Pilot Year Review: New Chairman's Award Feedback Structure

[jvriezen]

Why not 'crowd source' the feedback? Since you can post everything, a post on CD asking for others (esp. HoF teams) to provide feedback, either publicly on CD or privately is entirely within reason. You might also get some judges to provide feedback in a less time pressured context. You should also be able to at least audio record the presentation with a smartphone to get the Q&A.

I clearly understand the desire for judge feedback. *I also understand how difficult it is for judges to provide quality feedback, especially if there are a lot of teams. In MN, you get 10 points toward State Tourney qualification just for applying for Chairmans. Not applying moves you down about 10 or so slots in the rankings. Winning Chairman's automatically qualifies you for the State tournament. This was done to incent teams to apply, but it does mean there are far more applicants now. Prior to the first state tourney in 2012, our team was at a Duluth regional where only 5 teams applied.

* I've never been an FRC judge but have been a debate judge and basically had about 5-7 minutes to write feedback for four kids other than what I wrote during the debate-- repeat four times during the day. I also had to take notes on the content of the debate arguments at the same time to assess which side won. It was very stressful. I can't imagine doing the similar for 20-30 or more teams applying at a 63 team regional. Some judges would find a reason not to return the next year.