Qualitative judgements have an inherient problem that the inter-rater scoring and scale cannot be calibrated... I could point you to some fairly complicated statistical patterns of behaviour, but it can be summarised in a way which most people would "get" but interpret differently for themselves:
"one person's expert is another person's novice"
More words (and particularly) double/triple negatives do not align the scaling.
People will infer/judge what they wish to see/hear/feel.
If I could change the the system, I'd start with how people think.
I'd have everybody choose a de Bono thinking hat see below (they are colour coded) and decide which parts of their contributions they made under each... Even better if they could filter according to the hat.. That way people could spot their hat of of choice and focus their own thinking...
As a parent, the words I choose are "Well done, you did your best" - regardless of whether they got 10% or 100% correct.
NLP practitoners will know that the meaning of the communication is the feedback you get. I don't think one should penalise those who's preferred hat is black and award best to someone who makes you smile.
And yes, I think that humour is the best way to connect (to/two) people... a case where if it were aural, you'd different people would hear two different meanings - whereas in print you have to make a choice and a typo could change the meaning entirely...
For more on inter-rater scoring for subjective measurement tools, NLP - particularly antinomy related concepts, and team dynamics, feel free to ask me to link. (This week's spare time pondering is focused on how to the thought to screen in an enjoyable way rather than feeling like a "slave" to the keyboard...)
"one person's expert is another person's novice"
More words (and particularly) double/triple negatives do not align the scaling.
People will infer/judge what they wish to see/hear/feel.
If I could change the the system, I'd start with how people think.
I'd have everybody choose a de Bono thinking hat see below (they are colour coded) and decide which parts of their contributions they made under each... Even better if they could filter according to the hat.. That way people could spot their hat of of choice and focus their own thinking...
As a parent, the words I choose are "Well done, you did your best" - regardless of whether they got 10% or 100% correct.
NLP practitoners will know that the meaning of the communication is the feedback you get. I don't think one should penalise those who's preferred hat is black and award best to someone who makes you smile.
And yes, I think that humour is the best way to connect (to/two) people... a case where if it were aural, you'd different people would hear two different meanings - whereas in print you have to make a choice and a typo could change the meaning entirely...
For more on inter-rater scoring for subjective measurement tools, NLP - particularly antinomy related concepts, and team dynamics, feel free to ask me to link. (This week's spare time pondering is focused on how to the thought to screen in an enjoyable way rather than feeling like a "slave" to the keyboard...)
No comments:
Post a Comment