Subject: Digest for the period 1/25/2004 - 1/26/2004 Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 01:02:53 -0500 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Re: Digest for the period 1/24/2004 - 1/25/2004 (Scott Bickham) 2. exam beer timing (Gordon Strong) 3. Exam format/time management (Kevin Kutskill) 4. Exam Heresy (Michael Conard) 5. Intential HSA (David Houseman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bickham Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 07:04:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Digest for the period 1/24/2004 - 1/25/2004 I'm catching up here, but I'd like to comment that the the exam administrator is given a choice of which format to use, and I normally recommend that the exam group make the decision democratically. Some like the beers interspersed to give them break from writing, others want the beers served at the end. Both formats are used frequently, but the former is more common. I'd estimate it to be an equal mix in the 20 or so exams I have administered. Cheers, Scott > Denny asks "Is there a reason why the tastings have traditionally been > interspersed with the essay questions?" > George says "To interrupt the examinees essay writing with high-pressure > tasting is not just a bizarre idea, it is cruel. Let the people get their > essays written and then move on to the tasting." > ********************************************************************** * 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: Gordon Strong Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:18:21 -0500 Subject: exam beer timing When giving exams I usually ask the group if they want the test beers served equally throughout the test or just during the last hour. Invariably they say during the last hour. That's my preference as well. It also helps the administrator because it's easier to get two co-proctors for the shorter time. As has already been stated, this format also makes it easier to support people who are retaking only a portion of the exam. I let the examinees have a full two hours of writing and then bring out a beer every 15 minutes. When I teach prep classes, I can then tell people to plan on giving each question or beer about 12 minutes, with a final 12 minutes for review and cleanup. Of course, people will spend more time on different portions than others, but it's a good rule of thumb. It's a preference; the instructions to the exam administrator allow them to do it either way. If it bugs you to be interrupted, ask your exam administrator (ahead of time, preferably) if you can have the beers served during the last hour. Gordon Strong ********************************************************************** * 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: Kevin Kutskill Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:33:55 -0500 Subject: Exam format/time management >From reading over the numerous posts regarding the exam format/test heresy thread, it seems to me that the main concern is content size versus time allotted, i.e., time management. I have two things to note, and they both relate to each other to some degree. 1) I am relatively new to the BJCP and judging (judging competitions the past few years, first took the test last year), but I have yet to see any judge pressured at a competition to finish the flight within a certain time period. Granted, the competition director is _gently_ coaxing the judges along, but never stating that the judging _has_ to end by a certain time. Consideration is always given to fully evaluate the beers, not to evaluate them in a certain time span. There is, however, significantly more time pressure during the BJCP exam. From the comments made throughout this thread, it seems that some judges feel that not enough time is given to allow the examinees fully complete their exam. I know that the purpose of the BJCP exam is to see how well a judge can organize his thoughts and get them down on paper in a reasonable amount of time, but I guess the question is how much is a reasonable amount of time. This brings me to my second point. 2) My "day job", so to speak, is being a Pediatrician. I work in a busy office, with patients coming in the door every 10-15 minutes to be seen. Just as with beer judging, my entire day revolves around collecting data; evaluating a patient; and quickly forming concise, complete diagnoses and writing them down on paper, all within 10-15 minutes. Sounds familiar? Pretty similar to what we do as beer judges. So I would have to say that I am very used to the format _and pace_ used in beer judging and the BJCP exam. After taking the exam last summer, that I felt like I needed another 30-60 minutes to complete the exam to my satisfaction, and I too had writers cramps by the end of the exam (and remember, I write all day at my job). =20 So, how much time should there be allowed for the BJCP exam? There is no easy answer. Like it has been said before, there needs to be a balance between testing knowledge and testing writing efficiency and writing skills. I would lean towards 1 or 2 less questions, or an extra 30-60 minutes for the exam content as it is now. Just another judge's opinion. Kevin Kutskill beer-geek`at`comcast.net ********************************************************************** * 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: Michael Conard Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:09:13 -0600 Subject: Exam Heresy Having followed the string for awhile, I'd like to add some food for thought. Let me first say the I've always felt the exam needs to be given a longer timeframe. What has always been billed as "ten questions" ends up being almost twice as long because so many of the questions are multiple questions. Despite the fact that they are more difficult to grade, the essay format is the best format to assess true knowledge and given the length of the exam, I thinkd that it would be reasonable to allow four hours, three for writing and one for the sensory evaluation portion. As a former full-time educator I would have alloted a much longer period of time for actual writing if I gave an exam with the numbers of questions that we currently use in the BJCP exam (given that they have to take time out for the beer evaluations.) Since time management