Rock Eisteddfod judges corrupt?

This is aimed to any of us that were involved with or viewed the Rock Eisteddfod Grand Final. The results stand as followed:

1. John Septimus Roe
2. Como
3. Perth Modern
4. Willetton
5. Mandurah Combined

To many of us involved with the schools production found these results rather suprising.

For the record, all my comments are not biased and I will not name my school for various reasons.

The general thought backstage was that Padbury (Harry Potter) and Yanchep (just a wish away from home) deserved places 1 and 2 respectively. Ocean Reef (Cobacabana) was of outstanding quality and also deserved to be in the top 5. Mandurah was thought to place higher, but 5th is a reasonable place. Willetton was alright, they deserved 4th and probably could have been beaten by Mandurah and other schools. Perth Modern was good, they always have been and always will be good so they deserved 3rd. Como: don't get me wrong, I loved their performance but the sets and costumes didn't really deserve 2nd. Watching the production during rehearsals you get to the finale and think "Finally, some colour in the performance!". And John Septimus Roe, simple idea and did a bloody good job of it, but most of us didn't think they deserved 1st place.
The performers choice award: who decides that? If the performers do, the only people they must of asked is the people from Como because I and most other schools would not say Como.

Hopefully there is a judge on this page that can answer this posting and shead some light on the situation. Comments?

How is it all judged and how did you get these results?

Cheers,
Alan Gill

The performers choice award is chosen by the schools. The liason teachers (i believe) give a vote of who they think it should be. I believe, it should have been Dongra, or one of those little schools in the "small schools division".

I would have chosen, Perth Mod, Mandurah, Ocean Reef, Belridge, Padbury, JSR in any order... Rock ed. is always like that though, you never know who is going to win (or place for that matter.) I'm from Perth Mod, and we were worried that we might not place at all! Despite what people say, you can never be too sure.

Last year was wierd as well (when Como won)... it was a huge shock! For the past two years, everyone has expected Mandurah to win at finals; and for the last two years, they haven't.

I don't even remember Yancheps - what was it? I have to say, I really did think that Perth Mod's backstage deserved Prop/set design and the stage crew award (which we did win)! They rocked 110% (boyakasha)... both on and off stage!

What I think was great about JSR was they didn't loose story/characterisation, etc. with their dancing and it was REALLY easy to understand! (not so "symbolic" and "representational" like a lot of the other schools). You have 8 minutes to convey your story/message/theme/concept it has to be clear enough for the audience to understand easily...

I don't think the judging is "corrupt" I just think it's hard to know what is going to look good on the burswood stage in comparision to entertainment centre. (because the judges are so much further away at finals) and it really does come down to personal choice a lot of the time.( Also, a lot of the judges were new this year)

I just had a thought! Did any of the schools take more than 4 mins. to set up, or 4 mins to set down, because doesn't that lose you 2 ranking places? i know when i was watching the hosts were adlibing a lot and asking heaps of questions? maybe that would explain the strange results? Doing things like smoking, taking drugs, etc. also loses two rankings... so maybe that happened?? or maybe not...

I was at the Rock Eisteddfod finals and was astounded by the choices made by the judges. In my humble opinion Mandurah where the clear winners. The story was clear, their set was very good and their dancing was superb.

My daughter is from Lake Joondalup, who were entering for the first time and were just pleased to have made the finals, but they all agreed that Mandurah and Perth Modern were the best.

I was not the slightest bit impressed by the judging, none of them had any clear comments to make. All that talking inbetween was a complete waste of time - I sat there for five hours - and my bum was very, very numb!!! I have to say that I dont think I would ever go and see it again. Sorry.

I love the concept of it all, and for kids that dont normally perform its a wonderful opportunity but they need to sort out the way it is run to keep everyone's interest - its just too long winded.

I didn't know exactly what the time frame was, but I knew that there was a time frame for the sets to be set up. I did notice a lot of ab libbing but I didn't know that they were denied two places.
Yanchep had the very simple set, and that is what I liked about it. It was simple, yet affective. The lighting was good, once again, simple, and the transition between scenes was smooth. Yanchep had Cotton Eye Joe for the scarecrow and at times had only 3 or 4 people dancing at one time. That takes not only guts to do but the choreography has to be good enough to be effective.
Liason teachers are definately not performers. Probably a vote should have been taken in each school and then forward the results on to the judges representitives or whoever takes the vote. Full credit to Mandurah, they obviously were favourites and that is at times hard to win over about 1000 people, especially when they are your competition.

