Have you ever had a judge who meant to vote one way but marked his ballot the other? Have you ever been waiting on rounds in remote campus buildings to end so that the next round could be paired? Have you ever found that your school is missing ballots from your ballot packet at the end of the tournament?

While the tournament tabroom has been modernized with computer programs to automatically tabulate and pair rounds, the physical ballot itself has remained the same. As the modern business strives to handle its transactions as paperlessly as possible in order to increase efficiency and reduce human error, the debate community should similarly strive to make paper ballots an arcane relic of the past, residing nostalgically in memory beside the OxBox and index card.

Businesses and governments have recognized that eliminating paper from the work environment saves their employees the time and hassle associated with filling out and keeping track of paper forms. Computer technologies allow users to fill out digital versions of paper forms. The computer can then check the data for inconsistencies and instantaneously transmit it to whoever needs to act on it. Processes like these are being implemented wherever possible. Microsoft believes that electronic forms will be the backbone of every business and is striving to create a product line to support that future. Sadly, however, the technology can be expensive and difficult to implement.

Debate suffers from the same setbacks that drive industry to eradicate paper from the workplace. The physical handling of paper ballots leaves room for judges to make mistakes in filling out their ballot, ballots to be lost in transit, ballots to be delayed or lost in making it from the round room back to the tabroom, and for ballots to be misplaced in the tabroom. Furthermore, a lot of the time and effort invested in an efficient tournament is wasted in repetitive, mundane tasks: running ballots, figuring out which ballots have been returned to the tabroom and which are still out, checking ballots for errors, sending runners across campus to track down judges, and stuffing ballots into coaches’ packets. An electronic ballot can avoid all of these pitfalls associated with handling paper.

InCharta is the next step in modernizing debate tournaments by computerizing the ballot. InCharta allows judges to fill out ballots from any computer with an internet connection. It then immediately checks the ballot to ensure that all data are correct and immediately alerts the judge to any anomalies. Finally, it sends the ballot directly to the tabroom via the network.

The academic community tends to see technology as expensive, intimidating, and high-risk. However, InCharta is built with the same technologies and practices implemented by Fortune 100 companies. It is a true demonstration of how technology can be implemented in the academic world to successfully and measurably increase the educational value of a debate tournament, while not incurring the additional risk that traditionally accompanies the use of a computer.

The Paperless Tournament:

1. Instead of printing paper ballots, the tabroom prints the judge’s name, the room number of the round, and a username and password to log in to InCharta. This paper is put on the ballot table, just like a paper ballot.

2. The judge can then use any computer with network access (a laptop the judge brought, a computer provided by the school already in the room, etc.) to fill out a ballot. The system automatically enters the teams and speakers debating in the round. The judge can quickly pick the winning team from a drop down list, enter the speaker points, and type a reason for decision.

3. The computer performs a variety of error checks to ensure the ballot is 100 percent accurate. If there are any errors, the judge is asked to correct them immediately— saving a trip from the tabroom to the judge and back again. Only when the ballot passes all checks can the judge submit it to the tabroom.

4. As soon as the judge fills out the winner and speaker points, InCharta instantly submits the paperless ballot to the tabroom. The judge can then continue to edit his comments and reason for decision without worrying about holding up the tournament.

5. The tabroom is notified as soon as a ballot is submitted and can either view it on screen or print it so that it can be entered into the tabulation software just like any paper ballot.

Advantages for the Tabroom:

Much of the tabroom’s work centers around the logistic handling of the ballot: running ballots from collection stations back to the tabroom, figuring out which ballots have not yet been returned, checking ballots for errors, and tracking down judges to ask about possible errors. This shuffling is an unnecessary logistical nightmare.

As the judge is filling out a round’s ballot, InCharta performs checks on the ballot to ensure the data is accurate. InCharta makes sure that:

• The winning team and the winning side are consistent (if the judge selects that Team A wins the round on the affirmative InCharta checks to make sure Team A is not actually the negative for that round).

• Speaker points are within the correct range (i.e., should not be lower than 20 or above 30).

• Speaker points are correctly distributed (i.e., the first speaker should not have the lowest number of speaker points).

• If the round is a low-point-win based on speaker points the judge must check the low point win box.

• The judge has not assigned the same speaker rank to more than one speaker.

These checks drastically reduce the likelihood of a judge filling out a ballot incorrectly and could save the tabroom the time, stress, and staff associated with having to track down an errant judge.

The paperless tournament allows for real time tournament status updates. The tabroom staff can see a listing of rounds and the judges who have not yet submitted a ballot. As rounds run late, the tournament knows exactly which rounds are still in session without having to shuffle through all the ballots they already have. The tabroom can then send runners to these slow rounds to investigate the delay.

InCharta also provides a clear record of when rounds ended. If one round gets out late, the tabroom knows exactly what time the ballot was submitted by the judge and can use that when trying to make decisions about whether the teams in a late round should forfeit their next round.

