Judging Feedback – Some Stats and Emerging Trends

SCPF launched a feedback process in early 2016 to provide judges with constructive information about how we’re doing.

You might be interested to know the following stats from the first eighteen months of the process.

  • In the eighteen months since launch, 105 feedbacks have been received – 94 by the official form and 11 by letter or email;
  • 44 clubs have contributed, 80% of which are SCPF; the remainder equally are clubs in SxPF, SPA and CACC. That means approximately half of SCPF clubs have not provided feedback;
  • Clubs providing feedback are led by Basingstoke (9); Winchester (8); Bognor Regis (6); Petersfield (5); Bracknell, Gosport, New Forest, and Niton (4); Alton, Horndean, Isle of Wight, Lewes (SxPF), Reading, Salisbury, Seven Sisters (SxPF), and Storrington (3);
  • Feedback covers 36 individual judges, sixteen of whom were at Level 1 on receiving their first feedback, fifteen at Level 2 and five at Level 3;
  • Feedback has contributed to 10 upgrades to Level 2 (+2 currently pending) and 3 upgrades to Level 3 (+1 currently pending);
  • From 105 feedbacks, we have distilled approximately 400 useful free comments (both praise and criticism), and categorised them by the judging competencies that we train. Free comments carry a lot of weight, because they reveal what is important to reviewers.
Judging Feedback Comments by Competency

Spread of judging feedback comments by competency areas

Appraisal Skills (32%) attracted the most comments (mostly positive), and within that, giving a constructive critique and a balanced appraisal were overwhelmingly the most important qualities to emerge.

Marking (17%) was commented less frequently than Appraisal Skills and Language and Presentation, but attracted the most criticism, not surprisingly. Marking was mentioned more as a criticism than a praise. 39% of all comments received about Marking concerned the range of marks awarded, where there was twice as much criticism as praise, mainly for using too narrow a range. Coherence of marking – the perceived matching marks to comments – also attracted significant comment.

All of this I intend to publish in more detail later in the year.

For now, thank you very much to all the clubs who have contributed to our judging development by giving feedback. Your help is greatly appreciated.

And a reminder please. Recently we have had to intervene on behalf of judges to press clubs to provide feedback after judges have requested it. We do ask that clubs provide feedback whenever you engage a Level 1 judge for your evenings. It is essential, as they are gaining experience, for new judges to know how they are doing, and it helps us too when it comes to upgrades.

Best Regards

… Ken Scott
Judging Advisor