[AISdiscuss] Re: JT Handbook Revisions

[gary white <in2iris@yahoo.com>]

Greetings,

Here are my views on issue #1 concerning judges
titles.  I apologize in advance for the length of this
note.

I agree with the terms Apprentice Judge and Emeritus
Judge.  The other 3 names I believe need some
re-thinking. 

First, I agree with Jim Copeland about the use of the
term Student Judge.  As Jim pointed out, as students,
they are not judges.   I support the idea of dropping
the word judge from this designation and just calling
them students.  We sometimes dont know who these
students are, and many never move to the next stage as
Apprentice Judges.   So, using the term Student
would be more appropriate than calling them Student
Judge.

For the same reasons that have already been discussed
by others, I agree that the use of Garden Judge has to
be changed.  Just two weeks ago, a person involved in
finding judges for a show contacted me and asked for
help in locating Master Judges for that purpose. 
During the conversation, I realized that she thought
that only Master Judges could judge shows since other
judges were Garden Judges.   After a little education
about judges education and duties, we quickly located
two Garden Judges to work with the Master Judge she
had already procured to judge their show.  This little
episode makes me wonder how many Garden Judges have
been passed over as show judges because people believe
that they are only qualified to judge irises in the
garden.  And, I also recall a few complaints from
Garden Judges that they dont often get asked to judge
shows.  This could be one of the reasons.  It, of
course, also points out that some show officials and
affiliate officers are not consulting the Handbook for
Judges and Show Officials as they should be.  At any
rate, I think there is considerable confusion by the
general AIS membership (and non-AIS Affiliate members)
about the requirements and duties of judges at all
levels, but especially between Garden and Master
Judges.

Although I like the terms Master Judge or Active
Master Judge, I think that they are misnomers in that
the only real mastery required OVER the current
Garden Judge is persevering 15 years to be given
that title, as Terry alluded to early in this
discussion about judges titles.  As it now stands,
every iris judge will be a Master Judge if they hang
in there a few years.   Personally, I believe that the
term Master Judge should be reserved for more than a
requirement of simple longevity.  Granted, these
judges will have had the OPPORTUNITY to attend more JT
schools in their 15 years than someone with less
seniority as a judge, but how many take full advantage
of those opportunities, and how many simply meet the
minimum requirements?  After reading comments from
regional JT Chairs, I conclude there are a number who
do just that, and then we make them Master Judges,
where their minimum requirements are even less.  And,
certainly, all JT Schools are not created equal,
either.  We all know that you get out what you put in,
and experience does not necessarily yield expertise. 
The term Senior Judge would be more appropriate than
Master Judge with our current requirements.  While
there are many Master Judges who really are masters at
their craft, there are also a good number who are not.
 And, conversely, there are a number of Garden Judges
who have attained at least the same level of mastery
in much less than 15 years, but do not have the title
of Master Judge.   As Kitty pointed out the
inadequacies of the in-garden JT school she attended,
with the class size far too large, too much of a
distance, etc to even hear the discussion, I believe
that if we are giving credit for courses, we need to
better insure that they are delivering quality and
substance.  While that instructor may have been
well-qualified and the content excellent, the physical
mechanics of the course were totally inadequate.  I
once attended a JT School (the instructor was a Master
Judge) who literally read almost word for word from
the Handbook, then gave an embarrassingly easy exam.
 It was a waste of time and money.  There was almost
no discussion and everyone simply wanted it over.  Yet
everyone received JT credit for that training.  So,
again, I will say that a well crafted correspondence
course, with thought-provoking exam questions would
have been infinitely better than that live JT School
was.

Having said all of that, and hearing the comments from
Clarence and Bob and others who believe that we need
separate classes of Show Judge and Garden Judge, here
is my proposal which is somewhat of a compromise:

First off, the very term Master Judge connotes a
certain level of expertise  someone highly skilled or
proficient.  I dont think we can say that one hundred
percent of our Master Judges meet that description.  
Do even fifty per cent meet it?  We dont know because
there are very few standards for the courses or for
the instructors.   I propose that we consider a
certification process for judges to meet in order to
become Master Judges.  There could be Certified Garden
Judges and Certified Exhibition Judges.  In order to
be named a Master Judge, the judge would have to be
certified in either Garden judging or Exhibition
judging, or both.   A specific number of years as a
judge could/would still be required as well.  And, as
with the Apprentice Judge and Retired Master, the
prospective Master Judge would have to request the
status change once all requirements are met.  Now, as
to the requirements, I suggest that a specific number
of credits over and above the usual requirements for
an iris judge would be mandatory to obtain the
Certificate as either a Garden or Exhibition judge. 
The number of hours required might be 10 hours or 15
hours, as the Board wished.  But, I think an important
aspect would have to be that there would be specified
courses, and approved content, with approved judges as
facilitators conducting the Schools.  There obviously
would be a specific set of courses for Exhibition
Judging and a set for Garden Judging.   If an iris
judge (currently Garden Judge) did not wish to pursue
that certification, it is his or her choice, but only
those who become certified and with the years required
could apply for Master Judge status.  And, judges at
the current Garden Judge level would work toward those
certifications if they wished to become a Master
Judge.   If an iris judge did not pursue the
Certification process, then they would remain an Iris
Judge (or whatever the name given to current Garden
Judge), regardless of the number of years they have as
a judge.  Current Master judges could be grandfathered
in, but would be encouraged to obtain certification as
well.  This all would take 2 or 3 or more years to
implement, but as Brad put it, it is important that
the AIS attend to improving the garden judging
credentials of all our judges, and I think this may
be one way of doing that, and also improving the show
judging credentials as well.

Finally, for the Retired Master Judge, I think that if
the certification process were put in place, there
would be fewer Retired Masters, since only someone who
became a Master Judge could then Retire. Second, since
they would have gone through this extra schooling, I
would feel much better about them judging a show or
even conducting an occasional JT School, if it was
within the first five years after they retired.  As it
now stands, I dont believe Retired Masters should be
conducting JT Schools.  I would support allowing a
current Retired Master to judge a show within the
first five years after retirement.  One final note
about Retired Masters.I believe that in order to move
from Master to Retired Master, a written request
should be sent to that effect to the regional JT Chair
and RVP.  I know of Master Judges who simply stopped
voting, stopped attending JT Schools and didnt turn
in an activity report, so were automatically made
Retired Master Judges, some never to be heard from
again.  In these cases, with no formal request for
status change, the Master Judge should be simply
dropped from the roster of judges.  And, if a Master
Judge goes to Retired Master, then wants to regularly
judge shows or conduct JT courses, then that person
needs to request a change back to active Master.  

Thanks for reading, and again I apologize for the
length of this note.
Now, I will put up my flame shields.

Gary White,
Garden Judge, RVP Region 21, Chair Scientific
Committee, Director AIS, Director SJI

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