Performance Judging? (back to original discussion)

[Jim_Woodward at beaerospace.com]

Hi Rick,

Thank you for posting some thoughts regarding my original post.  The first 
part of your post seems concerned with "... what will be done once the 
scores are posted," and "... how can you compare judges' results." 

My point is that "availability" of the information is important to the 
contestant pool and will foster an open communicative environment.  FAI 
has already figured (after reading the last FAI rules notes posted by 
T.N.) out that it is important for the contestants to see what is 
happening across the judging panel.  This is a difference between 
contestant and judge centered paradigms.  In my opinion, focusing on 
increasing the pilots view of a fair open system, will encourage higher 
turnout and satisfaction at the end of the contest round.  Please perceive 
my ideas as a betterment of the pilots experience, and not "cornering" of 
the judges. 

Consider this:  During each judging school, many note that it would be 
"great" if there were demonstrational flights.  However, each and every 
contest round is in fact a demonstrational flight because people are 
watching it.  There would be no finer opportunity than to take the work 
and effort that is already being done, and utilizing it within a few hours 
(while fresh in the memory), for individuals to stop by the table and 
review if what they thought they saw was what was being scored by the 
judges. 

Because there is no current "open" or "organized" way to review a judging 
panels work (.... or performance...).  Any questions a pilot has  have few 
paths to resolution: 
1.  Question the CD regarding a score (pilot feels his score is very low 
and was singled out):  In this process, a pilot asks to talk to the CD off 
line, where other pilots may see this conversation from afar and begin to 
question the motive of this pilot.  The CD then goes and attempts to 
discretely ask the judge why they gave a score.  Typically, the judge is 
correct. Pilot is not happy and has no insight into the trend this judge 
placed on the panel.  Now, this judge goes and tells his friends that a 
particular pilot did not like the score.  Note - this process does not 
foster good will for anyone, and promotes a rumor-mill type of atmosphere.
2.  At round posting, one pilot feels his position is very low:  Because 
there is no panel information, this pilot must now go and try to question 
people who might have seen the round (not the judges because this would 
indicate poor pilot etiquette).  This turns into a complete frustration 
for the pilot and yields only a mystery conclusion.

The flight takes place in an open forum for all to witness that are there, 
everyone looks at the line and recognizes who is judging (as we do not 
make judges where hoods, masks, robes, costumes :) ), many pilots are 
already sharing information from tear or score sheets, we all are privy to 
the "outcome" of the round.  The only missing link is posting of the 
judges panel sheets at the conclusion of the round.  Again, it is 
important for the contestant to have insight into the panels scores as 
recognized by FAI. 

Again, because there is no organized way to see what a judging panel did 
for a completed round, a pilot has only 'backdoor' options to get any 
information - all of which will yield mysteries or distrust in the 
"system."  Result, pilot is not happy with system or individuals, gets 
upset, and doesn't return.  With a few small procedural changes, we can 
increase the pilots enjoyment of the contest - name of the game. 

Put your pilot on - does anyone feel that judges panel information is not 
important to the pilots, or should be kept secret given that all other 
information is known? 

Thanks,
Jim W.






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050803/d0969560/attachment.html