Beginner? Intermediate? Advanced?

[mbroberg]

Yes, it is a little early to start talking about next year but I am going to throw this out anyway so you all can be thinking about it.

A recurring problem for which there seems to be no answer is how to establish penmaking categories for the pen making contests. Number of pens made and length of time turning each have drawbacks. I received this suggestion which, while I think it may need some work, may be worth exploring.

Pens are submitted to a jury. Entrants write out a detailed explanation of how long they have been turning, how many pens they have turned, a description of the pen entered and an explanation of what modifications were made to the pen, what customization was done, what parts were made by hand, etc. Everything that has anything to do with the pen and how it was made is explained. The jury then places the pen into the correct competition.

Alternatively, and this would be for the long term, the IAP establishes skill levels for pen makers (Novice, Intermediate, Advanced, Expert, etc.) IAP management would decide through whatever means and procedures it develops what level a member is at. Criteria would be established for each level and member's prior work would be taken into consideration. That member will then know what contest he can enter. His skill level could be displayed right under his name and in his profile.

Yes, there are potential pitfalls to this system but the one thing it will have is consistency. Currently we ask members to place themselves in categories. If the same group of people were evaluation member's skill levels then the playing field may be a little leveler. It too may be something that could work with some refinement.

 

[mredburn]

In trap shooting ATA competitions, beside your average reecorded scores you can be rated on "Known Ability" a panel or an individual can rate you at entry into a higher class than your scores would have put you. keeps the sandbaggers inline. DAMHIKT

 

[ed4copies]

We are adding members every day. Who wants to "chair" a panel to rate them? How many people will compose this "panel"?

On the other hand, one or two people don't win a contest, so they think the guy that beat them was "overqualified".

I can get some ribbons made to give to the "also rans": I was in the contest and everyone agreed my pen was "exceptional". They can hang that in their shop.

 

[mbroberg]

In trap shooting ATA competitions, beside your average reecorded scores you can be rated on "Known Ability" a panel or an individual can rate you at entry into a higher class than your scores would have put you. keeps the sandbaggers inline. DAMHIKT

"Known Ability" That is something we might be able to work with.

 

[PR_Princess]

Not sure that I am too keen on a "rating" underneath everyone's name in their profile... One that would be there all year long. Bit of a stigma...if you ask me (But then I hate labels for people..especially when it comes to creative endevours)

Do we really need more rules and restrictions over a $100.00 worth of prizes??

 

[maxwell_smart007]

Why do we need to label people? - beginner stigma under someone's name will make their words have less weight...
My biggest pet peeve is when forums bring in 'rankings' or status...

As far as the contest rankings - if people cannot abide by the honour system, and we bring in harsh rules, then how are we going to keep people interested?

If we have a 'guideline', that's a different idea.
beginner - just began turning, tenuous ability at making kit pens
Intermediate - very comfortable turning, kit pens only
advanced - comfortable modifying pen kits and/or kitless

 

[ed4copies]

Labels don't even work in the "real" world.

An example: I join the local AAW club, because a few guys I know asked me to join. Two months later, I am giving the demo--by their invitation. Two months later, I get a form asking me to "rank" myself, beginner, intermediate or advanced. I rank "intermediate". The "board" laughs and changes me to advanced. Why?

I am very comfortable with nearly ANY turning tool in my hand. I can make any kit pen, pretty much without thinking. I can turn any substance---or combination of substances. But, I don't make "kitless" pens. I think I could, but I don't see a reason to---don't think they are an improvement on kit pens. So, I am a HAPPY intermediate. If I entered the contests, would people complain because I have turned thousands of pens? They are ALL GOOD---some touched on GREAT---only because I hit the right spot on the wood or plastic, creating an abnormal "beauty".

So, I am intermediate. Now, suppose I decided to make a few kitless pens and I succeeded. Am I no longer intermediate? Because I possess skills you arbitrarily assign as "expert" skills? So, no matter WHERE you classify me, I have an argument to prove you wrong.


And that is with all information being presented openly and objectively. If I WANTED to enter a contest and you did not KNOW who I am, you most certainly would be unable to classify my skills. I can describe them honestly in many ways, as long as we don't define "is", language can be a great tool to achieve a desired result.

 

[mbroberg]

I have no problems with guidelines, or the honor system.

