View Single Post
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-04-2016, 22:49
Red2486's Avatar
Red2486 Red2486 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Kinney Anderson
FRC #1011 (CRUSH)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 112
Red2486 is a splendid one to beholdRed2486 is a splendid one to beholdRed2486 is a splendid one to beholdRed2486 is a splendid one to beholdRed2486 is a splendid one to beholdRed2486 is a splendid one to beholdRed2486 is a splendid one to behold
Re: Judge Consistency Between Events

[Sorry, this post is very all over the place but I have a lot of thoughts on this topic]

I think the main issue with judging, and I have thought about this a lot, is just how subjective it is, and then, with that, how can it be less subjective but still effective? We know that checklists/rubrics aren't really the answer, but how do we find a happy medium?

One thing that I had never seen at a regional before, but saw this year at one event, was two Chairman's judging rooms. I've always been bummed about multiple judging rooms (there are always multiple at Champs), but there is really nothing to do about it since there are just so many teams. The event where there were two judging panels had ~30 teams applying for the award. The problem is that this makes the process a lot muddier. Not only does the Chairman's team have to advocate that they are the best role model to one set of judges, but they have to connect with those judges so well that their judging panel, in turn, then has to advocate for the team. It adds a layer of subjectivity to the whole situation; something, like starting a robotics camp for special needs students, for example, may connect better with a judge who is a special needs teacher than a aerospace engineer (totally just an example I made up).

In my time in FIRST I have been a FRC Judge Assistant, FLL Project Judge, FTC Dean's List Judge, and general FTC Judge. Like many of you have mentioned, it is really tough, and there are issues like the ones that have been mentioned in all levels of FIRST and in many other competitions outside of FIRST. As a team, I think the only thing we can really do about it (besides mentioning it in the post-event survey*) is to make yourselves so good that subjectivity is a non-issue. As a mentor, I think the best thing we can do is encourage our students to understand that there is a difference between not winning an award and "losing" an award and to utilize moments like these to become more motivated.

A final thought, as your team continues its Chairman's journey, is that the Chairman's Award was put in place to encourage teams to do Chairman's-like activities. When you are signing up for outreach events, running tournaments, starting teams, etc., it is important to understand what the truly positive and life-changing results will be on the team, school, community, and larger world. And, the truth of the matter is that only one team at each event can earn the Chairman's Award, regardless of how many outstanding teams are applying, but each team still has that outstanding work they have done behind the scenes that is truly making a difference!!

*I don't mean that any disagreement with the judges should go in the survey, just any evidence-based concerns that could negatively effect you or other teams FIRST experience.
__________________
Mentor - CRUSH, FRC Team 1011 - 2015 to Present
Student - CocoNuts, FRC Team 2486 - 2010 to 2014
2014 Dean's List Winner
--
"Every child deserves a champion, an adult who will never give up on them, who understands the power of connection, and insists that they become the best they can possibly be. We can do this. We're educators. We're born to make a difference." -Rita Pierson
Reply With Quote