An electronic ballot allows tournaments to get rounds paired quickly and reduce downtime between rounds. Because ballots travel at the speed of light, rather than the speed of judges, the tabroom receives all of its ballots much more quickly and can allow less time between rounds. Not having to wait for ballots to make their way across campus eliminates a lot of the mishaps which result in delayed schedules.

As the tournament is ending, InCharta can print out pre-sorted ballot packets for each school. This packet has all the ballots for a single school grouped together and can be stuffed directly into a school’s packet without needing to spend extra time sorting and copying all of the tournament’s ballots. This means that schools will not find that they are missing ballots when they pick up their packets and will receive all of the comments the judge wrote for them. The ballots can also be made available online which would save tournaments the time and expense of having to print them and allow debaters instantaneous access to judge’s feedback.

Finally, it drastically reduces the amount of staff required to run an efficient tournament. It allows tournaments to cut down on people needed to run, collect, and check ballots. This means that tournaments organizers that are stretched for resources will not have to struggle to find the people they need to execute an efficient tournament, and those tournament organizers which have the staff they need can devote their help to other areas.

Advantages for the Judge:

InCharta makes filling out ballots easier. The computer provides convenient drop down menus for the affirmative and negative teams, winner, and speaker positions which allow the judge to make three clicks instead of writing out team and speaker names.

The judge can then simply type in the speaker points and a reason for decision. The ability to type and copy and paste comments makes it easier for judges to be a lot more verbose. A judge can then copy and paste possible cites or other data into the ballots to save time in oral critiques and still get teams the information they need to improve.

And, much to judge’s delight, after submitting their ballots over the Internet; they do not have to walk their ballot to a tabroom or a collection table. They are completely free to coach other teams, eat, or do whatever they want until the next round is posted.

If, however, a judge is mortified of anything even resembling a computer, the judge can still use a regular paper ballot (which can be stapled to the back of judges’ login tickets just in case), and submit his ballot to the tabroom.

Advantages for the debater:

Because InCharta checks all ballots for errors, it will help to eliminate situations where debaters have to resolve conflicts when a judge fills out a ballot incorrectly. While this may end up having no consequence, it can be a very stressful situation if the error changes the winner of a speaker award or who might break. Eliminating errors like these will help to prevent students from leaving the activity out of frustration.

InCharta also significantly increases the valuable feedback that debaters will receive from judges. Because judges are able to fill out their ballots on the computer, we have found that most judges tend to leave much more verbose and meaningful comments to the debaters. Judges can also copy and paste data from their laptops such as citations to better cards to use in rounds. These comments are then provided in writing for the debaters to consider after the tournament, saving speakers from having to keep track of notes on flows which tend to disappear in tubs.

Advantages for the Community:

In the modern world, businesses are doing everything they can to eliminate paper processes. They are prone to error, slow, inefficient, and time intensive. Fortune 500 companies spend millions on consulting firms and programmers to computerize their paper processes. For example, Kelly Services, a Fortune 500 temporary agency which employs 700,000 people a year, uses a web-based form to handle timecards for its employees. The Colorado Department of Agriculture uses paperless forms in its safety inspections of the food supply. Courts around the nation are turning to electronic filing processes to cut down on the thousands of pages sent back and forth in litigation. As technology is becoming more accessible and easier to use, however, electronic filing is becoming more pervasive in everyday life—you can now even file your taxes online.

Education as a whole has traditionally lagged behind industry in adopting new techniques, concepts, and especially technologies. InCharta provides a way to bring the debate community up to the level which Fortune 500 companies are still striving to achieve. Exposure to this type of technology helps bring everyone in the community up to speed with industry and even puts us ahead of the curve turning out individuals who are prepared for the modern society.

Case Study:

InCharta was first deployed at the 2004 Harker Invitational. Almost all of the judges that tried paperless ballots loved the system and many wanted to implement InCharta at their own tournaments.

Harker took a very flexible approach to implementing InCharta, allowing judges to choose whether they would like to use Paperless Ballots or regular paper ballots. The school set up several rooms with computers to allow judges without laptops to use the system. In addition to these pre- setup rooms, judges were able to use their own laptops to access the school’s wireless network to fill out Paperless Ballots. The one judge that preferred not to use computers was still able to use traditional paper ballots.

The tournament stapled the InCharta login information to regular paper ballots. Judges using Paperless Ballots would then carry this to their room and use either their own laptops or laptops the school had provided to access the school’s wireless network and login to InCharta. Judges had the option to use regular paper ballots in the event.

Once connected to the network, all of the judges were able to figure out how to log in and fill out their ballots without needing any training. Most of the judges loved being able to type and copy and paste sections of text into their reasons for decision box and comment boxes. This resulted in much better feedback to the debaters. One judge repeatedly left three typed pages of comments to the debaters in his rounds. Other judges pasted sections of flows or citations to evidence in order to give better feedback to the competitors.

