JUDGES TRAINING COMMITTEE (JTC)

JUDGES TRAINING COMMITTEE (JTC) REPORT TO THE BOARD REGION ROTATE & STATE COMMITTEE MEMBERS OFF 1 WA Joyce Hubbard Dec. 2012 2 CA Gail DeGough April 2014 2 CA David Wortham Dec. 2012 5-NY Fran Bishop Jan. 14 3 AZ April Seiler Dec. 2011 8 NC Debbie McGhee April 2014 5 VT Michael O Kelly Dec. 2011 6 IL Jill Conklin June 2012 COMMUNICATION: I have distributed a copy of the NPGA Board decisions made at the January 2010 meeting to the judges, Board and committee members. I have requested that all judges and Board members submit their thoughts, concerns and ideas to me to help improve the NPGA judges corps. I provided information to prospective candidates for the Judging Exam (JE). The JTC, as a committee, is now making several proposals to the board for changes to improve the current judges corps knowledge and to facilitate steps and procedures to improve our candidate pool for the JE itself. I contacted the judges and updated the Web site and address book with the correct contact information for all of the judges that I received. I have sent updates to the Webmaster and the memo editor for publication. I have updated the Judge s Written Exam to implement the NPGA changes made over the past several years. Update all JTC documents to reflect NPGA changes approved over the past few years. Continuing Education (ConEd): The three judges who were given a one-year extension for the year 2010 must attend the 2011 ConEd in Washington. Two judges have requested a one-year extension for the 2011 ConEd and must attend the 2012 ConEd to satisfy their license requirements. The JTC is working closely with the NPGA Clinician, Jennifer Josephson, to ensure that the program is updated with the changes approved by the board and to assist her in the preparation of the June clinic. 1

2011 Judging Clinic Following the Board s selection of Jennifer Josephson for the NPGA Clinician, the JTC has made every effort to assist her in preparing for the 2011 Clinic. Jennifer received the program from the past clinician in mid-april of 2011 and has been working on changes and updates to be used in the 2011 Clinic. Jennifer and the JTC have been designing updated materials to be presented in the clinic. The JTC and Jennifer have been working with the convention hosts to make sure all arrangements are being made and to facilitate a successful endeavor. 2011 Judging Exam: There are approximately three candidates who have spoken with me regarding taking the JE and Judging Clinic in Washington in. There are currently two provisional licensed judges who must attend the JE in order to retake the exam. 2011 Budget: Whenever possible, my correspondence will continue to be sent via e-mail, which is free. Income shall be composed of the fees received for the Judges Written Exam, Judging Clinic, and ConEd Judges Clinic. The expenses are yet to be determined since they shall be based on the Clinic costs. BOARD PROPOSALS: Procedure of JTC: As JTC Chair I manage the committee just as the current NPGA Board President resides over the board. Ideas, thoughts, questions and issues are brought to my attention or the attention of a JTC member. I then propose the question to the Committee and allow them to formulate an answer through discussions. Only majority rule proposals are included in the JTC s report to the board. Unresolved or disputed issues are not presented to the board. Every JTC member s ideas and thoughts are incorporated into the final proposal that I include in this report. In an effort to make the JTC s proceedings transparent to the board, I will include the names of the JTC committee members that voted for each proposal and those that were non-responsive. This disclosure is meant to help the board understand the JTC s procedures and processes. This JTC committee has spent a formidable amount of time and consideration on each of the following proposals, and, as in our first report, has addressed the pros and cons of each proposal. The committee has carefully and thoughtfully developed each proposal for submission to the board. As chair, I have compiled the committee s decisions into the coherent proposals now presented. Below you will find the committee s proposals and each JTC member that approved the proposal for the board s consideration. There are 8 JTC members and 1 Chair, though only 8 votes have been cast for each proposal since the chair does not vote. The JTC kindly requests the board s approval of the following proposals. The entire JTC, as a unit, endorses these proposals by majority rule. 2

