Skip to main content
University of Texas at Austin
University Interscholastic League Logo
University Interscholastic League Logo

UIL Speech Judges

If you have corrections, questions or comments regarding this information, please notify The UIL Speech and Debate department at or 512-471-5883.

Andrew Cornish

Current high school:

Currently coaching?: yes

Conference: 3A

Number of years coached: One

Number of tournaments judged: 11 or more

High school attended:
Hallsville, TX

Graduated high school: 2009

Participated in high school: yes

Participated in college: no

Judging qualifications:
Extemp: 4A district champion for two years, regional medalist one year, and NFL national alternate my senior year. I competed for all four years of high school. LD: I was taught this as well as CX even though I chose to do CX more. I also competed and won several invitationals my senior year when my partner couldn't come for CX CX: I was a 4A state medalist for 3 years, Octofinals sophomore year, 1st junior year and 2nd senior year. I was also the golden gavel winner my senior year and silver my junior. I qualified for NFL nationals for three years, breaking twice and my senior year was 12th speaker and placed 15th.

Judging Philosophy


Rounds judged: 40
Judging approach: tabula rosa
Policy priority: Equal
Evidence philosophy: quality
Paradigm: I consider myself a tabula rasa judge. I am open to any type of arguments minus unethical ones (racism good, rape good, etc). I will default as a policymaker, but if you make the case I might evaluate as a stocks judge although it will be an uphill battle for you. T: I like T a lot. If you don't do the work then I won't vote on it. If you go for T, I prefer it to be 5 min in the 2NR. I will vote on Potential abuse if you win that I should. I generally think that T should be A priori. DAs: Generics are fine, just win the link. CPs: No problems here. My default is topical CPs are fine. Ks: These are fine, but you better be able to explain the argument well for me to vote on it. Theory: This is fine as well. Speed: I can flow it but at UIL tournaments I expect there to be a high level of communication. If you go too fast it will show up in your speaker points. Conditional Negative arguments: As long as you win the theoretical objections go for it.


Rounds judged: 6
Approach: Equal
I am open to most arguments, but I consider myself a comparable worlds judge for LD. Speed: I can flow it, but for UIL tournaments I expect there to be a high level of communication. If your speed gets excessive it will show up in your speaker points. Argumentation Pre-standards: There must be a clear reason as to why it is a pre-standard and developed. Other: I am open to K, T, CP, DA, and theory. Theory should only be ran when there is real abuse occurring. Post-modernism: Don’t assume I am familiar with your author. Given that, clarity is imperative. Rebuttals: Weigh arguments and give me a clear decision calculus. Don’t make me work – you might not like the work I have to do for you.

Contact Information

cell: 903 8065528

Availability Information

Meet types:
District Regional CX State State Meet

Qualified for:


Region of residence:
Area 5 Waco/Lufkin

I will travel to: 1 2 5 6