RE: [AISdiscuss] Re: JT Handbook Revisions

["Barbara Aitken" <aitken@flowerfantasy.net>]

Retired master judges are permitted to judge at shows, on a team with
other accredited judges - either accredited garden judges or active
master judges. They are NOT permitted to give garden judges training,
classroom training or tutoring - for the very reason stated. They are no
longer actively taking judges training, and possibly not seeing much in
the way of irises in the garden. They do not vote the ballot. They are
'retired' or 'inactive'. I am not sure why they are permitted to judge
shows, except that show judges are sometimes very hard to come by, and
they are serving on a team with other active judges, who would know most
of the newer varieties, presumably, if the retired masters were not
familiar with them. Show judging is evaluating the flower stalks as
exhibited by the entrant, not evaluating iris plants growing in the
garden. In essence, judging the exhibitor, not evaluating the introduced
iris itself (except in seedling sections). To be fair, retired masters
probably should not be judging in the seedling sections, as it would be
difficult for them to know whether a seedling was an improvement over
something already introduced if they are not currently involved in
garden judging or familiar with newer varieties.  

I have always felt that active master judges should receive credit for
tutoring given in the garden. Although, I do feel that both accredited
garden judges and active masters should have a combination of training -
some classroom, some in garden training, in addition to tutoring when
asked - not any one kind to be used for all of the required hours of
training in a three year period. 

The main problem I foresee with the new in garden training requirement
is for hybridizers who are judges. It is really difficult to ask a
hybridizer to leave his/her garden at peak bloom to attend a region
meeting/JT on the other side of the region in order to acquire in garden
training. I guess the answer to this is to hold a J.T. session in the
hybridizer's garden, at peak bloom. Then all can benefit. And should be
do-able if the requirement is only for 2 hours in a three year period.

Barbara Aitken
Region 13


1.   "It only seems fair that ANY judge who gives one-on-one garden
training 
should receive credit for that training of the apprentice.  To exclude
an 
Active Master defies logic.  Cheryl Deaton"

      I agree with Cheryl, it defies logic.   Any judge should receive 
credit for giving the training.



2.   The handbook states a retired master can be used as a show bench
judge 
if they are assigned to a panel with an accredited judge, but the
handbook 
is silent as to whether a retired master can give training sessions.
Our 
region just approved a training session, put on by a retired master who
has 
been retired nearly 5 years.    This retired judge hasn't been
participating 
in the required training in Region 14 for 5 years, isn't required to
vote 
the ballot, so it defies logic as to how a retired master is authorized
to 
give AIS training.



3.   "I was/ am still bothered by judges who barely manage to get their
5 
hours every three years, while others are getting 10 or 12 hours per
year. 
Which one would you rather have judge your show? I don't think that 
requiring more hours is necessarily the answer - this might lead to more

judge attrition - but maybe publishing the hours or requiring that a
certain 
% be garden judging might help.  Vince Lewonski"



      I agree with Vince on this one.   I served a 3 year term as JT
chair, 
and it bothered me that some judges barely squeezed by getting their
minimum 
hours.  Serving at many shows, I found those same judges to be weak at
the 
show table, as they often don't know the varieties.  I too suggested 
publishing the hours in some format, maybe just a Star (*)  for 10 hours
or 
more in 3 years, instead of 5 hrs.   It would help show chairs to know
who 
has higher levels of annual training.



4.       Requiring garden training comes with its own set of problems.
We 
had a garden training session last year at a large regional that was a 
disaster.  I don't know the count of individuals in the garden, but it 
seemed like 60-80, there was no room between rows, people had to stand
half 
way across the garden and couldn't see anything, many of the judge
attendees 
couldn't hear a thing, myself included.  So my suggestion is that there 
needs to be guidelines set for establishing the maximum number of 
participants per garden session, identifying the need for adequate room
so 
that the attendees can see the iris being spoke about, and sufficient
time. 
Sessions could be repeated if necessary.   I've seen clubs try to
squeeze in 
1 hour of garden training, which is suppose to have a written test, and
I 
think that's another invitation for a poorly given session.  I think 1 =

hours should be the minimum for a garden session.



5.       The handbook is silent about whether the 2 hour garden tutoring
for 
apprentices includes a written exam.  However, the handbook does say a 
written test is required for other normal two hour or longer sessions.
It 
might help to clarify the apprentice tutoring sessions as it pertains to
an 
exam.



I appreciate hearing everyone's comments!



Kitty Loberg

Northern Calif.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
aissecjill@earthlink.net.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
aissecjill@earthlink.net.