Chairman's feedback form: Gracious Professionalism

[Chris_Elston]

Just curious what might be some feedback to what other teams do to address the question "Team exhibits numerous examples of gracious professionalism".

Do you actually have examples of things you've done for teams in your chairman's essay? Or maybe expand on what that question means to your team? We do several things that we believe are GP, but maybe they aren't in the eyes of the judges and wanted something to compare that too.

Better yet, how are you clearly communicating to the chairman judges you are meeting the Gracious Professionalism bullet points?

[KelliV]

When in doubt give information directly. "Team XXXXX believes in GP and this is how." Sometimes judges are VERY familiar with FIRST, other times they aren't.

[AllenGregoryIV]

We do have examples of things we have done for specific teams in our essay, summary questions, and presentation.

Our submission can be read here.

[BigJ]

It seems like judges want to see more than just helping other teams as well -- our RCA feedback last year listed a point to improve as "Examples of GP not related to [the list of categories in the rubric that involved FIRST and FIRST teams]".

[Chris_Elston]

Originally Posted by BigJ

It seems like judges want to see more than just helping other teams as well -- our RCA feedback last year listed a point to improve as "Examples of GP not related to [the list of categories in the rubric that involved FIRST and FIRST teams]".

What category rubrics are you referring to?

[BigJ]

The ones on the feedback form at the regional level from last year. I don't have a copy handy to write examples from, sorry.

[Chris_Elston]

Originally Posted by BigJ

The ones on the feedback form at the regional level from last year. I don't have a copy handy to write examples from, sorry.

Oh ok. Yeah I have those bullet points. The GP one is the reason for my post, as I am trying to help my chairman's team understand that question from the judges.

[cadandcookies]

Honestly, my team has mostly ignored that in our submissions and hasn't ever really been asked a question about it while I've been a presenter. At least the judges at our regionals seem to take our actions at tournaments and overall submission as sufficient evidence.

[Chris_Elston]

[quote= At least the judges at our regionals seem to take our actions at tournaments and overall submission as sufficient evidence.[/QUOTE]

This is a VERY INTERESTING comment you made. It seems it's also important to the judges what they see in your team at the moment right there at the event is maybe more so important than what you did the whole year or past ten. I think it might be a gauge of success that it should be percolating all throughout your team. And if it's not 100% a shining example at the event, then they must assume all your documentation is null and voided.

What's interesting is to have a lower score in Gracious Professionalism than all the other marks on the chairman's feedback form, yet you WIN the Gracious Professionalism Award at the regional...at least that is what happened last year. So just trying to make heads or tails of judge logic and what it is exactly we aren't communicating to them.

[cadandcookies]

Originally Posted by Chris_Elston

What's interesting is to have a lower score in Gracious Professionalism than all the other marks on the chairman's feedback form, yet you WIN the Gracious Professionalism Award at the regional...at least that is what happened last year. So just trying to make heads or tails of judge logic and what it is exactly we aren't communicating to them.

Remember that in most cases the GP Award and RCA are judged by different judges... the GP Judges are often actively searching, while the RCA judges (I'm guessing) mostly rely on incidental contact and the interviews. Not to mention the drastically different interpretations of exactly what "GP" even means.

[JB987]

"Not to mention the drastically different interpretations of exactly what "GP" even means."

And therein lies the rub.