Ratings through Arbiter

[JRutledge]

A rating system and an evaluation system in my mind are not the same things.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

A rating system and an evaluation system in my mind are not the same things.

Rating often implies a number being associated with one's performance (example, 1-10), which, in some cases, can be limiting. Evaluation, while it may be associated with a number, may involve other forms of measuring one's performance (written commentary, oral commentary, checklists, etc.).

Also, the question pops up, is the "system" used for:
1) Ranking (another number) for assignment purposes (the level and number of games).
2) Education (improvement of officials).

[JRutledge]

My understanding is that assignors have to rank officials in the Arbiter in order to give them games. I was told these rankings involve what games they can give as an official.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

My understanding is that assignors have to rank officials in the Arbiter in order to give them games. I was told these rankings involve what games they can give as an official.

Peace

It's an option, but not mandatory. It is mandatory if you want Arbiter to do auto assigning. You can rate all the officials and rate all your games and then tell Arbiter to fill all the slots.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

It's an option, but not mandatory. It is mandatory if you want Arbiter to do auto assigning. You can rate all the officials and rate all your games and then tell Arbiter to fill all the slots.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

You are right, it was for some level of auto-assigning. I do not get to use that feature, but that is the only way I know it was used in Arbiter. And our rating system only involves schools and they do that through the state's website (not Arbiter). That might change at some point, but not right now.

Peace

[SC Official]

We have a convoluted, antiquated rating system in South Carolina. 25% of our rating is peer evaluations, which we do through Arbiter. There is an "evaluations" tab and an option to "evaluate officials" underneath it. There are six categories we rate our peers in, on a scale of 1-10. The average is then multiplied by 2.5.

[ilyazhito]

I remember that you said in a different thread that peer evaluation is useless because most people give their peers 9s and 10s. If the system is convoluted and antiquated, what alternative would you prefer that the SCBOA and SCHSL use?

BTW, I do receive evaluations through Arbiter for baseball. There is a standard form that asks the designated crew chief for the game (the person whose name is in bold in Arbiter) to evaluate his partners on mechanics, signals, judgement, procedures, and professionalism, and provide an overall score. The crew chief also is expected to add comments to any rating that he posts. We later get to see how our partners rated us, including an average of our scores in all of the categories, and an average overall score, with their comments.