Topic 1: Judge s Pledge Approved: Bishop, DeGough, Hubbard, Josephson, O Kelly, Seiler, Wortham. Non- Responsive: Conklin Currently, the NPGA Judge applicant only has to complete an application for Judging License that details their basic contact information, asks whether they have special interests in Pygmy Goats, and requests a general statement of the candidate s health. This information and form are appropriate for use as a general application. However, no formal document has ever been made to hold a judge accountable for ethics, sexual harassment policy, criminal background history, etc. Most other animal breeds require a Judge or Judge candidate to sign a document stating they will follow the rules set forth by NPGA and the Code of Ethic. The JTC has developed a Judge s Pledge that will be signed by every current judge and new judge to hold him or her accountable for any issues that might arise. This Pledge is very similar to the NPGA Board of Directors agreement. Pros: To have all judges sign an agreement to be held accountable for their actions and to state that they have no reason for being disqualified as an NPGA Judge. It will allow the board, the compliance committee and the JTC to have a signed document to use in case any issue arises where a Judge has violated any NPGA rule or code. This document will also ensure that a Judge/Candidate must declare if they have been convicted of a sexual crime against a minor. Cons: Facts: None No Code of Ethics or Judges Duties has ever been outlined for signatures of the Judges to follow these rules set forth by NPGA. Only a Judge s License Application has ever been presented to the Candidate/Judge for basic information to be given to NPGA. Conclusion: The JTC requests that the Judge s Pledge be accepted and that all current judges must sign a copy of the pledge and return it to the central office no later than 30 days after receipt. All new judges from would be required to sign the pledge. Proposed Judge s Pledge Copy: NPGA JUDGE S PLEDGE OF ELIGIBILITY AND ETHICS I hereby declare that I am eighteen years of age or over and currently hold a regular membership in NPGA. I understand that any official judging privileges granted me as a result of my participation in training conferences, the judges clinic and the JE are void unless my membership is kept in good standing and I fail to follow the Code of Ethics for Members and Judges. My membership is due on or before October 1 for the following year. I agree to pay the proper fees due to NPGA to keep my membership current each year. 3

I also pledge to promptly dispatch all show report of awards to the NPGA office and the NPGA Show Committee Chair. As a judge, I shall keep the NPGA office and the JTC Chair informed of my current address and all contact information. If granted a license, I pledge to fulfill all other responsibilities of an Official NPGA Judge faithfully, and to abide by the following Code of Ethics and to Judge by the NPGA Scorecard and Guidelines: As an officially licensed Judge, I am a representative of the National Pygmy Goat Association. Therefore, at NPGA shows, I will refrain from inappropriate behavior whether as a Judge, an exhibitor, or as a spectator. I will evaluate all Pygmy goats and exhibitors in strict accordance with NPGA Rules, Breed Standards, Scorecards, and the Evaluation of Defects, not my personal preferences. I shall always strive to improve my judging skills and will not, in any way, solicit judging assignments. As an NPGA Judge, I shall seek to inspire confidence in my abilities, through my appearance, my evaluations, my presentations, and my relations with show officials, exhibitors and spectators throughout my professional career. I shall refrain from use of my cell phone or any form of electronic communication while judging. I shall do my best to return emails, phone calls or any other forms of communication from any person seeking my services as a judge. I certify that I have not been finally adjudicated and found guilty, nor entered a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, in a criminal prosecution under the laws of any state of the United States, whether or not sentence is imposed, for any felony involving a sexual offense violation or a violation regarding minors I understand a background check may be conducted for verification purposes. Name (print) Address NPGA ID# City State Zip Phone (Day) Phone (Evening) Fax E-mail Signature Date Topic 2: Judges Written Exam Re-Take Requirement Text Approved: Bishop, DeGough, Hubbard, McGhee, O Kelly, Seiler, Wortham. Non- Responsive: Conklin Currently, R&R Paragraph 10.B.2 is very confusing about when and for how long the written exam for a judge candidate is valid. It may be interpreted with a couple meanings, each having a totally different outcome for the candidate. The intent and the verbiage are inconsistent, and the JTC seeks to correct this vagueness. The original intent was for a candidate to have a total of three attempts to take the JE after passing the written exam with a passing score above 80%. The JTC would like to modify this text to clarify the NPGA s intent. Pros: To clarify the R&R. 4