Still waiting for a judge's answer.

Alan

Yea, it's 4 mins either side of your performance. I don't think they would have penalised anyone though.

Oh you though Yanchep should have placed? Mmm... see, I disagree there, and that's when personal choice comes into it all. The way I see them having only the 4 people on stage was it's not a team feeling. For me, Rock Eisteddfod is about being part of a team, and being equals, having "soloist" takes away from the team feeling. Sure- you have you choreographers/producers/front line dancers but just having soloists on stage by themself, I don't know I don't think it's right for Rock Ed. The best part (for me) is seeing a performance with maximum students on stage and with a finale with EVERYONE on stage as one (with one costume).

The judges decision is final and no correspondance will be entered into. There is absolutely no benefit in this type of discussion.

I know that there is no hope of changing the judges decision. This is discussion is mainly trying to figure out how the judges reached those decisions.

Yanchep, I think, was quite a small people. I agree that the Rock Eisteddfod is a team event, and that the finales with the whole schools performers are absolutely amazing. But if you only have a small amount of people, and you start off with few and move on to many and still get 4 people to make an impression doing a dance is pretty good. But yes, I do agree with the more the merrier and some of the finales that are like that take my breathe away.

On a different note, have you ever wondered why some schools have a full dress rehearsal and other don't? This is probably going to cause a bit of warfare but in my mind it is to get a phycological edge over the other schools. If you sit back at the heats and watch the other schools, not knowing what the judges think of you, and you see them with full costumes and lighting and all of that you think that they are really good. To some people this affects their confidence and transfers into their performance. There are a few tricks that go on behind the scenes but just your thoughts on why some schools do it and some don't.

I'm still confused. Explanation by a judge willbe apreciated.

Cheers
Alan

Yea, I was wondering that about the full dress rehearsal too! I know a few schools just put on or two in a costume, so the other dancers get the "effect". I personally think it's good to do at least one dress rehearsal because things are always different backstage than they are in your school gym. I know 1/2 our finale didn't make it on stage cause they weren't dressed in time, something about too many people and lack of space (that's what you get when you have sets that come off stage and into the wing and 100 dancers!) A bad thing about rehearsing in cotumes is that bits and pieces can get lost, creased, dirty, etc.!

Mmm... I just didn't dig Yanchep. But, that's just personal choice.I know people who thought it was great. I think having two "Wiz. of Oz's" was just unfortunate!

So, is anyone doing Rock Ed. next year? If so have you started yet - any themes decided on? Our little Year 9's have already gotten their theme for 2004 (it was one of the ideas for this years!). How cute! Perth Mod still hasn't decided whether they're doing it next year because of music tour, and there's a rumour there might be a musical...

Alan Gill wrote:
-------------------------------
>>I know that there is no hope of changing the judges decision. This is discussion is mainly trying to figure out how the judges reached those decisions.



I didn't see the Eisteddfodd, so I can't comment on these particular judges.

But I was recently in a situation of being invited to judge a Yr 12 Mock TEE practical drama exam. It was harrowing to say the least!
I feel I was qualified to criticise and give constuctive comment, and having never seen the students before there could be no bias; but still the whole process of grading and ranking became surprisingly difficult. More difficult than when I have conducted auditions, because then at least I have a reasonably clear goal in mind for the auditionee to fulfil. This was simply ranking one set of performances against another.
Not that there aren't very clear guidelines for TEE adjudicators to follow. The guidelines try to be as prescriptive as possible as to whether technical and artistic elements fit into a "poor-standard-good" type of scale, and list specific areas where marks should be deducted if the skill is not demonstrated.
But even following these guidelines, the actual decision-making becomes very subjective. Differences in vocal competence, physical competence, directing skill, improvisation skill, characterisation, spatial awareness, audience awareness, etc ..were wide and varied and often subject to my interpretation. Although I tried to avoid it, it was difficult not to be influenced by what came before in the order of presentation (after watching six monologues from COSI it's difficult to assess my own judgement when someone presents a good Shakespeare...not that the others were bad, just that the change of pace influenced my reaction as an audience).

