Jump to content

Shadow Weaver

Members
  • Posts

    120
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Shadow Weaver

  1. You bring up some intriguing points, because I think here is where we broach a terribly interesting topic: what is it that we are really judging?

     

    BOA and UIL play off each other so well when the topic of biased judging comes into play because two biases, both valid in their own ways, can find themselves at odds. I love both judging systems and appreciate their differences, but they have to be recognized.

     

    I believe that BOA approaches their judging with an emphasis on the artistic and creative advancement of Marching Band Arts. This is a lofty goal that yields many fascinating interpretations and stretches the more subjective aspects of art and taste. Innovation and boldness is encouraged and admired such that events are always dynamic.

     

    UIL seems to me more cerebral and less interested in artistry past a commitment to teaching the fundamental art of performance in the moment. In that respect, UIL focuses much more on the interaction between student and teacher as well as the product of discipline, dedication, and technique. Great bands have both creative artistry and technique, but in a teaching environment, how much emphasis should be focused on the artistic sensibilities of the director?

     

    Depending on how each of us personally judges a band, we will often draw different conclusions as to how we might rank a particular band, but it is useful to remind ourselves of how we might approach our opinions of the bands while also remembering that there are other, valid ways to think about any group in particular.

     

    Just another tangent as we approach UIL 6A State and the judging disparities that are bound to occur.

     

    I think this is an artifact of difference in personal judging emphasis - giving more points for certain things than for others. There are many instances among middle and top tier bands in prelims where the MPI and MPE are at least one point different. But we normally wouldn't give much thought to a one point difference between those captions. If, then, a one point difference (which goes underneath the radar) becomes common, then comparatively a two point difference isn't that much. It's just that it doesn't go underneath the radar. The same for VPI and VPE. Just look at James Martin's visual scores.

     

    At this point I am just speaking generally, not necessarily to you... And I'm kind of going out on a limb here...

     

    This is my defense of judging bias.

     

    I hesitate to use the term 'bias' because people tend to read 'political bias' or 'unfair bias' or even 'prejudice' into that. But the reality is that a judge without biases cannot judge at all; he or she would have no prior notion of what a good band sounds or looks like, and thus would be unable to recognize and score any good music or visual production whatsoever. What's required is that a judge have competently formed biases, and BOA ensures that since they choose their adjudicators.

     

    The adjudication handbook itself - implicitly, I mean - merely allows for a certain band's performance to be interpreted into a certain scoring range. It's not like the judges are under pressure to subjectively approximate as close as possible the one and only real, objective score that a band's performance deserves in a given caption, for there are many real, objective scores even in the same caption that a band can deserve for the same performance. It's not just that a judge 'sees different things than another might', or that we should put a margin of error after the sub-total. True, there can be error and judges do see different things, but these are mitigated substantially by having competent adjudicators: they know what they're looking for, and they look for it effectively most all of the time. The point is that there can be a legitimate range of difference in scores of the same caption, of the same performance, without actually making any judging error.

     

    How is this? The reality is that there is no rigid definition of the terms used in adjudication - just a range of competent interpretations of those terms. This is different from the sciences and mathematics in toto. Any time there is not absolute, univocal, philosophical precision in the definition of a term (which is exceedingly difficult), there can be legitimately different opinions - for there are many ways of legitimately 'carving up' ambiguity. There are many ways to legitimately get to Columbus, Ohio if there are not watertight qualifications on how to get there. So just as in any community, there needs to be something of a gentleman's agreement to settle for a plurality of competent opinions, rather than enforcing an absolute, unanimous homogeneity. This we call the adjudication handbook, and it prevents chaos by sketching very broadly the norms of the community, without suffocating the future of the activity. And if we ever doubt that there are different opinions, we need only to look at the different products that different programs put out. Then also consider whether any group of more than one intelligent, educated person agrees on absolutely everything about a certain subject matter.

     

    But we shouldn't be in any hurry to nail down with philosophical precision the meaning of these terms, for if the adjudication terms were static rather than dynamic, the entire future of marching band would be locked in to a predetermined way of doing things. There would be no 'paradigm shifts', no moving forward, no designers pushing the limits of what general effect or execution legitimately means on a marching field, no unexpected Flower Mound or CTJ productions. As with any human community (and the marching arts community is an extremely young one, I may add), there is a continual organic development in which the members of the community evaluate and reevaluate their norms and rules, as they come to a deeper or different understanding of themselves, as well as their goals and means of getting there. This simply cannot be transposed or codified into a short adjudication handbook, for that organic development still has more unpredictable achievements to produce. Moreover, even the handbook is always necessarily just a partial expression of the greater expanse of both written and unwritten, inchoate and intuitive community goals and norms that shape the activity.

