-Extemporaneous Events:

I personally did not compete in these events so I'm not as well-versed in them however, I think a clear and concise speech is the best route. By plainly pointing out each of your points and then tying them all together to a clear conclusion would be best for me to understand and critique properly. Evidence is also very important, I think the best is having 1-2 sources tied to your points for a valid speech. Virtual delivery the same, just make sure to not move around too much as you maybe would in an in-person speech delivery.

-Original Oration/Informative:

Please make sure there's a distinct difference between an OO and an Info. How I was told is that Original Oration should have more persuasive and argumentative points in your speech versus Informative is just informing your audience on a specific topic of your choosing. Similar to extemp, it's best to have a clear and organized speech. If the speech is confusing and disoragnized then the topic can get a diffiult to follow.

-Intepretation Events:

I think introductions should be simple and short, if you have a personal connection to the piece that you are comfortable sharing then share it. For the virtual speeches, it can be challenging because not everyone has the same resources or space as others and that's okay! Just try to engage as much as you can with the audience, the more simple the blocking the better sometimes. Character work is very important to interp events, if trying to convey multiple characters and I, as a judge, cannot differentiate between each character then it can be confusing. If you are just conveying one character then really work out the details and mannerisms of this character. As far as appropriateness goes, I really don't mind swearing or mature content as long as it has a point (especially for cursing, do not curse just to curse.) All in all, tell a story that is what interp to me is about. If you have a story that you want other people to hear and a story that you are passionate about then that should be enough for me as a judge to see and understand.

In dramatic events, I am looking for clear characterization, strong emotional connections, and understanding of the piece. I want you to draw me in and let me feel with your characters.

In humorous events, I am looking for clear and concise characterizations that are easy to differentiate and follow, and a good sense of comic timing with the piece.

Duo and Duet, I am looking at the same things, but also strong interactions between the different characters.

In Informative, Oratory, and the Extemps, I am looking for a good conversational style with good use of gesture and confidence in your speeches. Know your stuff, or at least look like you know your stuff.

I am overall going to also look at technique and seek for it to be clean and clear.

Experience: My experience started a bit backwards, I began judging events in 2023 within Corpus Christi, Tx and as time went on began to move upwards in Texas, to San Antonio schools. In January 2025 I was hired at Veterans Memorial High School in Corpus Christi, Tx. Where I will began assistant coaching the VMHS Speech and Debate team in the fall.

My Preferences:

-Jargon & Technical Language: I understand that as contestants/competitors at times you will need to use jargon and technical language, my preference with this is that if possible you work to include a short definition or clarify what you are using the language in reference to as I am still relatively new to the realm of Speech and Debate.

-Pace of Delivery: When it comes to pacing of delivery, I very much prefer that if you choose to spread or speak very quickly that you do so in a manner that truly emphasizes the most important parts of your speech/argument and do well to speak clearly and loudly enough for me to hear you.

-Values: When judging arguments I highly value both the style of the argument and the argument itself. I prefer a bold and confident speaker who can convince me that they are the authority on the topic and have well prepared their arguments and make it evident that they understand the topic well. I also value the structure and organization, delivery of the argument, and how they connect their argument to their audience.

In non-debate events I value how believable a character is, how well prepared the speaker/actor is, and how the actor blocks their piece. I like to feel like I've been brought into the realm of the story and that I am almost like a fly on the wall in the story of what is being presented to me as a judge.

Expectations for In-round Conduct:

-I expect that all debaters are respectful and courteous to their fellow debaters, refrain from any non-professional or on topic conversations while debating, the same for spectators. I expect that each round I judge flow smoothly, and that all debaters are prepared to be professional while in the room whether they are spectating or competing.