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.

Victoria Graves

Current high school:
Texas City

Currently coaching?: Yes

Conference: 5A

Number of years coached: 6

Number of tournaments judged: 0

High school attended:
Texas City High School

Graduated high school: 2007

Participated in high school: Yes

Participated in college: No

Judging qualifications:
I probably default to policy maker judge but consider myself a critic of argument. I view debate as a discourse for growth and education. Summary: I competed in policy debate and extemporaneous speaking for 2 ½ years in a AAAAA high school. I coach at a AAAAA school and have been coach for approximately 6 years. I will try to answer questions to the best of my ability before the round within reason. I have taught English for approximately 5 years. I have been judging for 9 years.

Judging Philosophy

CX

Rounds judged: 0
Judging approach: Policy Maker
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: Round Preferences: Type Preference Comments/Specifics Preferred Quantity of Arguments Love it Communication is important in the round but not more important than argument. Quality and quantity of evidence are of equal importance. Variety of sources is smiled upon. Don’t waste time on evidence that will not come up again. If you want me to vote something up or down then spend the time to explain it. If you want me to call for evidence red flag is in the 2AR or 2NR. Complete warrants are NECESSARY for each argument. (abuse, education, permutation) Topicality Like it I prefer analogy or example for better limits. The quality of a definition in context is important to me. Providing a list of cases that meet your standards will play greatly in your favor. Counter Plan Love it Topical CPs are accepted. Single agent of action is better than multi-agent. Plan inclusive counter plans are accepted. The more vague the more likely I am going to accept “perm”. 1NC must indicate conditional, non-conditional, or dispositional. Disadvantage Love it DAs will be weighed at the end of the round. I will vote for the team with the better impact calculus. Conditional No Preference Preferences said arguments as disposition as long as they are competitive. Conditionality under certain conditions. See Kicking. Kritiks Topic Specific Don’t be general or generic. Germane and provide alternative not a rejection. Will give more credence to the most logical or realistic argument will be accepted. Kicking No Preference Do be clear about what you are kicking and remind me in 2AR and 2NR or I will count it as a drop. Don’t kick something unless it is necessary. I expect you to run arguments that you plan on keeping, not time wasters. Delivery Very Important Speed is fine if I am still flowing; nonverbal cues-pen drop. Be clear on tags and citations. Don’t run anything you cannot run well or with confidence unless you are choosing to throw the round. Road maps and sign posting is preferred. Don’t do the weird breathing thing. Don’t yell at me. Do have eye contact with me when possible but don’t be weird. Lowest speaker points will be 26 unless your behavior and performance warrants something lower. Additional Comments: Generate clash and solve I will not disclose. I do prefer the negative to sit on the right and the affirmative to side on the left, like the ballot. Please stand during speeches and cross examination. I don’t care if both team members contribute to cross examination; however, I do not like for the students who is not allotted for the cross examination time to dominate the time either with questions or answers. This is a teamed event not a solo, so don’t carry your partner or prevent them from speaking. Cross examination will not be flowed. If you want me to vote on something, you need to say it during your speech. Don't argue during cross examination. Do perform with professionalism-Don’t be rude, don’t use profanity, and don’t be disruptive during someone else speech. Do stand during cross examination and speeches. Do offer resources and materials that are being utilized in the round.

LD

Rounds judged: 0
Approach: Communication skills and resolution of substantive issues are of equal importance
Philosophy:
I teach LD traditionally (value and criterion); however, I am familiar with progress strategies and have taught them. Round Preferences: Type Preference Comments/Specifics Preferred Quantity of Arguments Love it Communication is important in the round but not more important than argument. Quality and quantity of evidence are of equal importance. Variety of sources is smiled upon. Don’t waste time on evidence that will not come up again. If you want me to vote something up or down then spend the time to explain it. If you want me to call for evidence red flag is in the 2AR or 2NR. Complete warrants are NECESSARY for each argument. (abuse, education, permutation) Topicality Like it I prefer analogy or example for better limits. The quality of a definition in context is important to me. Providing a list of cases that meet your standards will play greatly in your favor. Counter Plan Love it Topical CPs are accepted. Single agent of action is better than multi-agent. Plan inclusive counter plans are accepted. The more vague the more likely I am going to accept “perm”. 1NC must indicate conditional, non-conditional, or dispositional. Disadvantage Love it DAs will be weighed at the end of the round. I will vote for the team with the better impact calculus. Conditional No Preference Preferences said arguments as disposition as long as they are competitive. Conditionality under certain conditions. See Kicking. Kritiks Topic Specific Don’t be general or generic. Germane and provide alternative not a rejection. Will give more credence to the most logical or realistic argument will be accepted. Kicking No Preference Do be clear about what you are kicking and remind me in 2AR and 2NR or I will count it as a drop. Don’t kick something unless it is necessary. I expect you to run arguments that you plan on keeping, not time wasters. Delivery Very Important Speed is fine if I am still flowing; nonverbal cues-pen drop. Be clear on tags and citations. Don’t run anything you cannot run well or with confidence unless you are choosing to throw the round. Road maps and sign posting is preferred. Don’t do the weird breathing thing. Don’t yell at me. Do have eye contact with me when possible but don’t be weird. Lowest speaker points will be 26 unless your behavior and performance warrants something lower. Additional Comments: Generate clash and solve I will not disclose. I do prefer the negative to sit on the right and the affirmative to side on the left, like the ballot. Please stand during speeches and cross examination. I don’t care if both team members contribute to cross examination; however, I do not like for the students who is not allotted for the cross examination time to dominate the time either with questions or answers. This is a teamed event not a solo, so don’t carry your partner or prevent them from speaking. Cross examination will not be flowed. If you want me to vote on something, you need to say it during your speech. Don't argue during cross examination. Do perform with professionalism-Don’t be rude, don’t use profanity, and don’t be disruptive during someone else speech. Do stand during cross examination and speeches. Do offer resources and materials that are being utilized in the round.

Contact Information

email: vgraves@tcisd.org
cell: 713 2407435
office: 409 9160932

Availability Information

Meet types:
Invitational District Regional CX State State Meet Congress Region Congress State

Qualified for:
CX
LD
Extemp
Prose/Poetry
Congress

Travel

Region of residence:
3

I will travel to: 3