<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Just one thought to insert.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>In the past the judges id was kept confidential. I
did have one unpleasant experience where it was not. An official who was also a
pilot looked me up and challenged why I had give a zero for his spin. I
explained that his plane had sat there with its nose up and swung around almost
180 degrees before it started to drop. He said that's the way the plane flies
and I was "a couple of explicatives" and the only judge who had given him
a zero. Turns out that I was not the only judge but I was "rookie" enough for
this veteran to single me out and give me his unwelcome attention. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>This was seconds before I judged an FAI final. It
did affect my performance and confidence in my decisions for the next round.
Fortunately, my mentor, a very experienced judge counseled me and I got
back into the groove for the remaining rounds. </FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>That pilot had not made the finals so his contest was over. If he had
been in the finals he would have been ejected from the
competition.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The point of the story is that I know that
"payback" is going on out there.I have heard pilots bragging about it. I have
had it done to me on several occasions. When you take a leadership position you
have to expect that you will go a few rounds with folks who hold different
opinions. People being people find it hard to not let it overflow into judging
situations. I my own situation I know who will screw me over and have considered
not flying in front of them. I then decided to fly just to give them one more
chance to be a bigger and better person.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I know pilots who drive thousands of miles to fly
in districts where they think that they can get a fairer set of judges. In
personal survey I did in 1999 of all the folks that I knew who had
quit pattern, judging bias was their number one or two issue. AND that was
before pilot judging became as established as it is now.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Pilot judging is very vulnerable to this actual and
potential behavior.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Identifying judges on score sheets or posting
judges performances during a contest, is a UXB.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Regards,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><BR>Eric.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=Jim_Woodward@beaerospace.com
href="mailto:Jim_Woodward@beaerospace.com">Jim_Woodward@beaerospace.com</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:36
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Performance Judging? Trial
Balloon</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>Trial Balloon Email (beware)
:)</FONT> <BR><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>Hi All,</FONT> <BR><BR><FONT
face=sans-serif size=2>I'm going to propose a different way of looking at
judging. Of course, the pilot is the "performer" that is on stage for
all to see, however, at the same time the judge(s) are performing as well.
At the US Nationals, the judging committee is calculating persons
judging marks, and continuing to rank the judges. Thus, the judges are
performing at the same time as the pilot. However, we typically do not
ever get to see how the performance of the judge ranks against the pilot, or
peers in an open forum. The current atmosphere is sort of hush
quiet, or a "don't tell" type in regards to what judge gave what score.
Almost as if, its considered good pilot etiquette not to ask judging
questions. Many judges do not like to be approached after a round to
discuss scoring. Instead of this, we could turn the tables completely
180 degree around. </FONT> <BR><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>Judging
could be made to be a completely open from start to finish of the contest.
Perhaps within the scoring system, after each round, judges scores for
all pilots are posted (tear sheets essentially) at the same time as the round
postings. The posting of side-by-side scores, could become a POWERFUL
training tool for younger pilots (judges). Currently, there is no award
for the "performance" of judging. Flyers go to a contest to fly,
yet the task of judging takes double or more of the combined numbers of people
than contestants (at least in total effort). </FONT> <BR><BR><FONT
face=sans-serif size=2>If we acknowledge that in the current local contest and
Nationals setting, there is already volumes of discussion going on between
pilots regarding scoring (is there any bigger topic with 90% of the pilots?),
we can then foster an environment which turns what is currently ambivalent or
negative judge critiquing, into one in which takes these volumes of discussion
and focuses on "constructive" or "objective" results - results beyond simply
complaining amongst each other (avoid the misery loves company syndrome).
</FONT><BR><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>Doing something like this will
address two important issues. 1.) The contestant should feel more
"in-tune" with scoring, and perhaps use this feedback to better their own
flying and judging. 2.) The judge should feel satisfied in knowing
at the end of a round, whether or not his/her "calibration" is more or less
correct (I'm tending to think that within a few posted rounds of these scores,
judges will "self-correct" any trends without asking if such a trend has
become obvious). Individually, I hope each judge feels compelled to
"talk" to pilots about the round if asked. </FONT> <BR><BR><FONT
face=sans-serif size=2>Finally, recognizing that judging is an important
criteria, I recommend a "District Award" for the top 1,2,3 persons who
performed the most amount of judging in the district (or most accurate if
possible to calculate). Also possibly a District award for the "team"
that performed the most contest scoring.</FONT> <BR><BR><FONT face=sans-serif
size=2>Key thoughts:</FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>1.
Contestants are more in-tune with total system of contest
running/scoring, etc.</FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>2. Judges
(or CD's???) offered an avenue to "self-correct" if & when necessary
(... could happen to anybody)</FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>3.
District awards for the massive judging/scoring effort already taking
place.</FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>4. Re-focus the
INCREDIBLE VOLUMES of discussion already taking place regarding scoring into a
beneficial training event</FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>5.
Possibility: Upon the conclusion of Saturdays competition, the CD
could offer an open-discussion or review of the days scoring and judging
- read as, a quick pilots meeting that gives folks the open forum to
discuss anything - which can also be viewed as
mini-judge-training-event.</FONT> <BR><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>Anyway
- just thinking of ways to take the effort that is already going on, and
refocusing into beneficial paths. Definitely open to other ideas and
suggestions.</FONT> <BR><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>Jim W.</FONT>
<BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BODY></HTML>