[BillyMac]

I am presently on the ratings committee for our local high school IAABO board. After using the same ratings and ranking system for over 25 years, we are considering some major changes for next season. At this point we are asking our own board members for suggestions on how to improve our system or suggestions on a brand new system. As a member of this forum, I've decided to ask you, colleagues that represent a wider geographical area, for rating and ranking systems that you may use and believe to be successful.

First, a summary of our present rating system, which is used to assign a ranking that will determine the level of games, and how many games you get for the season:

The present rating system is based on peer rating (80%), attendance at meetings (5%), IAABO refresher exams (open book, group effort, 5%), and availabilty to the commissioner (10%). The peer rating is the portion that we are looking at the closest. Presently, each board member rates every official that he or she has observed in a board assigned game and rates them (one to ten). Varsity officials are required to get to the site early enough to observe at least half of the junior varsity game. Junior varsity officials are required to stay late enough to observe at least half of the varsity game. Most games are two man games, so each of the four officials should give and get three rating for that game. Ratings are kept secret and are sent into the board at the end of the season. During the summer, each official receives a copy of his or her ratings (numbers only, no names of raters, no reasons for the rating), which are used to generate a ranking for the next season's assignments.

How does your local board rate and rank? Do you use a system of peer rating, if so, does it differ from our system? Do you have any specific suggestions (i.e. rating guidelines) to help us improve our system?

I will report the results of this forum thread to the chair and assistent chair of our ratings committee. Thanks for your help.