The most important criteria when judging speech are to follow the suggestions on the judge ballot.  Leave personal philosophies, rules, and preferences out of your judging consideration.  Below are clarification of common misconceptions and a reinforcement of OHSSL philosophies concerning the events.  As always, thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration of the speakers.

General concerns for all events:

• Please judge with positive expectations.  Rather than looking for what a speaker does wrong, focus on what a student does right.  One error or weakness does not negate an otherwise excellent performance.
• Please leave your preconceived notions about materials and styles at the door.  The rules are broadly defined to allow students the most creative liberty.  The only rules/criteria are listed on the ballots.  It is unfair to hold speakers accountable to standards not sanctioned by the OHSSL.
• Do not compare present students to past competitors.  Likewise, in the event you have judge a student earlier in the season, suppress the urge to compare those performances.  Evaluate the student in THIS round at THIS moment against THIS group of competitors.
• A reminder that time penalties are left to the judge’s discretion.  There is no such thing as “undertime”.  Do not look at the time to be the definitive ranking criteria unless an excessive infraction.  However, if you use time in your ranking, note this on the critique.

Oratorical:

• Students have not written their materials.  They should NOT be evaluated based on the content of their speeches but rather HOW well they convey the messages and execute the speaking mechancis noted on the ballot.
• Speakers do not have to mimic the original author and should be given the greatest creative freedom.  The event does not ask students to pretend to be Martin Luther King, Pataraick Henry, or Hillary Clinton.
•  Evaluation should concern how well their interpretations solidify the messages of the speech.
• Remember, the event is called "interpretation" and not merely "recitation".  Students ARE permitted to employ a variety of delivery styles not used by the original orator.
• There are NO judging criteria for the type of speeches performed except that the material was indeed a speech.  Therefore, any philosophical bias towards the type of material presented should be avoided.

• Students have written their own speeches.  You SHOULD weigh both the content as well as the delivery.  How much weight you give to the actual content is a judge's preference.
• As this is a creative writing event, there is no rule that forbids students from employing a variety of narrative techniques (dialogue, characerization, affectations) to animate and emphasize their messages.
• Be cautious about evaluating the "originality" of a speech.  Topics that may seem "unoriginal" to you are new to young adults.  Rather, look at the originality of their execution
• Do NOT penalize the students for their personal views.  Rather, evaluate how well the speech is developed and communicated.

• Students may or may not address the audience during their speeches.  They may do both.
• The material should be presented in a fashion that is clear to the audience.
• Students may have one to an unlimited number of characters.  There is no criterion that says multiple characters are better than one or a criterion that says complex voices and accents must be used.
• Speakers should be judged based on how well they create, maintain, and interpret the characters in their pieces.  Likewise, there is no rule for judging the level of dramatics employed, but rather if the dramatics employed are appropriate for the scene(s) being recreated.
• There is NO rule restricting movement, and once again movement should be appropriate as dictated by the material.
• Finally, drama and humor should not be simplified to who was the saddest or the funniest.  Often, the inherent nature of the material will elicit these responses.  Evaluate the caliber of th espeaking and interpretive mechanics and not the material.

• Judge a speaker's delivery and content equally.
• Do not dismiss a speaker with excellent content for a few stumbles.  Fluidity is important, but judges should not reduce their responsibility to keeping track of verbal misspeaks.  Speakers only have 30 minutes to outline, research, and practice their materials; a few "glitches" are to be expected.
• Speeches should not be a tally sheet of sources cited.  A few well-used sources may be more desirable to a series of random citations.
• Most important is that the speech address the specific question selected.  Listen critically but do not penalize students who may have different political views from your own.

• The OHSSL, at coaches' requests, has been purposefully vague about the judgin criteria or performance philosophy of the event to allow the students the most creative freedom, and therefore judges should be open to diverse array of programs and styles.  Whatever you may BELIEVE should be the rules of the event is irrelevant to how you judge the speakers UNLESS supported by the rules on the ballot.
• The ONLY rules for prose and poetry are listed on the ballot, and most deal specifically with the mechanics of speaking and physical interpretation.  There is no rule, for example, mandating the use of a black notebook.
• There are NO rules as to the construction of the program and its narrative material so long as pieces are introducted and there is the appropriate amount of prose and poetry (which has been verified by the District Comittees for District and State Tournaments).
• The use of voices, gestures, focal points, or characterization is not prohibited by the rules.
• How often a student should look at the manuscript (beyond the fact that they must address it) is not mandated in the rules.
• There are NO rules that specify the level of dramatics that can be employed aside from what is appropriate in the context of the material presented.
• There are NO rules prohibiting or mandating that a student must employ the manuscript as an extension of the performance; only that if it is done it be appropriate.

• When responding to material, you should follow the same rules of interpretation for drama and humor.
• Students may not make direct eye contact with one another, but some blocking may mean one student will "see" the other.
• Students are allowed physical interaction and eye contact during introductory material.  There are no set criteria for the level of "dramatic" interpretaion.
• One should not make arbitrary judgments that students have gone beyond "interp".  Students are allowed freedom of movement so long as they do not physically touch and that the movement is appropriate for the material.
• Students may or may not directly address the audience.  Their failure to do so is not a penalty.

• Students should be given the greatest latitude in their interpretation of the quotation.
• Students should construct content to either agree or disagree with the message of the quotation or to qualify it.
• According to the rules in the OHSSL constitution, students ARE permitted to have prepared introductions.  Students ARE permitted to look through files of information during their preparation period.  If they do, they should verbally cite the sources during the speech.
• Students should construct the speech based on analytical evidence.  The use of personal stories, except in the introduction and/or the conclusion, is prohibited. 
• When judgin, one should keep in mind the ratio of prep time to speaking, but a shorter speech with better content may be much better than a longer one without substance.
• Like extemporaneous speaking, fluidity is important, but stumbles are not an automatic deduction unless excessive and distracting.
• Remember that timing begins after the judge has copied the topic on his or her ballot and returned it to the student.
• The speaker MAY hold and reference the quotation during the speech.