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.

Donghee Han

Current high school:

Currently coaching?: No

Conference: NA

Number of years coached: NA

Number of tournaments judged: 5

High school attended:
Cedar Park High School

Graduated high school: 2014

Participated in high school: Yes

Participated in college: Yes

Judging qualifications:
2014-2015 LD debater in High school. Started taking it seriously my senior year and went to regionals at UTSA. Had a trial run of policy debate somewhere in there. Currently a policy debater at Missouri State University. Went to a few NFA LD tournaments this year (one-person policy). Judged a few tournaments over winter break in Texas and some here in Missouri but debated for a good chunk of the year.

Judging Philosophy


Rounds judged: 20-30
Judging approach: Tabula Rasa
Policy priority: Resolution of substantive issues is more important than communication skills
Evidence philosophy: Quality of evidence is more important than quantity of evidence
Paradigm: Stock issues are cool. DA: I think UQ, Link, Internal link, and Impact are all equally important. Make sure you keep everything standing if you want it in your 2NR. CP: Make sure it's competitive and has a net benefit. K: Link, alt, impact, root cause. If you have a root cause, make sure it's articulated thoroughly. I see all parts of the K as equally important but the links should be strong. Critical affs: Make sure there is a clear advocacy by the end of the round. Theory is fine. Tell me how to judge and where to put my attention to and I'll go wherever the round goes.


Rounds judged: 1
Approach: Resolution of substantive issues is more important than communication skills
Value/ Criterion: Not the same thing in my mind. Criterion is how you measure your value. Apriori: Make sure they're legit, warranted, and justified. If it's intentionally abusive, I'll probably be more lenient on theory. I see all of the above ^ as part of framework and I think framework is the most important part of the round. All the criterions should be articulated back in terms of framework (value/criterion, etc.)

Contact Information

cell: 512 7852901

Availability Information

Meet types:
CX State

Qualified for:


Region of residence:

I will travel to: 1