JUDGE EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT Grow the number and capability of the Gymnastics workforce made up of coaches, judges, volunteers and administrators
Singapore Gymnastics has continued to work hard over the past year to address the perceived intentional biases and unintentional judging errors that occur in competitions. These questions are in response to feedback we received from our Annual Survey of the community, from Club Visits, as well as specific issues raised through our Technical Advisory Councils, and tabled at the 2020 Annual General Meeting. The key strategies have been: Source and implement a new scoring system which can support all our disciplines, and which can be used to track judge scores, scoring trends and judging quality at SG events. Review the judge education framework to ensure appropriate levels of judges throughout the system, as well as increase the numbers of judges overall. Be transparent in the allocation of judges in competition. Provide professional development sessions to improve judging competency. Despite the 2020 National Championships and Singapore Open being cancelled, all these strategies have either been achieved or made significant progress (limited only by the lack of competitions). New Scoring System The initial step was the adoption of ScoreExpress as our competition scoring system. There were two primary requirements during the sourcing of a scoring system: That the one system can support all our disciplines That the scoring can be linked back to individual judges for review Based on its ability to deliver both of these requirements, SG committed to a one-year trial of this system. The first phase of scoring analysis is aiming to address perceived improprieties is threefold: Look at the data for overall trends, regardless of the judge Develop education sessions to address areas requiring improvement Use these first two points to ensure all judges know scoring is now being reviewed in competitions. The following areas were analysed: Amount of time a judge’s score was eliminated as the highest score Amount of time a judge’s score was eliminated as the lowest score Amount of time a judge’s score was 0.6 above or below the final score Amount of time a judge’s score was 1.0 above or below the final score Amount of time a judge’s score was 1.5 above or below the final score.
Singapore Gymnastics Annual Report 2020
70