I didn't confer with the other judges, our collective results were simply compiled and averaged, and although I have every respect for my colleagues' ability and competence, I am sure that they probably felt the same pressures, and that there are probably some wide variations between many of our assessments.

In the end, you realise that you've done the best you can and it would not have been any less well judged than if someone else had done it - but the truth is that yes, some elements would have turned out differently with a different judge.


The thing to realise is that it is probably not the judges you are complaining about, but rather the whole process of judging and ranking the arts, which is a tenuous concept at best. But if you insist on setting yourself up for comparison at competitions like these (don't get me wrong, there is certainly merit in these events) then you have to accept how sometimes arbitrarily it can turn out.

I think the comment "Judges decisions are final and no correspondence will be entered into" is a telling one. The judges make the best of a difficult situation at that particular point in time, and while subsequent examination may reveal flaws in their decisions, that's the name of the game and there really is no point in pursuing it.


Cheers,
Craig

<8>-/====/-----------



Thou dissembling folly-fallen coxcomb!

I think we can only be greatful our judges weren't like anything from the Newcastle event, which I heard was something shocking! As crgwllams said, as much as an adjudicator can not put personal preference, etc. into it, they are only human...

I think the only downfall in the structure of the judging at Rock Ed. is the adjudicators have to always be positive - if you get through to finals, you really want to know everything they think isn't working, or could work better, why you didn't place higher than you did and what you can do to get those extra marks. But, Rock Ed. isn't meant to be about winning, it's the experience, and the drug-free high thing that they're promoting!

I agree. The experience isn't about winning, it's about having fun and all of that. But I'm not "mad" that my school did not win, I'm just trying to comprehend the judges decisions. Sometimes you can never figure them out. Who knows, the judging criteria maybe really obscure to the ones that we have as performers. It also helps schools to know that the judges are looking for so that they can plan their schools performance better.

Cheers
Alan

Schools should know the judging key - it's in the rules handbook! There's two judges for dance, two for drama/concept, two for costuming/set -- or something along those lines. Can't remember. And the way it is marked is the judges circle a number from 1-10 (but they're not allowed to score lower than 6 supposedly) from the sub-catagories on their sheets (each dept. has a different sheet)... The one that sub-catagory that they all have in common is Overall Effect/Impact? of Performance and they give that a number... Then there's a space for comments (only positive ones).

I was just wondering how people would answer this question. I know how I would, but how would you?

What is more important....the QUANTITY of schools involved in the rock eisteddfod challenge, or the QUALITY of the performances? Also within performances, which is more important...?

Alan wrote:
>>The experience isn't about winning, it's about having fun..
>>I'm just trying to comprehend the judges decisions....
>>to know what the judges are looking for so that they can plan their school's performance better...

I reckon you should rather concentrate on what you think an AUDIENCE is looking for, which is quality entertainment. If that guides all your decision making, then you shouldn't have to worry about the judges, you can be confident that you're planning your performance properly. And if you're lucky enough to score a mention, then that's a bonus - but that's all it is, really.
It's a hard concept to come to terms with, I know that young performers put a lot of emphasis on the award aspect. But the paradox is that ultimately, even though the judging system often demonstrates an educated opinion, it is kind of meaningless at the same time, which is both a consolation and a reason to not get too big-headed about any of it.


Pia wrote:
-------------------------------
>>What is more important....the QUANTITY of schools involved in the rock eisteddfod challenge, or the QUALITY of the performances? Also within performances, which is more important...?


I find it very hard not to answer QUALITY, but then, "quality" is such a difficult word to define! (Read Robert Persig's "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintainence" to see how trying to define it can drive you mad!)

For some in the audience, the fact that their kid gets to be up there onstage doing their best is part of that "quality" value. The magnitude of the event and the thousands of people who creatively contribute in their own exciting way are part of the "quality" of the event. There will be ideas of "quality" that don't necessarily look polished or professional, but impress nonetheless...particularly those who achieve much with simple concepts and/or shoestring budgets. And not everyone in the audience is going to like the fact that some schools have more money to spend on achieving a "professional" look, but for some, the quality is in seeing, or being part of, a slick, flashy-looking big-budget number...and that, too, is a valid idea of "quality".