Cons: Facts: To provide the candidates with a clear understanding of the rules. None R&R Paragraph 10.B.2 is confusing and the text does not accurately reflect the intent of the rule. Conclusion: The JTC requests that the R&R paragraph be changed to the following: 10.B.2. Any candidate for a judge s license who passes the written test with a grade of 80% or more will have three opportunities to take and pass the practical test (JE) at National Convention without having to retake the written test. The first opportunity will be the JE at the subsequent National Convention whether the candidate takes the JE or not. The remaining two opportunities will be the next two sequential JEs at National Conventions whether either or both opportunities are taken advantage of or not. Topic 3: Wether Oral Reasons Approved: Bishop, DeGough, Hubbard, Josephson, O Kelly, Seiler, Wortham. Non- Responsive: Conklin Currently Judges who judge wether classes at shows use terms taken from the Judges Training Manual, the Breed Standard, Score Cards, and Guidelines for Judging Pygmy Goats. There are official oral reasons listed in the back of the Judges Training Manual that are to be used while judging buck and doe Classes. The JTC has compiled the following list of phrases to be presented and added to the Manual. Both current judges and JE candidates can use this list in their testing. Pros: Adding these terms will provide more consistent judging by giving judges a stock set of terminology. These reasons will allow JE candidates to use terms officially approved of and presented by the NPGA. Bucks and does already have these Oral Reason for Placings listed in the Manuals. Adding the reasons for Wethers will complete the manual and properly represent all aspects of judging in the NPGA. Cons: None Facts: Judges currently judge wether classes without any official oral reasons. This omission allows each judge to invent their own reasons to give when judging wethers. Candidates for the JE must study and answer questions about wethers in the written exam and the 5

6 Report to the Board JE, yet no official oral reasons have been provided anywhere for them to use during these exams. Special Note: This list of oral reasons is in the same format that already exists in the approved NPGA Judges Training Manual. It has been submitted to the Publications Committee and the Breed Standard committee and CONTAINS their corrections and updates. This list is ready for board approval since it has properly passed through the necessary committees for review. All of the terms have been taken from approved NPGA publications such as: the Judging Guidelines, Scorecards, Breed Standard, Judges Training Manual and Showmanship Manual. Conclusion Add the Oral Reasons for Judging Wethers to the Judges Training Manual. NPGA WETHER ORAL REASONS GENERAL APPEARANCE: More balance, smoothly blended, well balanced More correct proportions, cobby compact More correct breed-specific markings, showing fewer random markings More correct coat, less masculine coat, having a straighter coat, more correct coat length Displaying a more pleasing expression, more alert, more animation More alert upright head carriage More correct head, medium short head, more dish in the profile, more pleasing pygmy type head, shorter broader muzzle, more muscling/width in the jaw, more width between the eyes More correct set to the ears STRUCTURE: (All reasons that are not gender specific and currently used for bucks and/or does are also applicable to wethers.) More functional or balanced body parts Showing more width in the chest, barrel broad, barrel deep, greater spring of rib, back strong, level top line, rump medium long, rump medium slope, fore and hindquarters well angulated, well aligned set to the legs, strong legs, straighter legs, well muscled throughout Gait smooth and effortless HEALTH and CONDITION: Free of disease, displaying vigor Free of parasites, having clean skin and coat Displaying good flesh and muscle More correct show conditioning, being over conditioned or under conditioned BEHAVIOR More friendly, alert, responsive, trusting, confident, cooperative More desirable behavior More tractability, showability

