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.

Cody Cade

Current high school:

Currently coaching?: No


Number of years coached:

Number of tournaments judged: 0

High school attended:

Graduated high school: 2015

Participated in high school: Yes

Participated in college: No

Judging qualifications:
I have participated in several events in Speech and Debate, including LD Debate, Extemporaneous Speaking, Original Oratory, Congressional Debate, and Prose/Poetry. I was 4A's top Presiding Officer in Congressional Debate State of 2015 and third overall as well as a National Qualifier in Congressional Debate. I also won many local and regional tournaments in extemporaneous speaking and LD Debate. My final qualification is that at the end of my 4 year debate career, I was my NSDA region's student of the year and accumulated over 1700 points in NFL/NSDA points.I know the "ins-and-outs" of all UIL events and would be more than happy to assist in assisting in the coaching students as well as judging.

Judging Philosophy


Rounds judged: 0
Judging approach: Tabula Rasa
Policy priority: Communication skills are more important than resolution of substantive issues
Evidence philosophy: Quantity of evidence and quality of evidence are of equal importance
Paradigm: As a Tabula Rasa judge, I am very laid back in the aspect of CX debate, if you can prove your argument with quality evidence then I am okay with it, and a large quantity of said evidence also helps a lot. However, my biggest pet peeve in this event is spreading. If I cannot hear or comprehend it I will not flow it. Make eye contact with your opponents and me, make it a debate not just reading evidence.


Rounds judged: 0
Approach: Communication skills and resolution of substantive issues are of equal importance
My basic LD judging philosophy is more of an "old school" take on Lincoln Douglas. While I understand that LD is adapting to more policy based arguments and aspects, I do not agree with them. I believe LD should be based on the philosophical arguments brought forth by the competitors, not the policy that has to be taken to do that. I do not enjoy K arguments unless they are extremely basic. Those who present the best philosophical case and arguments will be the ones who win in this round, not those who contain policy.

Contact Information

cell: 903 5396829
office: 903 5396829

Availability Information

Meet types:
Invitational District Regional CX State State Meet

Qualified for:


Region of residence:

I will travel to: 1 5 8