RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I will be apprenticing a master level hunt test this weekend and am thinking that when I get to be a judge for "real", I'd like to consider having handlers fill out an anonymous critique of the judges. I'm sure this has been done by others in the past and wonder what questions to ask? It would seem to be helpful to know how the handlers felt about your judging style and test set ups.

Christine
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,356 Posts
I'm sure this has been done by others in the past and wonder what questions to ask?
I don't know of a time it's ever been done in the past.

It may have....I've just never heard of it.

Be careful what you ask for regards,

kg
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
3,871 Posts
You can please some of the people some of the time...but you can’t please all of the people all of the time.
:)

Vicky
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,512 Posts
K G said:
I'm sure this has been done by others in the past and wonder what questions to ask?
I don't know of a time it's ever been done in the past.

It may have....I've just never heard of it.

Be careful what you ask for regards,kg

I agree, and remember your co-judge may not want to know what people think of their judging. :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,356 Posts
Good point, Margo, but as I've said all along, if you can't take the heat, don't sit too close to it....and judging puts you square in the middle of it. :wink:

Seriously, though...my primary concern in this instance is: how thick-skinned are the "newbies" and are they willing to suffer the slings and arrows of their largely evaluation-ignorant survey participants? Do we TRULY believe that folks are going to objectively answer survey questions about the test their dog just failed, ESPECIALLY if the dog just barely failed from an average score standpoint? Do we TRULY believe that they won't make it personal and take the "survey" opportunity to assassinate (anonymously, of course) the folks that gave their weekend to give THEIR dog an opportunity to pass?

I'm just not willing to give human nature that much credit, not when it comes to exposing people, especially newbie judges, to the scorn and uneducated opinions of a vocal minority.

kg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
617 Posts
I believe that some NAHRA clubs tried this years ago. Unfortunately, most of the people that are willing to take the time to critique, usually have had a negative experience and so you can imagine what they write down.

In principle, I agree with the idea of gettting feedback from handlers. However, if you do offer an evaluation form to handlers use caution in how you word the questions. Use mulitple choice or "on a scale from 1-10" questions.

If someone doesn't point out mistakes, how will we learn to change? Kind of like steering a boat, it's easier and safer to just hold the wheel straight. But it's better if we have input that tells us when to turn to avoid harm.

Travis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,411 Posts
stonybrook said:
If someone doesn't point out mistakes, how will we learn to change? Kind of like steering a boat, it's easier and safer to just hold the wheel straight. But it's better if we have input that tells us when to turn to avoid harm.

Travis

I think most judges hear about their mistakes w/o an evaluation :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,345 Posts
My opinion is that if you get asked to judge again, you either did something right or your last name is at the beginning of the alphabet.

Seriously, If you are happy with the results of your test on any given weekend, that is all that matters.

After the test, on the road home or during the next week, you should think about what was good in your test and what didn't go quite as expected and then think about how you can improve for the next assignment.

Also remember its the judges that shape the sport, with the reasonableness of their tests and the fairness of their judgement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Juges evaluation

There seems to be alot of threads on different sites about somehow trying to do a judges evaluation. Seems to me this should be the job of the Hunt Test/Field Trial committee, they should be there observing the test and listening to marshalls and participants during and after the test. If they have problems with a judge, they note problems and keep a record for the next committee. Eventually poor judges just won't get many assignments, and in general evaluation would be unbiased. Of course it helps to have knowledgable and unbiased people on your committes too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,411 Posts
Re: Juges evaluation