     

    The letter of the law then has to be open enough to allow for what we cannot predict - so that our expectations can be pleasantly surprised - and turn the rest over to the prudent, continual assessment of the community, even if this means we can't program judging robots. Unpredictability is simply ineliminable from any facet of human life, and the scoring accounts for that because the judges and designers are sensible human beings capable of handling surprising human achievement. Despite the appearance of nice boxes with numbers in them, adjudication is not really like science or mathematics at all, where there's only one true and one false response in the end. There's no harm in playing with the numbers, for they are valid, but they are not the only valid numbers as it would be in the sciences. Adjudication retains the competent plurality of the activity it governs, and this plurality will probably never go away. Why the numbers at all then then? We accept the numbers because it gives a real and valid - competently determined - resolution to the activity. It gives a prudent, informed answer as to what the ranking should be. For this activity, that is acceptable, for it still encourages high levels of achievement and produces life-changing experiences as a result - and (more than) fulfills so many other unwritten goals and expectations.

     

    TL;DR: Different judging biases are good so long as they are competent (and they are). Because of this, we get to see awesome new designs every year!

  2. Personally I think ctjs 5th place finish was due in large part to them being dirtier than normal (targeting grand nats) and it being a uil contest where the smallest amount of dirt can kill you regardless of difficulty.

    Dirt can kill, but I wouldn't say regardless of difficulty. Churchill and New Braunfels were two good examples at Area D Finals. Churchill had a difficult program that was short on execution whereas New Braunfels had a slightly less difficult program executed very well and ended up tying with Churchill for 7th in Finals. After the tie-breaker, Churchill came out on top.

     

    However, if you start to compare CTJ and RR directly, their difficulty levels are comparable, but Reagan was executing at a higher level, hence their final placements. I'm not saying that CTJ can't or won't catch up, but given that both RR and CTJ were scoring very similarly at earlier competitions, it would seem that CTJ will need have a focused week.

  3. Ok so the contest is only three days away so I'm gonna try my best at final predictions. Next to teach band will be the highest and lowest placement I could believably see them in.

     

    1.Flowermound (highest 1st, lowest 3rd)

    2.Leander (highest 1st, lowest 3rd)

    3.Reagan (highest 1st, lowest 3rd)

    4.CTJ (highest 4th, lowest 6th)

    5.Vandegrift(highest 4th, lowest 7th)

    6.Cedar Park(highest 4th, lowest 8th)

    7.Hebron(highest 5th, lowest 8th)

    8.Marcus(highest 6th, lowest 8th)

    9.Woodlands(highest 7th, lowest 10th)

    10.Round Rock(highest 8th, lowest 11th)

    11.LD Bell( highest 9th, lowest 12th)

    12.Hendrickson(highest 10th, lowest 13th)

    13.Vista Ridge(highest 12, lowest 14th)

    14.Keller(highest 12th, lowest 14th)

     

    Music: could see going to flower mound, Reagan, vandegrift, or even leander with a knockout run like 14.

     

    Visual: flower mound and Reagan are both very clean so either could take it, however both ctj and Leander have incredible amounts of choreography and difficult drill so they may take this caption much like ctj in 14.

     

    GE: flower mound, leander, or Reagan. All three have fantastically designed shows in my opinion and a great performance could give any one of them the GE caption.

     

    Whew that was ROUGH, so many great bands. I do not envy the judges here one bit.

     

    After having seen the Area D competition, I believe that, barring major cleaning and refinement (and maybe more than 8 hours of practice), C.T. Johnson will not be fifth place at BOA San Antonio, nor will Hendrickson be so low. CTJ's show is so fun and creative, but it seems to have fallen behind in terms of execution. They were a solid 5th at Area D.

