Well here are my thoughts sent to the AKC today. To: Alan Kalter and the Board of Directors of the American Kennel Club From: Jason M Hoke 314 S. Midvale Blvd Madison, WI 53705 First of all I would like to thank the Board for revisiting the approval process for judges as this has and always will be a thankless job, carrying with it both the detractors and the supporters. What is refreshing to see is that you are asking for input from the fancy as to what direction “We” would like to see this are proceed. Upon reviewing the proposal I have a few comments I would like the Board to consider: I will start firstly with what seems to be the driving force of the changes and that is the involvement of the A.K.C. Field Representatives observations on judges. This seems to be quite a contentious area. The question falls on whether or not Field Reps should be allowed to evaluate quality of judging. I have been evaluated my most if not all of the Reps and here is what I have to say about the process. Upon being notified that I am being observed I make very precise mental notes about my major placements. WD/WB and BOB I feel that these are the primary dogs to be discussed. Also if I feel there were other “dogs of note” I put them in my mental file to discuss as well. When speaking with the Reps I have always been allowed to discuss the positive attributes and shortcomings of the dogs. Sometimes the Field Reps did not agree with my placements but after listening to my rational came to a better understanding as to how I prioritize my placements. It is an open dialog I really enjoy because what this forces a judge to do is to have to quantify virtues of an exhibit in a verbal manner. Now one may say it is subjective on both people’s parts but it is imperative to have to do. The reason you cannot eliminate this process is because this “practice” teaches us as judges how to have the exact same conversation with an exhibitor who may be leaving our ring unhappy and wants to have an intelligent conversation with us regarding our judging at a later point. These conversations with exhibitors can determine future entries and the positive growth of our sport, something we cannot afford to allow to lose. If we do not have the tools to discuss our judging in a concise and intelligent manner with people our sport will be lost. So then moving to another point of the evaluation, we as judges are observed typically on our first assignment in a breed and subsequent ones as well. I know personally that the more I judge the breed the more comfortable I become and hopefully BETTER! I think one proposed idea that should be considered is that evaluations should occur on the later assignments after we have our proverbial feet wet in the breed. This way we have started to form our ideals and priorities more concisely. The first times we judge the breed it is really a challenge and to have unnecessary scrutiny for some only hampers the decision making process. So maybe the Board could consider placing the evaluations later in the judging process to allow judges to become more comfortable before being reviewed. My last point on evaluations would be regarding the theory or idea that a “certain” rep is out to get someone. This has never been my experience but for whatever reason this concept is prevalent. So a suggestion to the board to help assuage the concerned judge is to allow a person to Opt out of ONE and only ONE AKC Rep who they perceive as having a bias for whatever reason. This way the judge could then be observed by all the other Reps without such a negative feeling. Certainly all the reps would not have a bias against an individual. If the reports come back negative from multiple reps after being observed, one would certainly think the issue is with the judge, and not our entire Field Staff. This seems a fair way to deal with a judge feeling singled out by one Rep without eliminating the entire process which allows for checks and balances within our great judging community. These checks and balances must be maintained to ensure quality judging and promote education. Moving on to the educational aspect, I realize that there are financial considerations to the judges for acquiring the appropriate amount of knowledge to advance. It is a challenge, which goes without saying. But to lessen the amount of education required will do nothing but produce mediocrity in our judging. As I advance through the breeds I do not want to be required to do less. I want to be held to a higher standard. I revered our All-Breed Judges and Breeder Judges growing up and their knowledge was incomparable. To allow us to advance to that status in such a short time is doing a disservice to the breeds. I never want to fail in my judging and allowing us to advance so rapidly will do nothing but set us all up for failure. I want to see breeds, my breeds and others judged well. If we accept mediocrity in judging we will be accepting mediocrity in our breeding stock and that cannot and should not be accepted. The concept that by having more breeds makes you more marketable while in theory is great in actual practice means little or nothing. The reasons judges get hired hopefully first and foremost is the quality of their judging followed by their passion for our great sport and their treatment of the exhibitors. I know judges who have multiple groups and rarely judge due to their quality of judging and demeanor while some with one group or simply a few breeds far surpass the multiple group judge in assignment quantity. It goes back to quality vs. quantity. I do think the idea of bringing back the in ring observations is a tremendously wonderful idea. I as a young exhibitor always enjoyed when judges took the time to talk to me about breeds they judged. Imagine the wealth of knowledge we can gain by being in the ring and discussing nuances of breed type. This type of education is paramount and should even be required where we mentor in the ring under breed authorities. I know I would love the ability to be in such a practical setting with time constraints that we face and learn what makes the experts see the breed the way they do. I do hope the Board will listen to all of the input the fancy is offering and make decisions based not on what makes things easier for everyone but what will make us all better as judges and exhibitors. Jason M Hoke #92952
Posted on: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 17:22:24 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015