When we base skill level on number of pens made I hear from the guy who has made over x amount of pens but they were all single barrel and none of them turned out very good, and he hasn't turned since 2003. He was forced to compete in the intermediate class but he only considers himself to be a beginner.

When we base skill level on length of membership we hear from the guy who says he has been a member since 2003 but has only actually turned 2 pens. Again, he is forced to compete at a level over his ability.

What I am trying to find is a way for people not to be discouraged from entering contests because they know that they will be competing against people of relatively the same skill level. So how do we do that? How can we assure people that they have a somewhat level playing field when it comes to a competition. You don't like ratings or skill assessments, what do you like that will accomplish instilling that perception of fairness?

I don't consider an identification of a skill level to be the "labeling" of a "person". I don't consider a Master Plumber to be a better person than an Apprentice Plumber. I have been clued into who has more experience and obtained a greater skill level in their field. We (I) am talking about the penmaking ability of a person not the quality of the person's character. I think that saying someone is an intermediate pen maker has "labeled" them or that calling someone a beginner will stigmatize them is a stretch. It's not saying the person is a leper, it's saying that he makes pens at this level. All you've done is assess his penmaking ability. But then I come from a background where everybody was tested and labeled (ranked). Even there, guess what, we had officers who were more intelligent, dependable and trustworthy than higher ranking individuals and everyone knew who they were.

Again, guidelines and the honor system may be the solution but we need guidelines other than number of pens made or length of membership. Those have been proven to not work fairly.

 

[ed4copies]

Again, guidelines and the honor system may be the solution but we need guidelines other than number of pens made or length of membership. Those have been proven to not work fairly.

Are you convinced this has been proven, or are we dealing with people who want to find an excuse why they can't win, so why compete?

Long ago, when Eagle saw Skiprat join the IAP, Eagle was "concerned" that this guy had greater talent than he. He was afraid he would be "knocked off his perch" by the new guy. He looked for a different direction (started doing acrylics). It doesn't matter what level a person is----if he is afraid to compete, it is much easier to find an excuse than it is to say, "I don't want to lose"!

 

[mredburn]

It will never be fair. Some one will always be on the wrong side of a rule or definition. SInce you cant assign a rating system because we dont submit all our work to be judged you have no basis to judge against. Other than Pen Wizard level 6

 

[ed4copies]

It will never be fair. Some one will always be on the wrong side of a rule or definition. SInce you cant assign a rating system because we dont submit all our work to be judged you have no basis to judge against. Other than Pen Wizard level 6

Good yardstick!!!!!

Now, I can honestly say I am a beginner!!!

 

[mbroberg]

Are you convinced this has been proven, or are we dealing with people who want to find an excuse why they can't win, so why compete?

I receive enough complaints from enough different people every year to be convinced that the complaint is legitimate and needs to be addressed. If I didn't I wouldn't brought it up. If we make it too restrictive (defined number of pens made or length of time as an IAP member there are people who are being prohibited from competing at their skill level. If we make it too vague (provide guidelines and follow the honor system) people will enter contests below their skill level to increase their chances of winning.

Anyone can come up with reasons why something won't work but problems don't get solved that way. As I said before, this is something that I am asking you all to think about. It doesn't have to be solved this week but should be addressed prior to next year. Maybe I will specifically ask for the members feedback about this when I solicit the rest of the post-bash feedback.

 

[maxwell_smart007]

If we make it too vague (provide guidelines and follow the honor system) people will enter contests below their skill level to increase their chances of winning.

I think that guidelines and the honour system are the best way to guide people to the right area, while not preventing people from participating...if people feel they're intermediate while others think they're advanced, who are we to say differently?

Some people are going to be in a grey area. You absolutely CANNOT prevent this, no matter what guideline you impose, short of stamping every person with a skill level, and becoming a de-facto guild. If you start thinking that people are going to try and cheat at every avenue, then you'll get a legal document a mile long that will, in its own right, prevent people from participating - just as bad as the current 'number of pens turned' rule.

We're trying to increase bash participation - I think increasing entries by relaxing strict participation rules and putting impetus on the participant to use his/her own judgement, is a great way to accomplish both tasks.

 

[maxwell_smart007]

I receive enough complaints from enough different people every year to be convinced that the complaint is legitimate and needs to be addressed. If I didn't I wouldn't brought it up. If we make it too restrictive (defined number of pens made or length of time as an IAP member there are people who are being prohibited from competing at their skill level. If we make it too vague (provide guidelines and follow the honor system) people will enter contests below their skill level to increase their chances of winning.