From the tabroom’s prospective, keeping track of the paperless rounds was much easier than rounding up ballots individually. The tabroom was able to see a real- time grid layout showing the status of all the Paperless rounds. The tabroom could see which judges had already submitted ballots, which judges were in the process of filling out ballots, and which judges had not yet logged in to the system.

Once the tournament concluded, the tabroom could simply batch print all of the ballots sorted alphabetically by team to easily stuff them into coach’s packets. The ballots can also be made available to teams online via the Internet.

The reaction to InCharta was overwhelmingly positive; all of the judges except for one loved it. Those with laptops requested paperless ballots every round. Harker will be using InCharta again for its Finals in the West bid tournament in March.

Moving Towards the Future:

InCharta can be modified and adapted to fit almost any network architecture. The only requirement is a network that judges can connect to, via either school-provided computers or their own laptops. We can work with you to make InCharta work with your tournaments infrastructure.

If you would like to see a demo of InCharta or discuss implementing it at your tournament, please contact me at seanturner@sensability.net.

(Sean Turner is a senior at The Harker School in San Jose, CA. He has spent two and one- half years as a policy debater on the national circuit. He is a PHP and ASP.NET developer and has developed web-based electronic forms applications for Intel Corporation, Optical Exchange, and The Harker School.)

Notes

1 Microsoft geared the InfoPath component of Microsoft Office 2003 to be used with the Microsoft .NET Programming languages and Microsoft SQL Server to allow businesses to create electronic forms.

2 Microsoft Corporation. State Agency Improves Decision-Making; Boosts Efficiency with Existing Infrastructure. Microsoft, 2005. Microsoft Customer Solution Case Study Library. 28 Sept. 2005 <http://www.microsoft.com/resources/casestudies/ ShowFile.asp?FileResourceID=7598>.

3 Microsoft Corporation. Superior Court of California, Riverside County: E-Filing Solution Speeds Up Processing of Child-Support Cases for Superior Court. 2002. 1 Aug. 2002. 28 Sept. 2005 <http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/ casestudies/casestudy.asp?CaseStudyID=15211>.

4 Internal Revenue Service. “e-file for Individual Taxpayers.” Internal Revenue Service. 1 Nov. 2005 <http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/ 0,,id=118508,00.html>.

References

Campen, Alicia Holdner. The Paperless Classroom. San Diego State. Department of Educational Technology. San Diego State University. 28 Sept. 2005 <http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/articles/ Paperless/start.htm>. Campen, a graduate student at the Department of Educational Technology of San Diego University, analyzes different approaches to providing a paperless classroom and its impact on the learning process. She raises some of the key disadvantages of operating in a paperless environment.

Fong, Stanley. “Building a Paperless Office using Low Cost Technology.” ASP101 (2004). 28 Sept. 2005 <http://www.asp101.com/articles/ stanley/paperless/default.asp>. Fong analyzes different technical approaches to creating a paperless office and enumerates the advantages and disadvantages of different technologies.

Internal Revenue Service. “e-file for Individual Taxpayers.” Internal Revenue Service. 1 Nov. 2005 <http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/ 0,,id=118508,00.html>.

Microsoft Corporation. Education: Connecting the Agile Business. 2004. Microsoft Education. 28 Sept. 2005 <http:// download.microsoft.com/download/3/f/d/ 3fd18763-5a47-4db1-a6dd-dc2d36e42563/ EducationBrochure.pdf>. Microsoft Corporation researches the challenges involved in integrating technology into the academic world. After identifying the challenges, they enumerate how their software is designed to solve these challenges and provide the best platform for integrating technology into the classroom.

---. State Agency Improves Decision-Making; Boosts Efficiency with Existing Infrastructure. Microsoft, 2005. Microsoft Customer Solution Case Study Library. 28 Sept. 2005 <http://www.microsoft.com/resources/ casestudies/ShowFile.asp?FileResourceID=7598>. Microsoft reports on the Colorado Department of Agriculture’s implementation of a paperless system built on the same technologies used by InCharta. Microsoft analyzes how their technologies were used to address specific shortcomings of paper forms.

- - -. Superior Court of California, Riverside County: E-Filing Solution Speeds Up Processing of Child-Support Cases for Superior Court. 2002. 1 Aug. 2002. 28 Sept. 2005 <http:// www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/casestudies/ casestudy.asp?CaseStudyID=15211>. Microsoft analyzes how a Superior Court of California was able to make the case filing workflow drastically more efficient by converting to a paperless process, while still allowing users to file with paper if they preferred.

Regan, Keith. “IRS Says Record Number Will E-File Taxes.” TechNewsWorld 15 Apr. 2005. 1 Nov. 2005 <http://www.technewsworld.com/ story/internet/42343.html>. Regan explains that e-Filing is one of the United States Government’s most successful e-government pushes and explores the government’s investment in implementing electronic forms.