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.
Allison Morris
Current high school:
None
Currently coaching?: No
Conference:
Number of years coached:
Number of tournaments judged: 0
High school attended:
Vandegrift High School
Graduated high school: 2019
Participated in high school: Yes
Participated in college: No
Judging qualifications:
General- I took debate levels 1-4 in high school, and was the first student at Vandegrift High School to independently study a 4th year of debate.
LD- I competed in LD tournaments from 2015-2016, I wrote my own cases with a partner.
Extemp- We regularly did extemp drills in class for speech practice. I have not personally competed in this event, however I am extremely familiar with the format and overall purpose of an extemp speech.
Prose/Poetry- I only competed in this event for one semester, but I placed 5th overall in poetry interpretation at the Westwood UIL tournament on February 23rd 2019.
Congress- I competed in congressional debate tournaments from 2016-2018.
Judging Philosophy
CX
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: Honestly, I don't have much experience with CX, but this my framework for an effective policy: AFFIRMATIVE- - Are all the main questions answered? For example, who does the resolution call for? How will funding be allocated? Who enforces the necessary action? What is the importance of the outlined solution? What portion of the population will be affected/harmed? etc. - Acknowledgment of why our current system in place creates these problems or makes it difficult to resolve the point made by the resolution. NEGATIVE- - Simpler concept, must follow along with the affirmative's points and debunk them meaningfully. In other words, each point that is made by the affirmative must be addressed with supporting sources. - Abstract thinking- how did the speaker adapt to the points made? How directly correlated was the evidence?
LD
Approach: Communication skills and resolution of substantive issues are of equal importance
Philosophy:
AFFIRMATIVE- - How is their speech outlined? Is it easy to follow and are the points guided? - Is the resolution properly defined within the context of the speakers contentions? - Outline of risk/reward. Addressing setbacks while offering solutions. - How does each contention connect to the resolution? NEGATIVE- - Do they create a case for themselves while simultaneously dismantling their opponents points? - Do they define the resolution the same way as the affirmative? Why or why not? - Similar to CX and all forms of negative rebuttal, is each contention addressed with evidence?
Contact Information
email: allygracemorris@gmail.com
cell: 512 6950580
office:
Availability Information
Meet types:
Invitational
District
Regional
State Meet
Congress Region
Congress State
Qualified for:
LD
Extemp
Prose/Poetry
Congress
Travel
Region of residence:
1
I will travel to: 1 2 3 5