  4. My favorite shows were easily Hendrickson and Ronald Reagan. Solid sounds, beautiful execution, and great technique. Cedar Ridge had an excellent finals run after being late to preliminaries due to a transportation mishap, and Westwood can really play. Round Rock and James Bowie are such talented ensemble groups. There was not a weak band in finals, and even preliminaries was filled with strong performances. All in all a fun day of band.

  5. I arrived halfway through, and of the band's I've seen, CTJ, Reagan, Cedar Ridge, and New Braunfels have been standouts, with Stony Point, Churchill, and Lehman to come. Of those, Cedar Ridge had transportation issues, arrived after their performance time, and had a bit of a rough run, though still very good.

     

    I also heard that Bowie, Round Rock, Hendrickson, Pflugerville, and Westwood were standouts during the first half of the day.

  6. http://johnsonband.instantencore.com/web/page.aspx?title=2016+Competitions

     

    This is where I found that CTJ intended to only perform in preliminaries. Perhaps it's changed, but there's contradicting information from official sources, it seems.

    wow, well color me surprised. I hadn't seen that link. Getting additional confirmation seals the deal, but it's definitely some of the most surprising news I've heard in many years.

  7. And further proof that CTJ has no plans to pull out of finals:

     

    UIL Area D Competition Meal

                            
    Deadline, Wednesday, Oct. 26: The meal committee has put together a new meal order for the upcoming UIL Area D competition in Austin on Saturday, October 29.
     These meals are an optional purchase but we are encouraging everyone
    to order because students won't have an opportunity to purchase food
    until the finals competition later that evening (students will be
    allowed to purchase items from the concession stand while they are
    watching finals). If you don't want to order a meal, please send food or
    snacks with your band member for the day and/or send money with them.
    If you have any questions please contact Kim Freund at jjbandmeals@gmail.com. Please click on the link below to order.  Also, if you have a meal credit from last year's playoff games please contact Kim."

     

     

     

    This is from the Johnson Band Booster page. Sorry guys! Wishful thinking. ;)

     

    http://www.johnsonjaguarband.org/web/page.aspx?title=CTJ+Band+Parent+Association

  8. New Braunfels hasn't generally beat any of the band's on that list with the exception of Hays, Canyon, and Lehman. Their only BOA finals appearance was in 1998, though they did appear at 4A State and Finals a couple of times in the early to mid-2000's. I think their best showing at Area D was in 2008 where they placed 11th just shy of Finals. Needless to say, they would be a surprise group should they advance this year, though they are performing at a higher level this year than years past.

     

    Here are my predictions for finalists:

    Locks (No order):

    Bowie (Looking good this year! Although with all the band directors leaving, they could not get first like in 2014. Also, every year there is one crazy judge that gives them 13th place or something but could it drag them down beneath the cutoff?)

    Reagan (A strong contender for taking the gold at state finals, grand nationals, let along area finals.)

    CTJ (Always great, and this year is not an exception.)

    Cedar Ridge (Didn't do so great at State prelims last year, and also got 10th at BOA Austin. But with their grand national finals past and area judges always loving what Cedar Ridge put's on, I have them as a lock)

     

    Upper Bubble (In somewhat of an order):

    Round Rock (Really should be a lock, but Area judges seem to hate them)

    Hendrickson (Went from 1st in prelims in 2014 to tying for 9th in finals. Really got ripped off)

    Churchill (Didn't make finals in 2014, but has made some vast improvements since then)

    Anderson (Pretty good this year, Anderson is often a wild card, while almost making state in 2014 but not even making finals in 2012)

    Westwood (Music is top notch and, musically, could be ranked top 5. Visuals/drill is lacking through [at least at BOA Austin])

     

    Fighting for the last spot (In somewhat of an order):

    Pflugerville (I love Pflugerville this year! Beat Churchill in 2014 to take the last spot in finals, and could do it again (But beating out another band)

    Lehman (Such pretty music. Lehman got 2's at UIL Region last year, but have drastically improved)

    Hays (Always has been a dark horse for finals, could this be the year?)

    Canyon/New Braunfels (Could be an underdog for finals)

     

    Haven't really heard of New Braunfels's year, but I don't think they have ever made Area D finals, let alone beat any of my lock/bubble bands. Could be wrong, though.

     

    Edited to take out Lake Travis since they are not in Area D

  9. Leander's show was absolutely fantastic, and Claudia Taylor Johnson really stepped up their already high level of performance from Area D last week to overtake an impeccable James Bowie band. What a great finals! All the bands put on a great show, and I really enjoyed my most recent BOA Regional experience.