Anyone can come up with reasons why something won't work but problems don't get solved that way. As I said before, this is something that I am asking you all to think about. It doesn't have to be solved this week but should be addressed prior to next year. Maybe I will specifically ask for the members feedback about this when I solicit the rest of the post-bash feedback.

I would say the opposite - critically analyzing a concept prior to implementing it is the best way to solve problems before they become problems!

 

[mbroberg]

If we make it too vague (provide guidelines and follow the honor system) people will enter contests below their skill level to increase their chances of winning.

I think that guidelines and the honour system are the best way to guide people to the right area, while not preventing people from participating...if people feel they're intermediate while others think they're advanced, who are we to say differently?

Some people are going to be in a grey area. You absolutely CANNOT prevent this, no matter what guideline you impose, short of stamping every person with a skill level, and becoming a de-facto guild. If you start thinking that people are going to try and cheat at every avenue, then you'll get a legal document a mile long that will, in its own right, prevent people from participating - just as bad as the current 'number of pens turned' rule.

We're trying to increase bash participation - I think increasing entries by relaxing strict participation rules and putting impetus on the participant to use his/her own judgement, is a great way to accomplish both tasks.

All good points. I don't know what the answer is. I do know that the way we are doing it isn't working well. I hate to think that the only solution is to find and settle for a slightly less bad way to do it.

 

[mbroberg]

I receive enough complaints from enough different people every year to be convinced that the complaint is legitimate and needs to be addressed. If I didn't I wouldn't brought it up. If we make it too restrictive (defined number of pens made or length of time as an IAP member there are people who are being prohibited from competing at their skill level. If we make it too vague (provide guidelines and follow the honor system) people will enter contests below their skill level to increase their chances of winning.

Anyone can come up with reasons why something won't work but problems don't get solved that way. As I said before, this is something that I am asking you all to think about. It doesn't have to be solved this week but should be addressed prior to next year. Maybe I will specifically ask for the members feedback about this when I solicit the rest of the post-bash feedback.

I would say the opposite - critically analyzing a concept prior to implementing it is the best way to solve problems before they become problems!

I agree. But what happens all too often, as in the majority of the time, is that the critical analysis never proceeds past the problem identification phase. Even then the problem is misidentified many times. Then the analysis needs to continue into the problem solution phase and that is where many drop the ball IMHO.

 

[jeff]

Very interesting discussion!

In 2005 we worked for a few months on the "Skills Endorsement Program". Similar pitfalls in classifying people based on subjective criteria. The idea was to have people submit their pens and be judged to have achieved certain levels. Sort of a more rigorous alternative to the guild.

 

[Displaced Canadian]

Just shooting from the hip. In the NHL your first year playing in the NHL is your rookie year. It doesn't matter if you played on Russia's national team for 5 years or if you are straight out of college both of you have a shot at the rookie of the year award. If you are a bench warmer for your first year and have a banner year you can be MVP but not rookie of the year. Sorry, I'm Canadian, it always comes back to hockey. Someone who has turned wood for 30 years but made their first pen last week is going to have an advantage over someone who made their first pen the first time he used a lathe 3 months ago.

 

[Bob Wemm]

I can see where Mike is coming from, and he has to deal with all the complaints. I also agree that whatever rules or guidelines are put in place they will benefit some and disadvantage others.
I have had my lathe for eight years and turned my very first pen to enter in the beginners and didn't make the first cut. BOO HOO. So I don't think that turning "Time" has anything to do with the problem.

Is it possible to classify the competition by "Defining" the pen category, for example;-

Pen must be a Non Modified Slimline.
Pen can be any Kit pen
Pen can be any Modified kit.
Pen can be any style but not a kit.

By doing this Members can enter any Category that they feel comfortable with. Hopefully that would increase participation.

Just my humble thoughts.
Bob.

 

[Monty]

I can see where Mike is coming from, and he has to deal with all the complaints. I also agree that whatever rules or guidelines are put in place they will benefit some and disadvantage others.
I have had my lathe for eight years and turned my very first pen to enter in the beginners and didn't make the first cut. BOO HOO. So I don't think that turning "Time" has anything to do with the problem.

