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.
Kim Mills
Current high school:
Currently coaching?: Yes
Conference: NCFCA
Number of years coached: 1
Number of tournaments judged: 2
High school attended:
Denton High School
Graduated high school: 1993
Participated in high school: Yes
Participated in college: Yes
Judging qualifications:
As high school Debate Team captain, I competed in NFL and UIL LD debate, extemp, and oratory. I attended UNT on Speech and Debate scholarships, earning a BBA in Marketing while competing on the NDT collegiate policy debate team. My early career involved political speech writing and public speaking for various charities. After obtaining a Masters in Business Administration during my 20 years in the business world, I left to homeschool my kids. Now, I teach and coach homeschool speech and debate, and lead a competitive mock trial team. We recently joined the NCFCA league, and I have started judging through Ziggy online.
Judging Philosophy
CX
Judging approach: Stock Issues
Policy priority: Resolution of substantive issues is more important than communication skills
Evidence philosophy: Quantity of evidence and quality of evidence are of equal importance
Paradigm: Stock issues are fundamental to the structure and integrity of educational debate. Being able to listen intently to arguments, form tight counterarguments, and persuade effectively in clash is the criteria for choosing the superior debater(s) in a round. This is done through evidentiary support. Quality of evidence gives foundation and quantity demonstrates dominance of collaborative opinion, so both are equally important. I enjoy a technical debate and impacts to arguments are paramount.
LD
Approach: Resolution of substantive issues is more important than communication skills
Philosophy:
While communication skills are admittedly more persuasive than a debater who struggles with delivery, ultimately, debate should be judged on the content and quality of the arguments presented. I like to hear classical philosophy and value clash in a LD round. Under-supported ethical standards and underdeveloped criteria are killing this academic sport; this isn't policy lite. Again, I enjoy a technical debate with emphasis on value proposition and application to the resolution.
Contact Information
email: ideamill@icloud.com
cell: 210 3179340
office:
Availability Information
Meet types:
Invitational
District
Regional
CX State
State Meet
Congress Region
Congress State
Qualified for:
CX
LD
Extemp
Travel
Region of residence:
2
I will travel to: 1 2 5 6
