It was a day of contradictions – an amazing learning experience, so to speak. I was invited by a good friend to attend a declamation contest participated by different private schools in Southeast Cebu.
When I got there, the audio-visual room of the host school was filled with tension and excitement. The pupil contestants were already seated in the front row and everyone else in the audience were anxiously waiting for the program to start. I was glad when it finally did.
The theme, “Peace and Unity: The call of the times” was clearly plastered in front for everybody to see. It was indeed nicely put up and very colorful. Interesting… but what interested me most was what transpired during the contest itself.
Again, may I reiterate that it was a declamation contest. But as we moved from the first contestant to the next, I noticed that some of the pieces were not declamatory at all. One, in fact, delivered the famous, “Desiderata” and another one sounded like preaching. So I whispered to my friend, whose school was one of the participants, and asked her if there was a pre-screening process done on the texts because clearly some would not even pass the set of criteria i.e., the piece should be original, relevant to the theme and declamatory in nature and essence. I was surprised when she told me that initially, they were required to submit copies for the judges but were later informed that there was no need to do so as the judges’ attention may be affected/divided in a way. This is where I point out the first contradiction. I think it would have been very helpful to the judges’ decision if they have seen the texts prior to the actual delivery. This way the judges would see if the contestant was able to give justice to the piece. Question is, why change the guideline at the last minute? Because I am sure that if the pieces were viewed before the contest, the judges would be able to filter which ones would pass for declamation and which ones would fall under oration or mere recitation.
I would also like to stress on the mechanics of the competition. I gathered that it centered on Emotional Appeal, Vocal Expression, Mastery of the piece and Audience Appeal. Apparently, these criteria were not really good measures for the category because one of the judges blatantly put forward that the contest could have been judged according to the contestant’s stage presence… blocking, body expression and movement, etc. But why announce it right after the mechanics have been agreed upon by the intended committee? Worse, why even mention it right before announcing the winners? Do you think no eyebrows were raised when that declaration was made? Whatever happened to the fact that the judges’ decision was deemed final and non-appealable? The judge was right in saying that the contest should have been judged according to this and that but to make such statement made me wonder if this particular judge made the decision based on the set criteria agreed upon by the committee. By this, the criteria’s validity and reliability is put into question. It is also very possible that the judges may have created their own criteria in choosing the winners because of that surprising statement. If the judges believed in what could have been a more appropriate set of criteria for the contest instead of what was agreed upon by the organizing committee, then reading the mechanics would prove to be futile!
Also I think the audience was honest enough to express their awe and amazement to contestants who were able to capture and maintain their interest and attention. But the judge discounted this factor and even mentioned that audience impact should not have been part of the criteria. Why make this statement my dear judge? Why now when everybody is expecting that
the contestants will be judged according to the criteria read to them? Isn’t it that your winner did not make much impact/effect on the audience? Or wasn’t he not convincing enough and deserving enough to win that’s why you made such defensive and strong declarations?
The fact of the matter is that it seemed to me that the judge made unnecessary justifications of his decision. I think we already got the idea that the decision was final and non-appealable granted that they use the criteria set. But why defend it my dear judge? Nobody asked you why. Clearly, the judge himself was a walking contradiction!
Another point I would like to raise is the fact that one prominent character that day approached the table of the tabulator and timer and gave instructions on how to compute the scores. I heard that instead of computing it based on the averages, she told them to do it by ranking and not by numerical rating. Is this to make the decision faster and easier? But my dear friend, I think the host prepared enough intermission numbers to give time for computation. I also trust that the assigned tabulator and timer already know what to do with the scores. But with what happened, I am now questioning the credibility of the tabulators and how they came up with the winners. I also could not help but consider the fact that one of the members of this committee came from one of the schools that joined the contest. Now, I would like to challenge these people to show to everyone the scoring made by the different judges and the calculations they have made. The contradiction is, how can we prove accurate and fair results when the ones computing them may have the intention of letting their school win?
Where did time limit come into play during the contest? Did the judges even consider it? It’s not even in the criteria! So why did they have to take note of the time when it did not have any effect on the judges’ decision? Or did it?
Going through how the winners fared in the contest, I must say that the judges need to reexamine their scoring. To review, first placer’s delivery and enunciation was not for public speaking. There was no voice projection and the content of the piece came to me as weak and vague. Good for him though because his school was assigned to select the judges for the competition. Second prize went to the piece which did not have much activity going on. How can it become a winning declamation piece when the emotion was sustained from beginning to end? I was waiting for its climax or where the emotions would peak. But it didn’t happen. Lucky for the contestant, one of the tabulators was from her school. For the 3rd placer, I guess the judges acknowledged the effort with the paraphernalia she brought. That was probably why she came in late.
It was a very unfortunate event for me as I was witness to the subtle manipulations. Funny how the theme was set as such when the people involved could not behave accordingly. True, the call for these people is to promote peace and stop the injustices. What they have done just proves that the journey to achieving peace could not ever begin with these people around because there can be no peace without justice.
The winners had their own “justice,” but those who were not lucky enough, they “just tiis.” The 3 won the battle (according to the judges’ biased decision) but lost the day.