obxdog said:
There seems to be alot of threads on different sites about somehow trying to do a judges evaluation. Seems to me this should be the job of the Hunt Test/Field Trial committee, they should be there observing the test and listening to marshalls and participants during and after the test. If they have problems with a judge, they note problems and keep a record for the next committee. Eventually poor judges just won't get many assignments, and in general evaluation would be unbiased. Of course it helps to have knowledgable and unbiased people on your committes too.
Hitting the nail on the head. Do a good job you come back some other time, bad job .....
I really think most judges know when they run a good test and when they do not. Voluntary evaluations are usually heavily loaded with negativity because those that feel they were in some way wronged are the ones who are going to fill them out. Those that are happy are simply say to the judges "nice test, thanks" when leaving the line. How many Monday morning QB's do you read threads from complaining about judging. Some are correct in their complaints, but most have the "not my dog" attitude. I did everything right and it was all the judges fault is a common motto of such threads and in the end it becomes obvious that when both sides are presented the dog that did not qualify really did not deserve to qualify. What useful information would a judge gather from evaluations? You would get a bunch of "great jobs" and a number of "you suck" evaluations. Most great job evaluations would be from those who passed and the you suck would be from those who did not.
A judge could set up the best test of all time, the perfect test if you will, and someone is going to have a dog that does not do well because they have not trained for it or the dog/handler had a bad day. You simply cannot make everyone happy all the time. If you have been judging long enough you know what you are capable of and if you are still being asked to judge you must be doing a pretty good job. The judge and hunt test committee are the only ones who need to be happy with a test and who cares how the handlers feel? The judges are there to evaluate dogs, not to be evaluated.
Let's look at another direction this could take. Your a judge and are asked to judge for the Woman’s Pretty Golden Club (sorry golden girls, just an example). Now the WPGC has a bunch of very pretty conformation dogs, but few good field dogs. You as a judge set a test that is within the rules and fair for whatever level you are judging. Only three dogs out of 40 qualify. What kind of evaluations do you think you would get? Would they be at all useful? What about setting up a tough test that is firmly within the guidelines of the level you are judging at a club and having a large portion of the dog’s bomb out and you get crappy evaluations? Are you going to want to judge for this group again?
I think that if I were to set up a test that was at the level it should be and judged the dogs fairly I would walk away happy with myself and would not feel the need to be evaluated by those running under me. Evaluations are a double edged sword, they could help you improve (maybe) but they could also create hard feeling towards a club or by a club towards a judge and while I agree there are some crappy judges out there, there are simply not enough judges as it is. Why further limit the pool? If a judge is judging that you really feel so strongly about, do not enter his test.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
687 Posts
Are you also into being tied up and whipped?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,916 Posts
The BEST compliment a Judge can get is a handshake and a "Nice Test" from the handlers that just picked up their dog or did not get a callback.

Good judges KNOW when an egg has been laid and will take that into consideration when discussing callbacks, scrapping the test and/or determining placements/qualifications.

We are all subject to having something go wrong with any test we might set up. How we handle that "wrong" is the mark of a good or bad judge.

Laid a few eggs my ownself.

Jerry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Well, it looks like the majority opinion is that a critique is not a good idea; it's too bad that we all tend to be vocal about things we don't like and accept the good as expected. I know we all can learn from others and thought this might be a good mechanism to get some constructive (not damning) criticism.

Christine
 
G

·
While I don't think it, in and of itself, is a "bad" idea...

the last thing I want to do at the end of the 3rd series is fill out a critique.

ALSO... Everyone has different judging styles, different or similar intepretations of the rulebook, different preferences.

What are you trying to accomplish with the survey? I think that's the bottom line.

I think three things are important in a judge: 1) knowledge and experience as exhibited in the tests they set up, 2) personality and 3) ability to handle the logistics of a test (efficiency) -- IN THAT ORDER.

I don't think you need to do a survey about YOU per se... Just read the threads here and you can see what people WANT in a judge.

It takes a LOT of experience to be able to set up a smart test. Not everyone is capable of that. It takes some experience and brains to think "hey, maybe we should do lunches, drinks, rebird and potty breaks all at once instead of taking four separate breaks (this is honestly probably my biggest pet peeve!!!)". And then it takes a good heart to be pleasant and understanding of your contestants. I don't like running under grumps.

With that said, there aren't many people I won't run under and don't enjoy running under. But some are just plain jerks or too dumb to read the rulebook. But those are VERY few and far between -- and it will be a cold day in he!! before I'll run under them.

Just be yourself. If someone tells you that they think you don't know what you're doing, what are you going to do?? Experience will make you a good judge and even then people will be mad at you on the weekend at some point in time... I've been mad at judges I love to death. LOL

-K
 
G

·
Vicky Trainor said:
Kristie Wilder said:
... I've been mad at judges I love to death. LOL

-K
:( Say it ain't so!!!! :(

Vicky
i mean that it's easy 2 get mad regardless of who's judging

i do not mean that i confronted anyone, just that it's no fun to fail

so the being mad was sometimes just the result of failure, not the judge
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top