is an issue for most test takers, it would aid them in that endeavor if the exam were administered in THREE parts (assuming it were expanded to 4 hours.) The first 1-1/2 hours would be written, the next hour would be sensory evaluation, and the last 1-1/2 hours to complete the written exam. The middle hour would be broken into five 12 minute sessions, one for each beer with a built-in "restroom break" between the second and third beers. MOST experienced test takers would peruse the exam and in the first period write the questions they are most comfortable with, then move on to the harder questions until the evaluation break. Then, they would know just how much time to spend on each of the remaining questions with the 1-1/2 hour remaining to them. I would also advocate (OK, know I'm going to get blasted for this blasphemy) that during the evaluation portion, each condidate be given a copy of the style guidelines FOR THE BEER THAT IS BEING EVALUATED ONLY. My defense for this idea is that: 1) It is more realistic. The judges who have PASSED the exam get to use them when judging, so the concept of "rote memorization" for the purpose of the exam is silly! We certainly don't want them to have the entire set of guidelines, but handing the single style guide out with the beer and then collecting it afterward is not, IMHO, a real threat to aiding someone in successfully completing the exam. 2) The purpose of the evaluation portion is not only to test their palate but more importantly to examine their ability to give constructive feed-back to the brewer. We all rely on not only our own experience, but also the guidelines when we give feedback during competition, we should give examinees the same opportunity to demonstrate that skill using the same tools they would normally have during a competition. The current way of doing it is NOT a contest-like atmosphere and I think that it should be. OK - more 'cannon fodder' for this discussion. I look forward to comments. I (and several of my BJCP colleagues in the area) have been discussing the exam format for quite some time and all feel that the time has come to consider modifications to the exam process. Michael Conard ********************************************************************** * 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: David Houseman Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:37:14 -0500 Subject: Intential HSA While O2 introduced post fermentation creates cardboard flavors, O2 introduced as HSA tends toward sherry-like notes. Since "sherry-like" character is a part of the Old Ale style description, I'm curious if anyone has intentionally created hot-side aeration in order to introduce this characteristic? I tempted to try this as an experiment (albeit uncontrolled) by bubbling O2 into my kettle prior to it going to the CFC. But given the work put into brewing, I may pass on it and just see what develops naturally. But it would be interesting. Anyone done something like this? Dave david.houseman`at`verizon.net ********************************************************************** * 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 1/25/2004 - 1/26/2004 Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 01:02:53 -0500 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Re: Digest for the period 1/24/2004 - 1/25/2004 (Scott Bickham) 2. exam beer timing (Gordon Strong) 3. Exam format/time management (Kevin Kutskill) 4. Exam Heresy (Michael Conard) 5. Intential HSA (David Houseman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bickham Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 07:04:55 -0500 Subject: Re: Digest for the period 1/24/2004 - 1/25/2004 I'm catching up here, but I'd like to comment that the the exam administrator is given a choice of which format to use, and I normally recommend that the exam group make the decision democratically. Some like the beers interspersed to give them break from writing, others want the beers served at the end. Both formats are used frequently, but the former is more common. I'd estimate it to be an equal mix in the 20 or so exams I have administered. Cheers, Scott > Denny asks "Is there a reason why the tastings have traditionally been > interspersed with the essay questions?" > George says "To interrupt the examinees essay writing with high-pressure > tasting is not just a bizarre idea, it is cruel. Let the people get their > essays written and then move on to the tasting." > ********************************************************************** * 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: Gordon Strong Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:18:21 -0500 Subject: exam beer timing When giving exams I usually ask the group if they want the test beers served equally throughout the test or just during the last hour. Invariably they say during the last hour. That's my preference as well. It also helps the administrator because it's easier to get two co-proctors for the shorter time. As has already been stated, this format also makes it easier to support people who are retaking only a portion of the exam. I let the examinees have a full two hours of writing and then bring out a beer every 15 minutes. When I teach prep classes, I can then tell people to plan on giving each question or beer about 12 minutes, with a final 12 minutes for review and cleanup. Of course, people will spend more time on different portions than others, but it's a good rule of thumb. It's a preference; the instructions to the exam administrator allow them to do it either way. If it bugs you to be interrupted, ask your exam administrator (ahead of time, preferably) if you can have the beers served during the last hour. Gordon Strong ********************************************************************** * 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: Kevin Kutskill Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:33:55 -0500 Subject: Exam format/time management >From reading over the numerous posts regarding the exam format/test heresy thread, it seems to me that the main concern is content size versus time allotted, i.e., time management. I have two things to note, and they both relate to each other to some degree. 