the numbers if it helps you to feel
better about it, but no-one's going to see your numbers anyway. As a
judge, you are contributing to the overall result. Other judges,
perhaps with different opinions, are also contributing to the overall
result. It's extremely unlikely, unless the differences are vast or the
judges few, that all the judges will agree in their rankings.
Diversity of opinion is normal and healthy. Professional speech coaches
will probably all agree on positive and negative qualities of voice, but
ask a group of such professionals to rank the merits of ten good voices,
and you'll find the same diversity of opinion we see in Toastmasters.
The same is true of humour and (something you've raised recently in
another thread) - good taste. What's fresh and original to one judge
may be tired and stale to another. What crosses your boundary for good
taste may be perfectly acceptable to others. This is neither good nor
bad, right nor wrong, just different.
Since we cannot ignore diversity, we should incorporate it into our
judging process by having a large number of judges who are
representative of the audience as a whole.
If you're interested in a more comprehensive discussion on judging, I've
written a booklet on the subject and I'll gladly e-mail you a copy if
you're interested.
Rod Taylor (rodt iafrica - don't forget the @ and the dotcom)
Transformers Toastmasters Club
District 74, Southern Africa |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
"Toastmasters
International", "Toastmasters" and the Toastmasters
International emblem are trademarks protected in the United
States, Canada and other countries where Toastmasters Clubs
exist. Unauthorized use is strictly prohibited.
|
|
|