For displaying more pet like behaviors Topic 4: Adding terms and conditions to the Convention Contract for Judging Clinic JTC Chair Kress House Keeping Item The Judge s clinic requires a laptop computer and a television or monitor to display and play a power point presentation designed to assist the judges and candidates during the Clinic. The Candidates Clinic on Saturday and Sunday and the Judges Clinic for ConEd on Monday and Tuesday all require animals and handlers. The Convention host must be aware of these necessary items and NPGA should add them to the Convention Hosting Contract. Conclusion: Please add these necessary items (computer, TV/monitor, animals, handlers) to the Convention Host contract. Topic 5: Showmanship Oral Terms and Reasons. Approved: Bishop, Josephson, O Kelly, Sanderson, Seiler, Wortham. Non-Responsive: Conklin, Hubbard Currently judges that judge the showmanship classes at shows use terms taken from the Judges Training Manual, the Showmanship Manual, the Breed Standard, Score Cards, and Guidelines for Judging Pygmy Goats. The Judges Training Manual includes a list of official oral reasons to be used while judging buck and doe Classes. The JTC has compiled the following list for showmanship to be added to the Judges Training Manual and the Showmanship Manual. Current judges and future JE candidates in their testing can use this list. Pros: Adding these terms will help all current judges use the same terms while judging, and thereby improve consistency. These reasons will allow JE candidates to use NPGA sanctioned terms as official reasons during the JE. Bucks and does (Wether Reasons pending approval) already have these oral reason for placings listed in the Manuals. Adding the reasons for Showmanship will make the manual complete and properly represent all aspects of Judging in NPGA. Cons: None Facts: Judges now judge showmanship classes without any official, NPGA approved Oral Reasons. This omission allows each judge to invent his or her own list of reasons to use while judging. JE candidates must study and answer questions about showmanship in the written exam and in the JE, yet no official Oral Reasons have been provided for them to use during these exams. Conclusion: 7

Add the Oral Reasons for Judging Showmanship to the Judges Training Manual and Showmanship Manual. Special Note: This list of Oral Reasons is in the same format that already exists in the Judges Training Manual. It has been submitted to the Publications Committee and CONTAINS their corrections and updates. This list is ready for board approval since it has properly passed through the necessary committees for review. All of the terms have been taken from approved NPGA publications such as: the Judging Guidelines, Scorecards, Breed Standard, Judges Training Manual and Showmanship Manual. Showmanship Reasons: 1. Maintaining more eye contact with the judge throughout the class 2. Being on the correct side of their animal 3. Keeping their goat between them and the judge 4. Not passing the lead behind the exhibitors back 5. Not walking behind their goat 6. Having more knowledge of their animal / goats/ the pygmy breed based on questions asked 7. Leaving an appropriate amount of space between goats while walking or standing in a line 8. Being able to set up their animal to its best advantage 9. Listening to directions by the judge more carefully 10. Being more aware of the judge/other exhibitors 11. Being polite and considerate to the judge/other exhibitors by 12. Consistently setting up the correct leg first while setting up your goat 13. Exhibiting more correct maneuvers, more correct turns, a correct roll turn 14. Exhibiting more fluidity/smoothness when switching sides, moving around the ring, and generally while exhibiting 15. Having an animal that is more appropriately groomed/cleaner 16. Keeping their animal set up at all times 17. Making the (insert manuever here) more appropraitely/correctly 18. Waiting for the other animal/exhibitor while walking in pairs or threes 19. Presenting more appropriate show attire 20. Moving their animal in a forward, clockwise motion 21. Having an animal with more showability today/more age appropriate goat being exhibited in showmanship 22. Having greater poise and confidence 23. Returning to line in the position in which they left 24. Moving their goats into a different place in line correctly Topic 6: Showmanship Scorecard Approved: Bishop, Hubbard, Josephson, O Kelly, Sanderson, Seiler, Wortham. Non- Responsive: Conklin The current NPGA Showmanship Scorecard breaks down the scoring into three sections: Appearance of the Animal, 40 Points, Appearance of the Exhibitor, 10 Points, and Showing the Animal in the Ring, 50 points. This use of the terms and point system in the 8

