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.
Dr. Courtney Wright
Current high school:
Currently coaching?: Yes
Conference:
Number of years coached: 15+
Number of tournaments judged: 10-12
High school attended:
F.J. Reitz High School (Evansville, IN)
Graduated high school: 2002
Participated in high school: Yes
Participated in college: Yes
Judging qualifications:
I competed in forensics throughout school. Though I competed in Indiana during high school (Evansville Reitz, 1999-2002), I spent several years coaching at the University of Texas Summer Camp (UTNIF) and am very familiar with UIL. In high school I was in multiple state finals and won the NSDA National Championship in Poetry. In college I competed for Western Kentucky University (2003-2006), advancing to national finals in Persuasion, After-Dinner Speaking, Duo Interpretation, Poetry, and Prose, and won the national championship in Informative Speaking (PKD). I earned MA in Communication Studies from Eastern Michigan University (EMU) and PhD in Media & Communication (focus on rhetoric and argumentation) from Bowling Green State University. I have spent many years coaching interpretation, public address, limited preparation, policy, parliamentary, and Lincoln Douglass Debate at the high school and college levels. I live in Marshall, TX where I am an Assistant Professor of Speech Communication and serve as the Director of Forensics.
Judging Philosophy
CX
Judging approach: Stock Issues
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: I am a fairly traditional policy debate judge. I am trained in critical theory and appreciate critical arguments. I am certainly familiar with policy debate terminologies and can follow debaters who are spreading, but I very much appreciate rhetorical eloquence and a comprehensible delivery. If I miss most of an argument because a debater is spreading, I will likely disregard it. That said, I will also readily raise my hand to notify speakers if I cannot follow. I try to provide thorough feedback and a clear reason for my decision and typically refrain from oral disclosures after the round.
LD
Approach: Communication skills and resolution of substantive issues are of equal importance
Philosophy:
I am a fairly traditional policy debate judge. I am trained in critical theory and appreciate critical arguments. I am certainly familiar with policy debate terminologies and can follow debaters who are spreading, but I very much appreciate rhetorical eloquence and a comprehensible delivery. If I miss most of an argument because a debater is spreading, I will likely disregard it. That said, I will also readily raise my hand to notify speakers if I cannot follow. I try to provide thorough feedback and a clear reason for my decision and typically refrain from oral disclosures after the round.
Contact Information
email: cwright@wileyc.edu
cell:
office:
Availability Information
Meet types:
Invitational
District
Regional
CX State
State Meet
Qualified for:
CX
LD
Extemp
Prose/Poetry
Congress
Travel
Region of residence:
6
I will travel to: 1 2 3 5 6
