Difference between revisions of "Talk:TRC Gimmick Rallye Evaluation Cards"

From TRCWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Using Incomplete Evaluations)
m (move Dean's comment about incomplete evaluations to the new section)
Line 21: Line 21:


I did many of the tasks that we had been talking about.  See what you think.
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]]
- [[User:Dean|Dean]]
Line 54: Line 52:


== Using Incomplete Evaluations ==
== Using Incomplete Evaluations ==
I also propose that each question get scored by those who answer that question, so partial evaluations are used.
- [[User:Dean|Dean]]


If we include topics that not everyone will be able to answer, then we'll need
If we include topics that not everyone will be able to answer, then we'll need

Revision as of 13:51, 28 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.

- 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).

- Cris Wendt

What to Cut?

Okay, we've got 13 sections now. What do we cut/consolidate to get back to 10 (or fewer)?

Darin McGrew 18:20, 21 November 2007 (PST)


I think 13 sections and 15 easy-to-answer questions might not be too much, if it fits nicely on a half page.

- Dean

Using Incomplete Evaluations

I also propose that each question get scored by those who answer that question, so partial evaluations are used.

- Dean

If we include topics that not everyone will be able to answer, then we'll need to do something reasonable with "incomplete" evaluations. So, how should we handle the math for a rallye's total score while counting incomplete evaluations?

It's easy enough to average the responses we get in each category, and it's okay if some categories have more data points than others. But do we calculate the total score by adding the average scores for each category? I can't think of a better way, but this still seems clunky to me.

Darin McGrew 10:50, 28 November 2007 (PST)