[eDebate] 100 point scale, not 50

[Jean-Paul Lacy]

I don't know what the functional difference between 100 & 50 (with half 
points) is: Both make the old scale obsolete. Both have the same number of 
gradations. I'd be happy with either.

I'm not judging, but if I was judging, I'd still like some fairly concrete 
guidelines printed on the ballot. Like Charles said "we all basically know 
what a 28 means." None of us like to unfairly grade performances.

[Well not really...not when the top 5 speakers are broken by meaningless 
tiebreakers.]

But, I'd rather not be assigning 75 points for "average" when others are 
assigning 90. (Which is what the current scale amounts to: a 27-well below 
average-equates to a 90 on a 100 point scale.)

So, a basic rubric for translation from the old scale that make use of the 
extra range (without starting at 90 for "average," ) printed on the ballot 
would be incredibly helpful!


At 05:17 PM 11/4/2007, Ross Smith wrote:

>So, we originally had in mind a 50 point scale where you could still use

>half points.

>

>My message analogizing to grades required people to divide 100 by 2 to

>get the idea.

>

>Several people have pointed out that we might as well use a 100 point

>scale (without half points). Maybe it would be more "natural" to

>educators and students who are used to giving and getting grades on such

>a scale.

>

>Since there is no mathematical difference, I have no objection (nor does

>Gary Larson, tab engineer).

>

>What do people think? Does the 100 point scale help with the gestalt?

>

>--

>Ross K. Smith

>Director of Debate

>Wake Forest University

>

>336-251-2076 (c)

>336-758-5268 (o)

>

>http://groups.wfu.edu/debate/

>http://www.DebateScoop.org

>

>

>_______________________________________________

>eDebate mailing list

>eDebate at www.ndtceda.com

>http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate