The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1909-05-04
OFFICIAL MARKS IN CONTEST.
Some of the Judges Strict in Rating
Features.
The State.

| line OUaIe.
Greenwood, May 1.-The following
is the committees grading Of the
speakers of the South Carolina inter-
collegiate oratorical contest, which
was held in this city Friday night:
W. D. DuPre, Wofford, compost
ton 841-3; delivery 81; average
1928.
D. W. A. Neville, Clinton, eompo-
sition 79 1-3; delivery 81; average
s. 1-6.
R. B. Curry, Furman, composition
rs 2-3; delivery 90 2-3; average
81 23.
; S. S. Tison, Citadel, composition
Il 2-3; delivery 81 2-3; average
81 2-3.
G. W. Keitt, Clemson, composition
73 l-3; delivery SO 5-6; average
81 7-12.
R. E. Gonzales, university, compo-
sition p; delivery 81; average
81 6-12.
". C. McClain, Erskine, compost
ton IS 2-3; delivery 81 2-3; average
| 80 1-6.
Alan Johnstope, Newberry, compo-
sition 81 Is; delivery 81 5-6; aver
age 78 1-12.
J. R. Paul, Charleston college, COM
position 64 l-3; delivery Sc 1-3; av-
erage IS l-3.
The winning speaker led in compo-
sition, but fell a few points below R.
B. Curry, the third place man, who
made the highest mark on delivery
go 2-3.
The speakers were graded on COM
position by three judges outside the
State, Prof. J. W. Raines, Berea col
lege; Prof. J. D. Bruce, University
of Tennessee, and Prof. A. NJ. Har-
ris of Vanderbilt university.
The orations were submitted to
them few weeks before the Green
wood contest. The marks of the
speeches on composition are sent seal
ed to the secretary of marked seals
and are opened on the night of the
contest, when the geenral average is
made up along with the grades on
delivery, which are left in the hands
of three judges, who are present at
the event.
It will be seen from the grades that
the averages on composition are a
great deal lower than those on the de-
livery of the respective orators. In
other words. the composition marks
tend to pull down the general aver
age and make it appear as if every
one of the speakers we're lacking in
that feature.
The following are the marks that
other respective contestants were CIV
en- by the three judges on compost
tion and the average from the three: !:
W. D. DuPre-8O, IS, 88; average
"a l-3.
D. W. A. Neville-71, 80, 81; av-
erage 70 I3.
R. B. Cury-72, rs, S3; average
rs 2-3.
S. S. Tison-7O, rs, 70; average
II 2-3.
G. ". Keitt-sO, 40. 90; average
73 1-3.
R. E. Gonzales-75, s. 86; average
72.
". C. MeClain-S2, As, 70; aver
age 68 2-3.
| Alan Johnston- 40, 80; aver
age 81 l-3.
/ J. R. Paul-74, so, 50; average
641-3.
Two Of the judges graded Keitt 80
on composition and one 40, just as
an instance of how widely the judges
disagreed. On delivery this speaker
made 80 Sc. This difference Of SO
points on the part Of one judge did
much towards Mr. Keitt not being a
great deal higher in the list. If he
had been credited Is, which in many
colleges is a mere passing mark, in
stead Of the 40, which showed a big
/ difference between the decision of
two judges who both graded the same
and the other Judge, Keitt would have
held second place with an average of
I86 1912. There are also other in
stances in the marks on composition
where one judges grade brought
down the average in way which ma
terially affected the speakers stand
ing.