Does anyone know when and on what platform the new guide to judging will be published? It would be nice to know what the guidelines and rules are going to be for this season.
Not just nice but critical for classroom teachers.
They have posted some judging information. No certification process yet, but it looks like more less the same old thing. So far I must say highly disappointing.
Historically, I don’t believe certifications have been released yet. Typically everything was still under development and got crystalized after the Summit in July.
So far this isn’t out of the norm. Only exception I saw was the V5 Referee training being already released. This seemed pleasantly early to me.
No real judging guide just yet but the libraries and rubrics are now out for some stuff. Specifically just interview and notebook rubrics, and award requirements.
I like parts of the rubric design. I think the coding for the interview is way under valued. I know this was a syicking point at my touraments. I did send about a 3 page review of what truly lacked. Without setting better, clea, and concise criteria for the notebooks, we will again have TWO separate and unequal practices. The time controls are a key element and need to be more rigid. 30 to 40 minutes top to perform a final scored review. If we are upfront with the teams, they will blow away the expectations, but to not place the hard limits and better challenge the teams, we will continue to see word soup notebooks that could be made much more powerful and have better creativity. Than there is the Innovate. The most under valued and most STEM award. I would love to see the award fully developed Innovation in the notebook, clearly used in gameplay as described and actually some out of the box stuff. We have missed several actually amazing innovations due to the TOTAL LACK of CONTROLS on the notebook review and total undervaluing of the more Innovative innovations. Just my opinion for judging and being a judge advisor for a few years and seeing what ends up winning.
Can you share the links? I can’t seem to find them after a brief search.
https://library.globalrobotics.org/hc/en-us generic to where all materials are, presently.
https://library.globalrobotics.org/hc/en-us/categories/50432924955156-Competition-Resources
https://library.globalrobotics.org/hc/en-us/articles/50466404575380-Engineering-Notebook-Rubrics
https://library.globalrobotics.org/hc/en-us/articles/50466320011924-Team-Interview-Rubrics
https://library.globalrobotics.org/hc/en-us
judging information is in competition resources.
The judging stuff I have found in the GRSF library referes to both the Code of Conduct and the Student Centered Policy, yet those documents are NOT in the library (at least as far as I have been able to find). Any idea when those might be released?
I ask because I not only use them at the beginning of each season to set the tone for my teams (& parents!), but I also link them in my emails to teams that register for the event I host. I feel they are FOUNDATIONAL to a great program and a great event, and the omission has me very concerned!
Robert,
These documents were shared with the attendees of the Global Robotics & Science Foundation EP Forum last week. Global is giving the attendees an initial opportunity to provide questions, comments, concerns and other feedback before these documents are released to the entire community. A bit of a ‘Beta’ release, if you will.
The Forum attendees have been providing a ton of feedback that is being sorted through by the Global team, and once all of the feedback is reviewed and any edit or revisions implemented, I’m sure a public release will soon follow.
Feel free to reach out to Global Robotics [ info (at) globalrobotics.org ] for any specific questions.
Is it possible to see the draft? I know I have opinions and concerns, that have been emailed.
I believe we are intending to keep the review process small, bounded to the attendees of the Forum, but reaching out to the Global Robotics and Science Foundation email I sent above is the more authoritative source for that answer.