My memory of watching this type of event is that most of the audience has a vested interest, in their kid or their school or their friends (or arch-enemies!). But that accounts for only maybe 10% of the evening. So for the other 90-odd %, entertainment is paramount...and variety is part of the key. If a school presents a segment with a few select dancers rather than a massed troupe, that may add to the entertainment value, simply by being different. Quantity is a variable to be considered, but I would say it is subservient to quality.


...And part of the quality, for me, is the fact that it may encourage someone to find and follow their dream. - I was a performer at the Eisteddfodds in 86 & 87 (luckily, not competitively...I was part of the Education Department's "Dance Clips" team that entertained the audience while the scores were being tallied...so I knew the audience was watching, but the judges WEREN'T..!). I have strong and fond memories of the whole event, from rehearsals to backstage chaos to cheering audience...and in no small way it influenced me to pursue the long and crazy career that I'm now enjoying.
If it has the same effect on any of today's young participants, then, fantastic...that's worth any amount more than what some long-forgotten judges might have been thinking.


Cheers,
Craig

<8>-/=====/------------

Hi Craig

> The thing to realise is that it is probably not the judges you are > complaining about, but rather the whole process of judging
> and ranking the arts, which is a tenuous concept at best.

With you entirely on this one. The whole business of judging the arts is so fraught with difficulty you have to wonder why people bother!

How can numbers scribbled on paper or ticks in boxes satisfactorily describe a response to a theatrical event?

On the other hand, a 'judging' process that encourages informed debate, discussion and justification of responses and results has the potential to be both an enlightening and educational experience.

Jackie wrote: "There is absolutely no benefit in this type of discussion."

Frankly? Crap.

It is largely by informed debate and discussion about what has and hasn't worked in performance that we can grow, mature, move on and develop as artists and performers.

Cheers
Grant

Hi.

I agree. This dicussion isn't just targetting the issue of judging in the Rock Eisteddfod, but in any form of dramatic presentation. Whether it be entry into WAAPA or TEE Drama, or even an audition. Everybody has their own styles of judging and even though they all may be looking for the same things in a performance, the way they judge it is different. Someone may have seen something of much higher quality somewhere else, and therefore think differently when marking a monologue from, as someone said, Cosi when they had seen a fantastic monologue from Hamlet but at an entirely higher level, therefore they may think less of the "lower" quality monologue even though we would say it was excellent.

I have also heard that in the Rock Eisteddfod, if there are males invovled with the production they won't mark the performance as hard as they would if it were all females. I think that sucks. That means that some schools especially go out and recruit guys for their performance just so that they get that flexibility. I do admit that some guys aren't as talented as other and even the talented ones (like myself) are no where as good as a lot of females. I also don't agree with guys going in it because they want to perve on all the chicks running around in leotards. Many do that and I find that it gives a lot of guys in the Rock Eisteddfod a bad name. When I was at the final I was talking to a mate of mine from Kelmscott and we both agreed that we do it for the like of the art, and that the females are a bonus. In my mind, that's true. If there weren't about 1300 girls running around in leotards and the like I would still do it, if it was an all guys event I would still do it. But unfortunately there are leans toward schools with guys in them. Yes, they are an advantage for lifts and all that, and yes, some can actually dance but including guys in the Rock to get the lean, give them small roles and treat them like dirt is wrong, and I don't agree with it. I've probably gotten a little carried away here but there are something I feel strongly for or against, and that lean towards the guy friendly schools is something I'm against.

Comments? Any other leans and little secrets we haven't heard yet?

Alan

"I have also heard that in the Rock Eisteddfod, if there are males invovled with the production they won't mark the performance as hard as they would if it were all females."

Sorry, I really don't agree with that! Aranmore had a whole section of guys and they didn't even get into the finals! Last year, Wesley (an all guys school) didn't even get into finals. It just so happens that there are no longer all girls schools in such as MLC, PlC, Mercedes, St Hilda's, etc. therefore the schools that are doing well are co-ed.

"...give them small roles and treat them like dirt is wrong..."

There are so many boys that get "lead roles". Take this year for example, JSR - Gomez, Anthony, Adam. Perth Mod - 2 of the characters in white. Belridge - The game show host, the funky disco dude, etc. So, are you saying that guys should get leading roles because they're guys, what about all the girls who are the backrow dancer...? Just because boys are the minority in Rock Eisteddfod doesn't mean they should get special treatment.

Oh and while we're talking about TEE drama; does anyone have any tips/advice?