Judges shall evaluate the responses of teams solely in terms of the following criteria:
- Clarity and Intelligibility: Was the presentation clear and systematic? Regardless of whether or not you agree with the conclusion, did the team give a coherent argument in a clear and succinct manner?
- Avoidance of Ethical Irrelevance: Did the team avoid ethically irrelevant issues? Or was the team preoccupied with issues that are not ethically relevant or are of minor ethical relevance to the case?
- Identification and Discussion of Central Ethical Dimensions: Did the team’s presentation clearly identify and thoroughly discuss the central ethical dimensions of the case?
- Deliberative Thoughtfulness: Did the team’s presentation indicate both awareness and thoughtful consideration of different viewpoints, including especially those that would loom large in the reasoning of individuals who disagree with the team’s position?
Each judge will score teams as follows:
0-40 points for Team 1’s response to the Moderator’s question, including how well the team addressed the judges’ questions (40 best); in evaluating a team’s answer the judges will give the team a score of 0-10 points relative to each of the four evaluation criteria indicated above and total the sum.
0-10 points for Team 2’s commentary (10 best).
0-10 points for Team 1’s response to the commentary (10 best).
In evaluating a team’s commentary and the other team’s response to the commentary, the judges will take into account the four evaluation criteria indicated above, but will give the teams an overall score, rather than a separate point score relative to each of the criteria.
Judges are not permitted to discuss their scoring decisions with each other. Each judge will rely on his or her own best judgment in scoring each match and record their scores on two evaluation forms.
Example Evaluation Forms