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 speech@uiltexas.org or 512-471-5883.

John Cantu

Current high school:
None

Currently coaching?: No

Conference:

Number of years coached:

Number of tournaments judged: 0

High school attended:
San Isidro High School

Graduated high school: 2009

Participated in high school: Yes

Participated in college: Yes

Judging qualifications:
High school developed my communication and speaking skills at a base level allowing me to compete in UIL Prose and Poetry, extemporaneous speaking, and Cx Debate. With each, I did fairly well but not as well as i wish i had. I was 2nd place state Champion in Social studies UIL, First place Calculator Applications team, and competed at state level for CX debate. AFTER COLLEGE, I studied speech and performance. Studying diction and theater performance, i was introduced to a new form of speech and was anle to better understand debate and speaking. Taking several communication courses and public speaking courses, i then was able to link the two forms of speech. Graduating in December from Yexas State with a BA in English and a BA in Philosophy, I was able to further the style of arguments by fully understanding the way arguments are formed and used as a way to seek further knowledge or gain public support.

Judging Philosophy

CX

Rounds judged: 0
Judging approach: Tabula Rasa
Policy priority: Communication skills and resolution of substantive issues are of equal importance
Evidence philosophy: Quality of evidence is more important than quantity of evidence
Paradigm: While I do claim to be a Tab judge, I could see myself falling under the title of stock issues judge. Looking at a debate, i seek for students to defend their argument with a solid basis as they hold their ground. Going into a debate, I judge both sjudge both sides expecting the same from the two: a good debate. The team that best sjowcases their knowledge of the topic whether A or D should be the team to stand at the end.

LD

Rounds judged: 0
Approach: Resolution of substantive issues is more important than communication skills
Philosophy:
I believe an argument should be clear and precise. The argument should be evident and protected from the beginning. As the debate develops, i expect competitors to not continue the same argument but develop their argument through careful analysis or theory. On theory and analysis, while I am fairly open to theory, it should be well thought out and defended. I will not attend to theories thrown in for the sake of argumenT without some sort of defense that could make sense.

Contact Information

email: john.jay.0413@gmail.com
cell:
office:

Availability Information

Meet types:
Invitational District Regional CX State State Meet

Qualified for:
CX
Extemp
Prose/Poetry

Travel

Region of residence:
1

I will travel to: 1 4