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.
Glenda Winter
Current high school:
Currently coaching?: No
Conference:
Number of years coached: 8
Number of tournaments judged: 17+
High school attended:
Clifton High School
Graduated high school: 1973
Participated in high school: Yes
Participated in college: No
Judging qualifications:
I coached Speech and Debate for 8 years, usually taking two CX teams to State each year. My teams often advanced to octa- and/or quarterfinals. Many of my LD Debaters advanced to Regional. One LD Debater advanced to State. In addition to judging while coaching, I have been judging around 20 tournaments per year since retiring in 2015.
Judging Philosophy
CX
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: I will keep an open mind about any sensible argument. CP should be non-topical and competitive. Please provide roadmaps and follow them. Signposting and structure are appreciated. Follow the roadmap established by the 1NR. Please don't say, "Next off-case" and then move to your next argument. Say, "Next, a Spending DA" or "Next a T violation on the word _____." Arguments should be properly structured and supported. A claim without warrants is not an argument. I am listening to your citations and evidence. I will not intervene or link your arguments for you. I will evaluate the round based on the arguments and under the framework presented. The negative should present offensive arguments on why the affirmative should not win the debate. Conversely, the affirmative should provide offensive arguments for why the negative's arguments should be rejected. Weigh arguments and give me a well-developed impact calculus and clear decision path. Also, if I put my pen down, I am not flowing because I cannot understand you. If I cannot understand you, I will say, “Louder” or “Clear.” I will give such prompts twice before putting my pen down. If my pen is down, I am not flowing.
LD
Approach: Communication skills and resolution of substantive issues are of equal importance
Philosophy:
I value logic over emotion. Convince me that your value is the most relevant and most important. You can do this by communicating your message clearly. For me, it’s all about persuasion and each debater's ability to demonstrate a superior approach to his or her side of the resolution. Clear, concise language that is direct, to the point, and void of jargon is much appreciated. Arguments: I will listen to whatever you want to run. However, whether I'll make a decision based on those arguments depends entirely on how well you explain how each argument functions in the round. Communication/Speed: Communication skills and resolution are more of equal importance, but if I can't understand you, I cannot give you the win. If you have a soft voice, please speak up. I need to hear every word regardless of your speed. If I cannot understand you, I will say "Louder" or "Clear." I will give such a prompt twice before putting down my pen as a signal that I am no longer flowing. Speaking quickly is only effective when you form coherent sentences. I'm judging the quality—-not the quantity—-of your arguments, so take the time to make your arguments understood. Please signpost clearly. Be respectful to your opponent.
Contact Information
email: glendaannwinter@gmail.com
cell: 254 2160184
office:
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:
5
I will travel to: 1 2 5
