Difference between revisions of "Talk:TRC Gimmick Rallye Evaluation Cards"
(Let's use what we have, not change what we don't use) |
m (move discussion here) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I don't want to "mess up" the draft, but am thinking we could separate (into separate sections) | |||
* scoring, and awards presentation efficient? (moved close to end) | |||
* material clear and legible? | |||
* registration and CP workers competent? | |||
- [[User:Dean|Dean]] | |||
---- | |||
The rallyemaster doesn't have much control over registration, so we shouldn't count that as part of the "best rallye" awards (although it may still be useful feedback). | |||
It would be good to ask about the beginners school too, although we shouldn't expect upper division rallyists to answer that question. | |||
And we shouldn't count it when someone other than the rallyemaster gives the class. | |||
I like the idea of putting the questions in rough chronological order (i.e., moving scoring and awards presentation towards the end). | |||
And as we mentioned last night, very few people can offer meaningful feedback on whether protests were handled fairly. | |||
Perhaps a better indicator would be how often the protest committee overrules the rallyemaster. | |||
- [[User:Darin|Darin McGrew]] 10:51, 14 November 2007 (PST) | |||
---- | |||
I did many of the tasks that we had been talking about. See what you think. | |||
I also propose that each question get scored by those who answer that question, so partial evaluations are used. | |||
- [[User:Dean|Dean]] | |||
---- | |||
I recommend leaving the existing form alone, except for the changes to the "Length". 10 Categories is sufficient for the feedback that we need. | I recommend leaving the existing form alone, except for the changes to the "Length". 10 Categories is sufficient for the feedback that we need. | ||
| Line 10: | Line 38: | ||
Such a post-mortem should be optional, but would be nice to include in the TRC minutes (if it is done). | Such a post-mortem should be optional, but would be nice to include in the TRC minutes (if it is done). | ||
- [[User:Ckwendt|Cris Wendt]] | |||
---- | |||
Should we drop the term "variety rallye" and use the term "gimmick rallye" everywhere? We talked about doing that in the Operating Procedures. It makes sense to do it here too. | |||
[[User:Darin|Darin McGrew]] 17:25, 21 November 2007 (PST) | |||
Revision as of 20:25, 21 November 2007
I don't want to "mess up" the draft, but am thinking we could separate (into separate sections)
* scoring, and awards presentation efficient? (moved close to end) * material clear and legible? * registration and CP workers competent?
- Dean
The rallyemaster doesn't have much control over registration, so we shouldn't count that as part of the "best rallye" awards (although it may still be useful feedback). It would be good to ask about the beginners school too, although we shouldn't expect upper division rallyists to answer that question. And we shouldn't count it when someone other than the rallyemaster gives the class.
I like the idea of putting the questions in rough chronological order (i.e., moving scoring and awards presentation towards the end).
And as we mentioned last night, very few people can offer meaningful feedback on whether protests were handled fairly. Perhaps a better indicator would be how often the protest committee overrules the rallyemaster.
- Darin McGrew 10:51, 14 November 2007 (PST)
I did many of the tasks that we had been talking about. See what you think.
I also propose that each question get scored by those who answer that question, so partial evaluations are used.
- Dean
I recommend leaving the existing form alone, except for the changes to the "Length". 10 Categories is sufficient for the feedback that we need.
I am not sure if many rallyemasters use the form as it exists today as a vehicle to improve or change rallies. As a consequence, making changes to the form is likely not going to do much. If we add more categories, rallyists may be less likely to fill out the form.
A better use of time might be for rallyemasters to use the existing form to create a post-mortem of their event that includes 2 topics:
a) What worked well b) What can be improved upon.
Such a post-mortem should be optional, but would be nice to include in the TRC minutes (if it is done).
Should we drop the term "variety rallye" and use the term "gimmick rallye" everywhere? We talked about doing that in the Operating Procedures. It makes sense to do it here too.
Darin McGrew 17:25, 21 November 2007 (PST)