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.

Jonathan Henderson

Current high school:
None

Currently coaching?: No

Conference:

Number of years coached:

Number of tournaments judged: 10-12

High school attended:
North Lamar High School

Graduated high school: 2007

Participated in high school: Yes

Participated in college: No

Judging qualifications:
I participated in Speech and Debate, almost all forms, throughout high school. I approach debate as a tabula rasa judge, willing to listen to each argument based on its effectiveness and rigor over the other argument. I have a bachelors degree in the humanities with a concentration in philosophy, I pay special attention to value in an LD debate. I was in extemporaneous speaking for at least 3 years and in prose and poetry for a few. The amount of information relative to the fluff of the speech is important to me, but so too is the method and process of delivery. As an Admissions Counselor of Midwestern State University I speak to people each and every day - if I can see that the student is comfortable speaking in from an audience, even if there is a little bit of a stumble, that to me is very important.

Judging Philosophy

CX

Rounds judged: 10-12
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: The quality of speech is important and if I feel as if the debater is speeding through the speech just to present an intense quantity of evidence I will judge that slightly negatively. I want to see that thought has put into the case and that the evidence presented, even if with expedience, is of sufficient quality to make the case. Debaters should argue for and against the evidence effectively to win my vote.

LD

Rounds judged: 20-30
Approach: Communication skills and resolution of substantive issues are of equal importance
Philosophy:
LD should be presented succinctly and in an interesting way. While substantive issues are incredibly important so is the method of delivery. I will vote primarily based on the effectiveness of the case through voice and debate of the value.

Contact Information

email: Jonathan.henderson@unt.edu
cell: 940 2479326
office: 972 4100126

Availability Information

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

Qualified for:
CX
LD
Extemp
Prose/Poetry
Congress

Travel

Region of residence:
2

I will travel to: 2 6