scorecard is very broad and general and does not define actual movements, knowledge of skills, or grooming of the animal. It simply generalizes showmanship as a whole. Other animal breeds have well defined showmanship scorecards that illustrate the differences and importance of knowledge, husbandry, maneuvers, appearance, showing, and grooming. The JTC would like to present a new Showmanship Scorecard with a break down of point values combined with all of the skill sets stated above. Pros: Cons: Will allow judges and exhibitors to set a point value for the specific items asked of the exhibitors during the showmanship class. Will provide judges with more instruction on how to judge a showmanship class. Will allow exhibitors a consistent, objective set of point values and definitions of terms and skill sets required during the showmanship class. None Facts: Currently NPGA Judges and Exhibitors use the general point values and descriptions in the showmanship manual as the guidelines for this class. While this approach is effective, there are more specific ways in which we can improve the skill sets of the judges and the exhibitors. Conclusion: The JTC requests that the Board approve and adopt the proposed new showmanship scorecard presented below. Special Note: The new scorecard has been submitted to the Publications Committee and CONTAINS their corrections and updates. This item may is ready for board approval since it has properly passed through the necessary committees for review. All of the terms have been taken from approved NPGA publications such as: the Judging Guidelines, Scorecards, Breed Standard, Judges Training Manual and Showmanship Manual. SHOWMANSHIP 1. APPEARANCE OF ANIMAL 20 points A. Condition and General Appearance - showing animal not too fat nor too thin and general appeal of condition of animal. Goat should be well groomed and ready for showing. 5 B. Hair - clean and properly groomed, free of dirt or other particles. C. Hoofs - trimmed and shaped to enable animal to walk and stand naturally. 5 9

D. Cleanliness - as shown by a clean body as free from stains as possible, with special attention to legs, feet, tail area, nose, and ears. Properly groomed and trimmed for showing. 10 2. APPEARANCE OF EXHIBITOR 10 points A. Clothes and person are neat and clean, well presented for showing. B. Proper attire for show ring. Sandals, hats (unless 4-H) and shorts are improper. 10 3. SHOWING ANIMAL IN THE RING 70 points A. Leading 10 points a. Enter leading the animal at a normal walk around the ring in a clock-wise direction, walking on the left side. b. Exhibitor should walk as normally and inconspicuously as possible. c. Goat should lead readily and respond quickly. d. Lead equipment should consist of a properly fitted collar or small, inconspicuous link chain of sufficient strength to maintain proper control. e. Lead slowly with the animal s head held high enough for impressive style, attractive carriage, and graceful walk. f. Exhibit proper maneuvers when asked by the judge to make changes in the ring. B. Posing 15 a. Pose and show the animal to its best advantage, allowing the judge to view them as much as possible. b. Stand or squat where both Judge and animal may be observed. c. Pose animal with front feet squarely beneath and hind feet slightly spread. d. Neither crowd other exhibitors nor leave too much space when leading into a side-by-side position. e. When the judge is observing the animal, if she moves out of position, replace her as quickly and inconspicuously as possible. f. Be natural. Overshowing, undue fussing, and maneuvering are objectionable. C. Show animal to best advantage, recognizing the conformation faults of the animal you are leading and striving to help overcome them. 5 D. Maneuvers 20 10

