Comparing the New “new CL” to the old “new CL”


<– Rev 5/2010 / Rev 2006 …

 
As usual, CL evaluators are directed to “read the project carefully before the meeting”. The fact is, unless you have a rev: 5/2010 CL manual you will be seeing the evaluation questions for each role for the first time when someone hands you a new CL manual.

How are you handling getting all in your club ready to be effective CL evaluators?

What I mean is, how are you handling this?
Many older members may have only used the older CL manual (Revision: 2006) and may have only seen it as evaluator and never owned it and read it because they did an “Old CL”

Do you NEED to bother to do anything?

The main changes apparent to me in content of the 5/2010 Cl manual:

1. Reduction of the introduction text for each project. Well, it take less time to read the project now! Some project introductions have been reduced by as much as 80%.

2. Elimination of the “Practice In Your Club” section in every project which had that section in Revision: 2006 (another change which that makes reading the project carefully” take less time)

3. Evaluation/Feedback format:
Change to a set of three to four questions for a role which are scored by circling 1,2 or 3 ( 1=Needs Work, 2=Average and 3=Outstanding) followed by 1-2 questions in small italic font to be answered by essay.
These 1-2-3 score questions and essay questions are often significantly different from the Revision 2006 CL manual. Some are improved. Some are big improvements from Revision: 2006

4. A much better and better positioned tracking sheet (near the front of the manual)
17 minutes ago

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *