Subject: Digest for the period 1/21/2004 - 1/22/2004 Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 01:03:40 -0500 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Belgians and New Styles (David Craft) 2. call for judges--correction (tbonestott) 3. Re: Digest for the period 1/20/2004 - 1/21/2004 (Mark Wilson) 4. Test Heresy (Jay Spies) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Craft Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 06:16:27 -0500 Subject: Belgians and New Styles Greetings, I'll start something new. The current exam thread is good and well reasoned from many angles, but lets talk about beer. I posted this a few weeks ago and go no response, my first post here and I was disappointed. Will some of the experienced judges give me some sound advice on how to compare and contrast Belgian Strong Golden Ale and Trippel. The guidelines vary little and to the untrained or lesser trained these are essentially the same beer. I hear there are some subtantial changes in the styles in the works. My thougths- English Brown is expanded to include Irish Red? Barleywine and IS is expanded to include Baltic Porter. Stout is expanded to include West Coast. Others, Have a good day, David B. Craft Battleground Brewers Guild Crow Hill Brewery and Meadery Greensboro, NC ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: tbonestott Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 12:01:40 -0500 Subject: call for judges--correction I just posted a call for judges for the Eastern Connecticut Homebrew Competition with an incorrect date. The correct date is March 20. Bruce Stott ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mark Wilson Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:13:10 -0800 Subject: Re: Digest for the period 1/20/2004 - 1/21/2004 > From: Gordon Strong Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 08:39:14 -0500 > Subject: Exam guide > > well on the exam, I suggest you take a look at the presentation I gave at > last year's AHA Conference in Chicago. Check out > http://207.89.201.107/Presentations/Mastering%20the%20BJCP%20Exam.pdf. It Great presentation! I think the example 7/10 vs. 10/10 answer was very illustrative. I know in the past I have added superfluous information in the hope that this someone makes me come off as a smarter judge, instead of just answering the question. I really hope this presentation makes its way to the BJCP web site. Another example comparison of ok vs. 10/10 answers would also be very helpful to have in the future. Two questions: How do you graders feel about complete sentence answers vs. lists and tables? lists and tables are easier to write and maybe to grade. Why didn't the 10/10 answer get dinged for not mentioning gypsum's affect on mash pH? -Mark ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jay Spies Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:48:50 -0500 Subject: Test Heresy Let me preface this by saying that I took the exam for the first time in November, so as a non-judge comment, please feel free to PgDn now...... I have been reading with interest the "Test Heresy" thread that has been milling for the last week or so, and I thought that I might add my perspective from another angle. My general thoughts on the test, being a first time taker, were that the questions were fair and pretty much what I had expected. After having left the test, though, I had the distinct deja vu feeling that I had felt the same way before, and after some thought, found that the test format reminded me exactly of taking the bar exam. I am an attorney by trade. The BJCP test reminded me of the old bar exam analogy that you get when you take the bar prep courses - answer the questions like you are skipping a stone over a lake. Hit the high points and move on. Regardless. I have long felt that the bar exam could use some reformatting in this regard. I actually felt less time pressure taking the bar than I did taking the BJCP. And believe me, I can take these type of time-sensitive tests - I did pass the bar.. :) The BJCP actually became for me more about time management than it did about actual conveyance of knowledge. I know that the BJCP is walking a tightrope with the time allotted for the test. Give people too much time and they can mull over answers to their hearts content. Give them too little and you get incomplete and glossy answers (tho that may happen in any case :) However, the rub is that you as a test taker want to model every answer off of the one given in the study guide on comparing/contrasting Trappists with Abbey ales. Do that and you fall on your face with time. I just can't write that fast. I cranked out 10 pages of tightly written answers, writing as fast as I could while still being somewhat legible, and I still felt like I only put down about 70% of the info that I had in my head. I took no more than 30 seconds or so to mull over the questions before I started writing, and with *every question* I felt like I had more info to give when my internal time clock said "move on". Maybe consider adopting posting what a 7/10 answer is vs a 10/10 answer for the same question so we as testees can have a better idea of when's a good time to "stop". The overwhelming urge is to write everything you know for a given answer. It's near to impossible to do that. If you try, you get good answers in the beginning and crappy ones at the end as you run out of time. If the BJCP exam is to truly test the scope and breadth of a taker's knowledge, I think either the number of questions need to be cut down, the time extended, or some mix of formats (essay/short answer) need to be considered. For the record, I'm not a fan of multiple choice. The process of elimination makes guesswork too easy.... Additionally, the tasting portion of the exam felt rushed and awkward because it was interspersed at 4 different points throughout the exam. Stop writing, look, smell, taste, evaluate, scribble, start writing again. I have never seen judging conducted this way. Everyone who has judged or seen judging knows there's not that kind of time pressure. How about having the full exam and then taste the beers afterward instead of having to rush? Having to interrupt your train of thought to taste a beer, and then get back into test mode is really distracting, not to mention that it likely detracts from the quality of my tasting answers because I'm always minding my internal time clock. Overall I applaud the quality of the test questions and I know that you all at the BJCP who grade exams and look to maximize the test's effectiveness put a tremendous amount of your free time into the process. I'm not at all trying to detract from that. This post was only to give my .02..... ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** Subject: Digest for the period 1/21/2004 - 1/22/2004 Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 01:03:40 -0500 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Belgians and New Styles (David Craft) 2. call for judges--correction (tbonestott) 3. Re: Digest for the period 1/20/2004 - 1/21/2004 (Mark Wilson) 4. Test Heresy (Jay Spies) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Craft Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 06:16:27 -0500 Subject: Belgians and New Styles Greetings, I'll start something new. The current exam thread is good and well reasoned from many angles, but lets talk about beer. I posted this a few weeks ago and go no response, my first post here and I was disappointed. Will some of the experienced judges give me some sound advice on how to compare and contrast Belgian Strong Golden Ale and Trippel. The guidelines vary little and to the untrained or lesser trained these are essentially the same beer. I hear there are some subtantial changes in the styles in the works. My thougths- English Brown is expanded to include Irish Red? Barleywine and IS is expanded to include Baltic Porter. Stout is expanded to include West Coast. Others, Have a good day, David B. Craft Battleground Brewers Guild Crow Hill Brewery and Meadery Greensboro, NC ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: tbonestott Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 12:01:40 -0500 Subject: call for judges--correction I just posted a call for judges for the Eastern Connecticut Homebrew Competition with an incorrect date. The correct date is March 20. Bruce Stott ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mark Wilson Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:13:10 -0800 Subject: Re: Digest for the period 1/20/2004 - 1/21/2004 > From: Gordon Strong Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 08:39:14 -0500 > Subject: Exam guide > > well on the exam, I suggest you take a look at the presentation I gave at > last year's AHA Conference in Chicago. Check out > http://207.89.201.107/Presentations/Mastering%20the%20BJCP%20Exam.pdf. It Great presentation! I think the example 7/10 vs. 10/10 answer was very illustrative. I know in the past I have added superfluous information in the hope that this someone makes me come off as a smarter judge, instead of just answering the question. I really hope this presentation makes its way to the BJCP web site. Another example comparison of ok vs. 10/10 answers would also be very helpful to have in the future. Two questions: How do you graders feel about complete sentence answers vs. lists and tables? lists and tables are easier to write and maybe to grade. Why didn't the 10/10 answer get dinged for not mentioning gypsum's affect on mash pH? -Mark ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jay Spies Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:48:50 -0500 Subject: Test Heresy Let me preface this by saying that I took the exam for the first time in November, so as a non-judge comment, please feel free to PgDn now...... I have been reading with interest the "Test Heresy" thread that has been milling for the last week or so, and I thought that I might add my perspective from another angle. My general thoughts on the test, being a first time taker, were that the questions were fair and pretty much what I had expected. After having left the test, though, I had the distinct deja vu feeling that I had felt the same way before, and after some thought, found that the test format reminded me exactly of taking the bar exam. I am an attorney by trade. The BJCP test reminded me of the old bar exam analogy that you get when you take the bar prep courses - answer the questions like you are skipping a stone over a lake. Hit the high points and move on. Regardless. I have long felt that the bar exam could use some reformatting in this regard. I actually felt less time pressure taking the bar than I did taking the BJCP. And believe me, I can take these type of time-sensitive tests - I did pass the bar.. :) The BJCP actually became for me more about time management than it did about actual conveyance of knowledge. I know that the BJCP is walking a tightrope with the time allotted for the test. Give people too much time and they can mull over answers to their hearts content. Give them too little and you get incomplete and glossy answers (tho that may happen in any case :) However, the rub is that you as a test taker want to model every answer off of the one given in the study guide on comparing/contrasting Trappists with Abbey ales. Do that and you fall on your face with time. I just can't write that fast. I cranked out 10 pages of tightly written answers, writing as fast as I could while still being somewhat legible, and I still felt like I only put down about 70% of the info that I had in my head. I took no more than 30 seconds or so to mull over the questions before I started writing, and with *every question* I felt like I had more info to give when my internal time clock said "move on". Maybe consider adopting posting what a 7/10 answer is vs a 10/10 answer for the same question so we as testees can have a better idea of when's a good time to "stop". The overwhelming urge is to write everything you know for a given answer. It's near to impossible to do that. If you try, you get good answers in the beginning and crappy ones at the end as you run out of time. If the BJCP exam is to truly test the scope and breadth of a taker's knowledge, I think either the number of questions need to be cut down, the time extended, or some mix of formats (essay/short answer) need to be considered. For the record, I'm not a fan of multiple choice. The process of elimination makes guesswork too easy.... Additionally, the tasting portion of the exam felt rushed and awkward because it was interspersed at 4 different points throughout the exam. Stop writing, look, smell, taste, evaluate, scribble, start writing again. I have never seen judging conducted this way. Everyone who has judged or seen judging knows there's not that kind of time pressure. How about having the full exam and then taste the beers afterward instead of having to rush? Having to interrupt your train of thought to taste a beer, and then get back into test mode is really distracting, not to mention that it likely detracts from the quality of my tasting answers because I'm always minding my internal time clock. Overall I applaud the quality of the test questions and I know that you all at the BJCP who grade exams and look to maximize the test's effectiveness put a tremendous amount of your free time into the process. I'm not at all trying to detract from that. This post was only to give my .02..... ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * **********************************************************************