Is it possible to classify the competition by "Defining" the pen category, for example;-

Pen must be a Non Modified Slimline.
Pen can be any Kit pen
Pen can be any Modified kit.
Pen can be any style but not a kit.

By doing this Members can enter any Category that they feel comfortable with. Hopefully that would increase participation.

Just my humble thoughts.
Bob.

My thinking is similar to Bob's, define the contests based on kits, kit modifications and kitless.

 

[mredburn]

We do define the contests with kit, modified kits, kitless, and also by skill level. beginner, intermediate, advanced. The reasons people complete or dont complete are as varied as the people themselves. Landon has beginner kit. intermediate kit, and advanced kitless.
Eric had modified kit (open skill level) and I had an advanced kitless and semi kitless slim line also. A beginner has no restrictions imposed that would keep him from entering in any or all of the competitions should he want to. He might not do well but he qualifies for all of them. Except possibly the youth contest.

 

[Monty]

Then maybe we need to be a little clearer as to the meaning of beginner, intermediate, and advanced, that it refers to the complexity of the pen and not the skills of the person.

 

[mredburn]

You cant make enough competitions to please everyone, other than a Name yourself the Winner competition. The first year I was able to compete in a bash I was excited to make a pen an put it in the modified cigar catagory . Then the rules came out and my pen would not qualify. I ended up putting it in the freestyle just to have a pen in the competitions. I think we did a lot better this year with the advanced rule notice and the longer entry times.

 

[mredburn]

Um So I can enter a beginners pen contest if I made a pen using a designated beginner pen kit?

 

[mredburn]

To me most of the contests that use kits and define the skill levels to seperate them are just judging fit/ finish and blank making ability. Mostly blank making ability. I really dont see any skill level in assembling kit hardware. You turn a blank you push the parts on.

 

[Monty]

Um So I can enter a beginners pen contest if I made a pen using a designated beginner pen kit?

Isn't this where beginners begin?

To me most of the contests that use kits and define the skill levels to seperate them are just judging fit/ finish and blank making ability. Mostly blank making ability. I really dont see any skill level in assembling kit hardware. You turn a blank you push the parts on.

True, but the next level would be modifying a "kit" pen by using segmented blanks, or something that would make the "kit" standout from a regular kit. The ultimate level would be to make a "kitless" pen.

 

[mredburn]

"Isn't this where beginners begin?"

Not all of them. MY first pen I submitted in a BB started with the Freestyle. I had joined in July of the previous year and didnt qualify to enter the beginners because of the time cut off.

Modifying the kit by using segmented or cast blanks is not the next level thats what determines the winners of the first levels. Modifying some of the parts is the next level and then making your own parts as well as the blank is the next level.

 

[Displaced Canadian]

I don't really think that modifying a kit and making/segmenting a blank are in the same area. Easier to modify the blank than the kit.

 

[maxwell_smart007]

How about a colour coding system for skill abilities...Let's use a ski hill as the analogy:

They have beginner, intermediate, advanced, and expert runs - corresponding to green, blue, black, and double-black labels....every run is labelled at the top, and there's a sign at the bottom.

The sign says:
Green - beginner: gentle, groomed slopes
Blue - intermediate: some more challenging grades and moguls, often groomed
black - advanced - ungroomed, challenging slopes with steep grades and moguls
double black - expert - hazardous slopes, drop-offs, etc.

There's no test or grade to determine which one I'm on, and I could ski for a lifetime and not be past a blue level...but after skiing a few times, I know darned well which slope I should be skiing regularly.

Ski patrol might be able to determine my skill as well, but they can't look at every skiier, nor can they limit it based on length of time skiing. It's the honour system, and if I try a level above my ability, It'll be a challenge. I know better than anyone which level I ski at (by the way, I'm a double black skiier, and a green/early blue pen turner!)

So if the issue is that people may try and cheat - sure, they will - more shame to them. Nothing we can do will stop that, no matter what stringent rule you have. Every turner is different, and every skill level is a hybrid...some will want to sandbag, and short of recording pen scores and ranking everyone, there's no way to prevent it...

So ranking challenges based on the type of material used seems to be the best way, in my mind....maybe Wood or Acrylic (in green) custom acrylic or modified kit (blue) and kitless (black). Freestyle (double-black).

 

[mredburn]

Would you apply this coding to the entries at the judging level?