Call me a sore independent bystander but the winners do not deserve their pride.
When I got there, the audio-visual room of the host school was filled with tension and excitement. The pupil contestants were already seated in the front row and everyone else in the audience were anxiously waiting for the program to start. I was glad when it finally did.
The theme, “Peace and Unity: The call of the times” was clearly plastered in front for everybody to see. It was indeed nicely put up and very colorful. Interesting… but what interested me most was what transpired during the contest itself.
Again, may I reiterate that it was a declamation contest. But as we moved from the first contestant to the next, I noticed that some of the pieces were not declamatory at all. One, in fact, delivered the famous, “Desiderata” and another one sounded like preaching. So I whispered to my friend, whose school was one of the participants, and asked her if there was a pre-screening process done on the texts because clearly some would not even pass the set of criteria i.e., the piece should be original, relevant to the theme and declamatory in nature and essence. I was surprised when she told me that initially, they were required to submit copies for the judges but were later informed that there was no need to do so as the judges’ attention may be affected/divided in a way. This is where I point out the first contradiction. I think it would have been very helpful to the judges’ decision if they have seen the texts prior to the actual delivery. This way the judges would see if the contestant was able to give justice to the piece. Question is, why change the guideline at the last minute? Because I am sure that if the pieces were viewed before the contest, the judges would be able to filter which ones would pass for declamation and which ones would fall under oration or mere recitation.
I would also like to stress on the mechanics of the competition. I gathered that it centered on Emotional Appeal, Vocal Expression, Mastery of the piece and Audience Appeal. Apparently, these criteria were not really good measures for the category because one of the judges blatantly put forward that the contest could have been judged according to the contestant’s stage presence… blocking, body expression and movement, etc. But why announce it right after the mechanics have been agreed upon by the intended committee? Worse, why even mention it right before announcing the winners? Do you think no eyebrows were raised when that declaration was made? Whatever happened to the fact that the judges’ decision was deemed final and non-appealable? The judge was right in saying that the contest should have been judged according to this and that but to make such statement made me wonder if this particular judge made the decision based on the set criteria agreed upon by the committee. By this, the criteria’s validity and reliability is put into question. It is also very possible that the judges may have created their own criteria in choosing the winners because of that surprising statement. If the judges believed in what could have been a more appropriate set of criteria for the contest instead of what was agreed upon by the organizing committee, then reading the mechanics would prove to be futile!
Also I think the audience was honest enough to express their awe and amazement to contestants who were able to capture and maintain their interest and attention. But the judge discounted this factor and even mentioned that audience impact should not have been part of the criteria. Why make this statement my dear judge? Why now when everybody is expecting that
the contestants will be judged according to the criteria read to them? Isn’t it that your winner did not make much impact/effect on the audience? Or wasn’t he not convincing enough and deserving enough to win that’s why you made such defensive and strong declarations?
The fact of the matter is that it seemed to me that the judge made unnecessary justifications of his decision. I think we already got the idea that the decision was final and non-appealable granted that they use the criteria set. But why defend it my dear judge? Nobody asked you why. Clearly, the judge himself was a walking contradiction!
Another point I would like to raise is the fact that one prominent character that day approached the table of the tabulator and timer and gave instructions on how to compute the scores. I heard that instead of computing it based on the averages, she told them to do it by ranking and not by numerical rating. Is this to make the decision faster and easier? But my dear friend, I think the host prepared enough intermission numbers to give time for computation. I also trust that the assigned tabulator and timer already know what to do with the scores. But with what happened, I am now questioning the credibility of the tabulators and how they came up with the winners. I also could not help but consider the fact that one of the members of this committee came from one of the schools that joined the contest. Now, I would like to challenge these people to show to everyone the scoring made by the different judges and the calculations they have made. The contradiction is, how can we prove accurate and fair results when the ones computing them may have the intention of letting their school win?
Where did time limit come into play during the contest? Did the judges even consider it? It’s not even in the criteria! So why did they have to take note of the time when it did not have any effect on the judges’ decision? Or did it?
Going through how the winners fared in the contest, I must say that the judges need to reexamine their scoring. To review, first placer’s delivery and enunciation was not for public speaking. There was no voice projection and the content of the piece came to me as weak and vague. Good for him though because his school was assigned to select the judges for the competition. Second prize went to the piece which did not have much activity going on. How can it become a winning declamation piece when the emotion was sustained from beginning to end? I was waiting for its climax or where the emotions would peak. But it didn’t happen. Lucky for the contestant, one of the tabulators was from her school. For the 3rd placer, I guess the judges acknowledged the effort with the paraphernalia she brought. That was probably why she came in late.
It was a very unfortunate event for me as I was witness to the subtle manipulations. Funny how the theme was set as such when the people involved could not behave accordingly. True, the call for these people is to promote peace and stop the injustices. What they have done just proves that the journey to achieving peace could not ever begin with these people around because there can be no peace without justice.
The winners had their own “justice,” but those who were not lucky enough, they “just tiis.” The 3 won the battle (according to the judges’ biased decision) but lost the day.
Call me a sore independent bystander but the winners do not deserve their pride.
RSS Feed