{"id":349,"date":"2015-07-01T08:24:51","date_gmt":"2015-07-01T08:24:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.magicjudges.org\/exemplar\/?p=349"},"modified":"2015-07-21T15:57:26","modified_gmt":"2015-07-21T15:57:26","slug":"wave-2-the-numbers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.magicjudges.org\/exemplar\/wave-2-the-numbers\/","title":{"rendered":"Wave 2 – The Numbers"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>\n
\n

A message from Kim<\/a><\/span><\/span>: <\/span><\/p>\n

“Me again!<\/p>\n

Lots of people have been asking us for statistics on wave 1. I’m pleased to be able to present the results of some analysis of Wave 2 performed by a whole team of judges. Before I hand you over to Eric<\/a><\/span><\/span>, though, a couple of reminders: <\/p>\n

-If you were recognised in Wave 2 and have not yet provided us with your current mailing address via the Google Form that was emailed out (and you are not a judge based in either Russia or China), you have one week left to do it. I’ll be sending all of the mailing addresses to Andy on the morning of July 8th (BST). If you were recognised and did not receive the email linking you to this form, you need to contact us at ExemplarProgram@gmail.com<\/a> in order to let us know as soon as possible so we can give it to you. <\/p>\n

-There are about five weeks left to put in your recognitions for Exemplar Wave 3. Some people have mentioned being unwilling to enter recognitions early in the window in case they want to change them later; I’d like to take this opportunity to remind you that you are able to edit or delete recognitions that you have entered up to the point that the window closes, so there is no need to hold off to the last minute in case you change your mind. Recipient level is only verified against judge apps at the point that the recognition is submitted, so you don’t need to worry about a recognition being invalidated by the receiving judge levelling up part-way through.<\/p>\n

And that’s done! Now for the post you have been waiting for…<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\n
\n\"\"<\/p>\n

Written by Eric Levine
\nLevel 3, USA<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Hey everyone! As we move forward into Wave 3 of the Exemplar program I want to talk a little bit about Wave 2, where Level 2 judges were added to the list of people who could submit recognitions. The hard-working team of Bryan Prillaman<\/a><\/span><\/span>, Joe Hughto<\/a><\/span><\/span>, Ronald Thompson<\/a><\/span><\/span>, and Paul Baranay<\/a><\/span><\/span> has taken the Wave 2 Exemplar data and wrangled it into a usable form, and I\u2019m here to highlight some of the results.<\/p>\n

a<\/div>\n

What would data be without takeaways, though? Not very useful, that\u2019s what. With each tidbit I give you I\u2019m going to give you my opinion on the takeaway \u2013 that way, we can actually give meaning to these numbers I\u2019m throwing around. Let\u2019s get started with some interesting summary statistics:<\/p>\n

62% of all eligible judges submitted at least one recognition<\/strong>. For a wide-angle program with global implications, I think 62% is a pretty good starting point. As we learn more about what a good recommendation is and how we can consider this program in our day-to-day judging lives, I think we can increase this number. Breaking this number down further, 59% of L2 judges<\/strong> and 87% of L3 judges submitted at least one recognition<\/strong>. Obviously the size of the L2 population (1,032 L2 judges compared to 132 L3 judges during Wave 2) means that they\u2019ll be carrying that overall percentage figure for the foreseeable future.<\/p>\n

\n

Takeaway:<\/strong>
The Exemplar program had a good debut in terms of overall participation, but there\u2019s room to grow \u2013 if you chose not to give a recognition the first time around, consider why and let us know at exemplarprogram@gmail.com if you have ideas for improvement. If you simply didn\u2019t find the time, start early \u2013 Wave 3 is open!<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\n

So, time to go deeper and discuss some specific pieces of data, including some points of concern I\u2019ve heard brought up from time to time. Let\u2019s start first with where our exemplar recommendations went in terms of levels. I saw some conversations online that indicated concern about Level 1 judges not receiving recognition through the Exemplar program. I\u2019m happy to report that 39% of Exemplar recognitions worldwide went to Level 1 judges<\/strong>! Here\u2019s a little more detail in the form of a bar chart:<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

The Level 1 population and the Level 2 population received about the same amount of recognitions. As L2 judges are often the face of Competitive REL, and as many L1s interact mostly with a single local store, it makes sense that Level 2 judges would be well represented. That doesn\u2019t mean there aren\u2019t L1 judges out there working by themselves in stores doing exemplary jobs \u2013 of course there are. Oops, I\u2019m eating into my \u201ctakeaway\u201d section…<\/p>\n

\n

Takeaway:<\/strong>
Level 1 judges received a substantial amount of recognitions through Wave 2 of the Exemplar Program. We could probably find more Exemplary L1 behavior by heading to nearby stores and playing or judging there \u2013 L2s, I\u2019m looking at you and that additional L1 slot you got for Wave 3!<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\n

Another concern I heard mentioned a few times was that judges would simply recognize other judges of the same level and leave lower-level judges feeling unmentioned and unfulfilled. I\u2019m pleased to be able to tell you that, as a group, we used about 62% of our recognition slots on judges lower than us<\/strong>. Here are some more specific stats, focusing on L2s and L3s as they make up the bulk of this population:<\/p>\n