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.

Jonathan Henderson

Current high school:

Currently coaching?: No


Number of years coached:

Number of tournaments judged: 0

High school attended:
North Lamar High School

Graduated high school: 2007

Participated in high school: Yes

Participated in college: No

Judging qualifications:
My B.A. is in the Humanities and in Philosophy. I take a logical approach towards argumentation in debate. How participants make their arguments, their substance, and their cohesiveness matter the most. I will judge holistically, as there are certainly more than just their method of argumentation that matters, but primarily I will look for who was able to defend / attack the best. In speech / prose and poetry I will judge on voice, confidence, and action. In extemporaneous speaking, especially, I will judge on the quality of sources and their implementation as well as the effectiveness of the speech.

Judging Philosophy


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: The winner in a CX round ought to be able to prove that their evidence (regardless of quantity) is stronger than the evidence of their opponents. They ought to be able to best support the resolution (or oppose it) with both logic and evidence. Real world issues are at hand in CX and they ought to make the strongest argument. However, an argument, if communicated badly, will never be as strong as one communicated well. A strong CX period will also be taken heavily into account.


Rounds judged: 0
Approach: Communication skills and resolution of substantive issues are of equal importance
LD is about value and substance. Competitors ought to appeal to a value, be able to support it with a criterion or various criteria, and prove that in some abstract or concrete sense, that what they are arguing appeals to the pathos, logos, and ethos of the judge or audience. A strong cross examination period will also be very important to my decision to award a win.

Contact Information

cell: 940 2479362

Availability Information

Meet types:
Invitational District Regional CX State State Meet

Qualified for:


Region of residence:

I will travel to: 2 6