 

[mredburn]

RIght now I think you want the contests coded to allow entrants to choose thier difficulty level clearly. The problem is when the double black diamond skier enters the blue race and whips all the other contestants.

 

[mbroberg]

...Let's use a ski hill as the analogy:

They have beginner, intermediate, advanced, and expert runs - corresponding to green, blue, black, and double-black labels....every run is labelled at the top, and there's a sign at the bottom.

Shouldn't the sign be at the top so it can be read before you ski down? :biggrin:

The sign says:
Green - beginner: gentle, groomed slopes
Blue - intermediate: some more challenging grades and moguls, often groomed
black - advanced - ungroomed, challenging slopes with steep grades and moguls
double black - expert - hazardous slopes, drop-offs, etc.

I would be a double Black & Blue skier.

Seriously, what your suggesting has possibilities. Clear definition of difficulty level seems to be more favorable than definitions of skill level.

 

[mredburn]

Or also, when the green color skier thinks hes a blue level and the guy that won the race in his opinion is a double black diamond skier.

 

[ed4copies]

Try to remember that ever since we introduced "rules for advertisers", the membership has increased and the participation (posting, etc) has decreased.

People come to IAP for relaxation and entertainment---not to read a ton of rules.

Entering the contests requires the potential participant to make a pen that complies with the rules, submit the pictures (limited, by rules) and give us an entry form (to comply with rules).

No matter how many rules you make, some group of people will object---We now know about 160 people competed---they found the current system acceptable. If you change the system, how many of THEM will stop competing?

We react to squeeky wheels--we got over 160 wheels turning quietly and effectively. I suggest we quantify the complaints and, perhaps ask THEM to propose the rules that would satisfy their desired outcome. Then, run those rules past the 160 current participants and see how many of them would "drop out" if the proposed rule is added.

FWIW,
Ed

 

[Displaced Canadian]

I think the idea of setting the contests to a skill level would be easier than giving members a rating. I don't see any easy way of keeping an experienced turner out of the easier contests.

 

[mredburn]

Really the experienced turner can only affect the lower medium level. He is disqualified by the Beginner rules for the most part. There are always the exceptions. A simple once you have won the medium levels you are an advanced competitor from now on rule would keep one or two people a year out of the medium level competitions. That of course ignores the members with deteriating skills.

 

[hunter-27]

To me most of the contests that use kits and define the skill levels to seperate them are just judging fit/ finish and blank making ability. Mostly blank making ability. I really dont see any skill level in assembling kit hardware. You turn a blank you push the parts on.

I asked my judges in the in the intermediate contest to take matching the kit choice to the blank choice as one of the ways to go beyond just fit and finish

 

[ed4copies]

To me most of the contests that use kits and define the skill levels to seperate them are just judging fit/ finish and blank making ability. Mostly blank making ability. I really dont see any skill level in assembling kit hardware. You turn a blank you push the parts on.

I asked my judges in the in the intermediate contest to take matching the kit choice to the blank choice as one of the ways to go beyond just fit and finish

I would expect that every judge does this, instinctively (as a penmaker).
Which is ONE way the judging is subjective (as it will ALWAYS be).

Oh, and Mike---I have ruined scores of pens "pushing the parts on"--believe me, it is NOT difficult to err! But, I certainly would not submit one of them for a contest!!

 

[mredburn]

Right now judging is a separate issue to be examined. I agree with Ed on the squeaky wheel thought. I dont see the complaints or the complainers so I accept mikes assessment as to whether we have a completely legitimate set of complaints or cry-babys that are doing all the complaining constantly. I do have enough experience in other areas of competitions outside of Iap to know that some people are not happy unless you build a competition around them. They dont want to run the competition just dictate how its done.

 

[Monty]

"Isn't this where beginners begin?"

Not all of them. MY first pen I submitted in a BB started with the Freestyle. I had joined in July of the previous year and didnt qualify to enter the beginners because of the time cut off.

Modifying the kit by using segmented or cast blanks is not the next level thats what determines the winners of the first levels. Modifying some of the parts is the next level and then making your own parts as well as the blank is the next level.

I may have misinterpreted something, but I thought we were trying to eliminate the time constraint.

I don't really think that modifying a kit and making/segmenting a blank are in the same area. Easier to modify the blank than the kit.

.

Exactly my point