TOPIC: Group Ratings: Yielding better group results?

Group Ratings: Yielding better group performance results? I say ABSOLUTELY! I believe that it has because the playing by all groups has been "kicked up a notch" since Dave introduced the concept. Beginnings are better, timing and other dynamics are better, endings are better, and satisfaction appears better as there seems to be more positive comments and enthusiasm after our last two sessions.

Fortunately, Dave worked the three-sheet rating form and its attendent clumsiness down to one sheet.......still a little clumsy as one trys to hold his instrument, find the paper and pen, etc and mark the sheet while not dropping his instrument or hitting the person beside him in the face. And now Dave has modified the original plan of doing the ratings every week to a "surprise" rating. That's good too.

Why is the rating working?
The competetive aspects....."honey, I was in the best group tonight!" "or, my group got screwed again". Nahhh.
Best group gets more chits for the prize draw (if there is one). Nahhh.
I believe it is awareness of the essential requirements for bringing individuals together to sound like one group.

Thanks Dave.......after getting over the stigma of "more work, less play" I'm buying in based on my "cost/benefit" analysis......just keep it at the "value added" level and not overdone......perhaps a good reminder tool. I've even put a blank form in my instrument case!

Yes, I agree. There was definitely an improvement in our focus and concentration and overall approach to group playing last Wednesday.....even though we didn't have to fill out our group ratings, there was a noticable,(to me) change in how we all approached playing in our groups.

I agree on group ratings, but disagree on who should be doing the rating. It's my belief that the instructor, in this case Dave, is the only one who really sees just what's going on and can give really valid inputs. I'm very much less concerned with relative scores between groups than I am with how my group was rated on actual performance, and it's much more meaningful if that scoring is put up on the board (by Dave) right after a performance than to wait even a day or two after when my "old" memory plays tricks on me. In my previous 38 year professional career, the only trouble I ever saw in being critiqued was when it was done by peers, not someone designated to perform that job. Just my humble opinion. I do agree that some sort of rating turns the heat up a notch in any case.

I agree with Hogpaws.....immediate instructor feedback following group performance is more effective and meaningful to the group performers and ultimately less work for everyone. Dave's logic and rationale for ratings is professionally based.......peer ratings are made by less knowledgeable people and can be biased for various reasons. Some of us old guys forget too easily and it is much more difficult to connect the rating to the actual performance 2-3 days later(if we remember to download it!).

I'm glad you brought that up. I too appreciate the constructive criticism. But as was mentioned in one of the other recent posts about ratings, the last time we did this, class mates were a bit hesitant to critique each other. I did. And later, when it was too late, felt that maybe I shouldn't have. It's more likely to be taken constructively from Dave. I don't doubt that it helps us, as students, to analyze each others performances. I'm sure we all do it to some degree in each class and there are lessons to be learned. All that being said, I more comfortable as the one being critiqued.

Sam, your point is spot on. I think the critique of the instructor is much more valid. He can tell right away if a player is on or off, or a whole group for that matter. He can most likely tell where the tune went wrong, and offer constructive criticism on how to correct the performance. Dave listens intently enough, his ears are better than mine. Good point.