a. For each maneuver, led the goat properly according to the rules set forth by the showmanship manual. b. Properly move the goat in the ring according to the judges requested maneuver. c. Poise, alertness, and courteous attitude are all desired in the show ring. d. Showmen should keep an eye on their animals and be aware of the position of the judge at all times. e. Persons or things outside the ring should not distract the attention of the showmen. f. Respond rapidly to requests from judges or officials, and be courteous and sportsmanlike at all times, respecting the rights of other exhibitors. g. The best showmen will show their animals at all times, not themselves, and will continue exhibiting until the judge has placed the entire class, given his reasons, and has dismissed the class. E. Knowledge of the Breed 20 a. Properly answer questions regarding: parts of the goat, health questions, medications, conformation, structure, Pygmy Goat husbandry. b. The judge may question showmen on their knowledge of proper terminology for parts of a Pygmy goat, breed standards, evaluation of defects and NPGA Scorecards. TOTAL POINTS: 100 Topic 7: Selection of JTC Members and Clinician Procedure: General Information Recommendations By: Bishop, Conklin, DeGough, Hubbard, Josephson, O Kelly, Seiler, Wortham. 11

It is important for the board and membership to understand that the JTC operates as a democracy. Any issue presented to this committee is passed through the committee with majority rule and input. While I have been Chair, selection of a new JTC member has been done by soliciting all JTC Committee members for their input on who would be a good replacement for a person rotating off of the committee. As chair, I process the information from the committee members and make a selection based on the majority of the committee s recommendations. This same procedure is used in the selection of the Judging Clinic clinician, resulting in the candidate(s) in the majority rule being presented to the board for approval. No member of the committee has been invited to join the committee without a majority vote by the committee, nor has a clinician been presented to the board for approval without the agreement of the majority of the JTC members. JTC CHAIR NOTE: This JTC committee has meticulously discussed and analyzed all of the topics presented to the board for approval. When I was selected as the new chair of the JTC last June, the board informed me that I was selected for my proposals for moving forward with new ideas and concepts, and for having a plan for the future and improvement of the current judges and prospective judges. This amazing committee presented a top-notch report to the board in January 2011. The committee worked for countless hours making that report and its proposals a success. As Chair, I contacted every Board member to discuss any ideas, thoughts or concerns about the January report and discuss any issue. The board, seeing a need for a spark and for change in the NPGA to benefit every member, approved and accepted this January report. Over the past 4 months the JTC has worked diligently on the proposals for this June report. This committee has been working on the Judges Clinic, the New Test Classes, the proposals for this report, creating new oral reasons to be approved for all judges to use, adding committee members, selecting a new Clinician--ALL at the board s request and to move the judges in a bright and knowledgeable direction. This wonderful committee, full of amazing people, has done all of this work while being under attack the entire time by a handful of members and board members. These actions have created turmoil for many of the JTC members and clinician candidates alike. The board made an informed and educated decision regarding the January JTC report at the board meeting and should stick by their decisions. Now, the JTC is proposing more changes, based on the needs and requests of the NPGA membership. For the betterment of NPGA, the JTC is presenting a carefully thought out report to facilitate the Board s ability to make educated and informed decisions based on ideas and thought presented to you by a committee of dedicated and amazing judges. If the board does not stand for the changes it requested in June of 2010, if it does not stand 12

behind the decisions it made in the January meeting, then NPGA will for certain see darker days ahead. The Committee Members request that the board review this report and discuss its contents with their region. The JTC members request that you direct your discussion and questions to me as the Chair and I will do my best to address any concerns. Please, come to the JTC directly and do not presume answers. This committee, as always, has discussed the pros and cons of every proposal and, with a majority rule vote, presents these items for acceptance. The board should have faith and trust in the members of this committee, whom it selected to represent NPGA as the JTC, and should allow the JTC to operate and execute the decisions made by the board in prior votes. Thank you for your time and dedication to NPGA. Respectfully Submitted Kevin Kress Judges Training Committee Chairperson May 2011 Report Approved by: Bishop, DeGough, Hubbard, McGhee, O Kelly, Seiler, Wortham Nonresponsive: Conklin cc: JTC Members: Bishop, Conklin, DeGough, Hubbard, McGhee, O Kelly, Seiler, Wortham 13