     

    Shout outs are merited for Dripping Springs as well for placing 6th at the Atlanta Super Regional, which Tarpon Springs won.

     

    UIL 6A State should be a good show.

  10. I feel like too many people say that the emphasis on BOA is based on pageantry. While it may increase a bands score-ish? The bands that do well in BOA often do well in UIL and vice-versa. I feel that Coppell is only of the only exception. Both circuits value clean shows. One of the things that probably affects the scoring majorly is having judges on the field who can see and hear how well these bands play. They can point out the people who don't play as well, maybe who aren't marching uniformly.

     

    Also BOA gives raw scores. idk why I think that's significant, but it seems that it would be.

     

    My point is that they are different scoring systems that take different factors into consideration. Naturally, a very good marching band will perfom strongly in both circuits, regardless of the criteria. However, bands will move up and down in the rankings of both circuits based on the show's intended audience. Am I the only one that remembers the early parts of this millenium when performing bands like Ronald Reagan would do significantly better at BOA (even ranking top 3 at BOA Houston) the same year in which they failed to advance to state (or maybe it was state finals)? The same can be said about Duncanville in the early 90's before they stopped participating in BOA altogether. Even Shine himself has stated the educational vs. design focus of the two circuits as a major reason for his desire to stop participating in BOA.

     

    It's also notable that bands that have introduced new design elements into shows have surpassed better performing ensembles over the course of BOA competitions (Center Grove 1995, Ronald Reagan 2000, 2001).

     

    That BOA has a bent toward design is not a knock on the system but a statement of fact.

  11. Perhaps I'm just an old curmudgeon who will never be a fan of the BOA system, but I find it more than a little disturbing that Marcus won Music and Visual in prelims.......yet they finished 2nd? Call me old fashioned, but I feel like the band who the judges agree marched and played the best should come in first. Everything else is a bit out of the kids' hands. I'm glad the band who won the performance captions in finals went on to win the whole contest.

     

    Also, I always scratch my head over Coppell's every other year flip-flop. Top five at state marching contest, then misses BOA SA finals. Is that group the biggest disconnect between the BOA/UIL scoring systems? Then again, they seem to have stepped out of their comfort zone a bit this year.

     

    You're right in saying that design is out of the kids' hands, but the fun with BOA is that there is a greater focus on the artistry, pomp, and pageantry of marching band. Sounds like enjoying the UIL State Marching Band competitions is the way for you to go. Being a more educationally-focused competition, you can enjoy the rewarding of excellence and perfection in performance.

     

    You have to approach both unique adjudication systems with the fact in mind that they have a distinct place in the marching band world. Once you are comfortable with that fact, you can enjoy each of the performances that much more.

  12. I agree. Emotion took over. Hard week. Saw too many upset kids, too much uncertainty, too much anxiety, too much... and felt too much of it too. Should have taken step back.

     

    Apologize. Don't want to reflect poorly on a program that is nothing but a class act. I came back and deleted once cooler thoughts prevailed. Wish I could take it back.

     

    Some food for thought...

     

    The consequences for having an ineligible participant for Poteet could have been much worse had this not been divulged but instead discovered. There are consequences to breaking the rules (however unintentional), and Poteet received the minimum punishment available to schools who, for one reason or another, march an ineligible player or play an ineligible football player etc.

     

    While not great for the kids who wished to march at State, the self-reporting and the disqualification were absolutely the best course of action for all involved given the circumstances.

  13. That's the whole purpose of a forum.... It gives folks a chance to voice opinions, good or bad.... It gives folks a chance to vent..... It gives folks some interesting reading.. Lets face it ....If everyone wrote about sunshine and roses... Nobody would read ...

     

    It doesn't hurt to remind the venters about the big picture, though.

     

    It was a truly great show!

  14. I'll be leaving Austin in about an hour for San Antonio to begin my two day adventure of preliminaries. I've never watched this many bands before in a two day period so I'm feeling a little overwhelmed. I think I'll be able to make it! Good thing the Saturday afternoon block looks to be the best.

     

    It can be a lot of fun if you've never done it before. The best thing about a regional like this is that essentially all the bands perform at a high level of competition, finalists or not.

×
×
  • Create New...