1) I am relatively new to the BJCP and judging (judging competitions the past few years, first took the test last year), but I have yet to see any judge pressured at a competition to finish the flight within a certain time period. Granted, the competition director is _gently_ coaxing the judges along, but never stating that the judging _has_ to end by a certain time. Consideration is always given to fully evaluate the beers, not to evaluate them in a certain time span. There is, however, significantly more time pressure during the BJCP exam. From the comments made throughout this thread, it seems that some judges feel that not enough time is given to allow the examinees fully complete their exam. I know that the purpose of the BJCP exam is to see how well a judge can organize his thoughts and get them down on paper in a reasonable amount of time, but I guess the question is how much is a reasonable amount of time. This brings me to my second point. 2) My "day job", so to speak, is being a Pediatrician. I work in a busy office, with patients coming in the door every 10-15 minutes to be seen. Just as with beer judging, my entire day revolves around collecting data; evaluating a patient; and quickly forming concise, complete diagnoses and writing them down on paper, all within 10-15 minutes. Sounds familiar? Pretty similar to what we do as beer judges. So I would have to say that I am very used to the format _and pace_ used in beer judging and the BJCP exam. After taking the exam last summer, that I felt like I needed another 30-60 minutes to complete the exam to my satisfaction, and I too had writers cramps by the end of the exam (and remember, I write all day at my job). =20 So, how much time should there be allowed for the BJCP exam? There is no easy answer. Like it has been said before, there needs to be a balance between testing knowledge and testing writing efficiency and writing skills. I would lean towards 1 or 2 less questions, or an extra 30-60 minutes for the exam content as it is now. Just another judge's opinion. Kevin Kutskill beer-geek`at`comcast.net ********************************************************************** * 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: Michael Conard Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 10:09:13 -0600 Subject: Exam Heresy Having followed the string for awhile, I'd like to add some food for thought. Let me first say the I've always felt the exam needs to be given a longer timeframe. What has always been billed as "ten questions" ends up being almost twice as long because so many of the questions are multiple questions. Despite the fact that they are more difficult to grade, the essay format is the best format to assess true knowledge and given the length of the exam, I thinkd that it would be reasonable to allow four hours, three for writing and one for the sensory evaluation portion. As a former full-time educator I would have alloted a much longer period of time for actual writing if I gave an exam with the numbers of questions that we currently use in the BJCP exam (given that they have to take time out for the beer evaluations.) Since time management is an issue for most test takers, it would aid them in that endeavor if the exam were administered in THREE parts (assuming it were expanded to 4 hours.) The first 1-1/2 hours would be written, the next hour would be sensory evaluation, and the last 1-1/2 hours to complete the written exam. The middle hour would be broken into five 12 minute sessions, one for each beer with a built-in "restroom break" between the second and third beers. MOST experienced test takers would peruse the exam and in the first period write the questions they are most comfortable with, then move on to the harder questions until the evaluation break. Then, they would know just how much time to spend on each of the remaining questions with the 1-1/2 hour remaining to them. I would also advocate (OK, know I'm going to get blasted for this blasphemy) that during the evaluation portion, each condidate be given a copy of the style guidelines FOR THE BEER THAT IS BEING EVALUATED ONLY. My defense for this idea is that: 1) It is more realistic. The judges who have PASSED the exam get to use them when judging, so the concept of "rote memorization" for the purpose of the exam is silly! We certainly don't want them to have the entire set of guidelines, but handing the single style guide out with the beer and then collecting it afterward is not, IMHO, a real threat to aiding someone in successfully completing the exam. 2) The purpose of the evaluation portion is not only to test their palate but more importantly to examine their ability to give constructive feed-back to the brewer. We all rely on not only our own experience, but also the guidelines when we give feedback during competition, we should give examinees the same opportunity to demonstrate that skill using the same tools they would normally have during a competition. The current way of doing it is NOT a contest-like atmosphere and I think that it should be. OK - more 'cannon fodder' for this discussion. I look forward to comments. I (and several of my BJCP colleagues in the area) have been discussing the exam format for quite some time and all feel that the time has come to consider modifications to the exam process. Michael Conard ********************************************************************** * 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: David Houseman Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:37:14 -0500 Subject: Intential HSA While O2 introduced post fermentation creates cardboard flavors, O2 introduced as HSA tends toward sherry-like notes. Since "sherry-like" character is a part of the Old Ale style description, I'm curious if anyone has intentionally created hot-side aeration in order to introduce this characteristic? I tempted to try this as an experiment (albeit uncontrolled) by bubbling O2 into my kettle prior to it going to the CFC. But given the work put into brewing, I may pass on it and just see what develops naturally. But it would be interesting. Anyone done something like this? Dave david.houseman`at`verizon.net ********************************************************************** * 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 * **********************************************************************