The vision thing

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: The vision thing

Not to mention that the CFC website describes the organisation as a "fraternity" ... just the thing to encourage females!

Let's call it a community instead.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC Goals Am I Missing Anything?

Actually, my reaction is that you have far, far too much. There is stuff that shouldn't be there, stuff that the CFC does not and will not have the resources to do, and you don't distinguish between aspirational goals for that wonderful future of 10,000 members and actual goals for the here and now. And some of it is just good sounding blah, blah, blah with no actual consequences.

Goals for the here and now are not typically part of the strategic or long term plan until you set the long term targets. The here and now then becomes a way station on the path to that wonderful future. The here and now goals are usually part of the business plan for the year which is not really what we have been charged with though it seems to me that a few of the items in the long term plan that seemed pie in the sky are actually achievable in the short term based on what I have seen recently.

We are still at the throwing stuff against the wall phase and seeing what sticks. Your thoughts are welcome and helpful.

Success is more likely to come from a clearly articulated small set of goals that can be cleanly stated and measured.

Perhaps something along the lines of the following?

What are the CFC’s primary/core accountabilities?

The CFC is the governing body for chess in Canada.

Governance of rules for national competitions (eligibility, formats, time controls, etc) and general rules of the game within Canada.

Affiliated with and the primary Canadian liason with the World Chess Federation (FIDE)

Maintenance of a national rating system

Publication of a website and member forums and provision of other member services such as the email newsletter which can be used to keep members informed of the happenings in Canadian chess

Outreach to enhance the popularity of the game in Canada. At the moment we are not doing this as an organization.

Sanctioning and coordination of activities with provincial and regional bodies.

KEY PRIORITIES DURING PLANNING PERIOD
1. Regain charitable status or some equivalent.
2. Secure corporate sponsorship
3. Adjust membership fees and options to optimal level so members/potential members see the value proposition.
4. Develop specific outreach programs to improve top of mind awareness rankings among the general population.
5. Support top players on world stage and ensure media coverage of chess events.
6. Focus on chess evangelism and education particularly in the key demographic of children.

well, a lot of people would disagree with you, that the national organization should concern itself with national championships, the relationship with FIDE, elite player stuff, and generally only the stuff that doesn't get done at a local level.

Tennis Canada, Hockey Canada and even Golf Canada seem to disagree with you on that point for their sports and quite frankly they are doing a better job of promoting and getting sponsorship and infrastructure than we have been. If we keep doing the same things we are going to keep getting the same results that we have in the past. A couple of book titles come to mind: "Always Change A Losing Game." and "Do One Thing Different."

In particular, the current membership structure is actively hostile to encouraging recreational players, by which I mean those who play only occasionally, perhaps only at a club level, and who basically don't care about serious competitive play or national level chess.

The first step in changing that is to acknowledge the truth of that fact and to take steps and find ways to tap into that very large market that we are currently ignoring.

Really? There are lots of people and organizations doing just that. I don't know about you, but if a job is being done by someone else, I'm a lazy SOB and will go ahead and let them do it. It's certainly not something the CFC does now or has resources to do now.

You obviously haven't been reading Kevin Spraggett's blog. Lots of people and organizations are doing just that but they are not terribly effective at the moment. Being lazy and going ahead and let them do it is a scenario for more of the same pathetic results. The predictable end results of that strategy will be to ask the last person left standing to remember to turn out the lights on his way out the door.

Perhaps you mean something more specific such as norm tournaments or high level training but if so, that distinction should be made.

I am talking about actions that increase the base. Norm tournaments are really only relevant to 0.2% of the current membership and would not be sustainable without building up the base to make us more attractive to sponsors.

Well, I suppose it does no harm to incidentally quote this kind of thing in appropriate circumstances, but to make it an actual "GOAL" of the CFC?

To publicize key benefits of chess to a potential chessplayer, sponsor and the public at large is an appropriate goal for the CFC and one which most successful sport marketers manage to do for their own sports.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: CFC Goals Am I Missing Anything?

That sounds a little harsh.

[John Coleman]

Re: The vision thing

Not to mention that the CFC website describes the organisation as a "fraternity" ... just the thing to encourage females!

[Roger Patterson]

Re: CFC Goals Am I Missing Anything?

Actually, my reaction is that you have far, far too much. There is stuff that shouldn't be there, stuff that the CFC does not and will not have the resources to do, and you don't distinguish between aspirational goals for that wonderful future of 10,000 members and actual goals for the here and now. And some of it is just good sounding blah, blah, blah with no actual consequences.

Success is more likely to come from a clearly articulated small set of goals that can be cleanly stated and measured.

To promote and showcase chess across Canada and to encourage the knowledge, study and play of chess at the recreational, amateur and elite levels for adults and children of all ages and genders

well, a lot of people would disagree with you, that the national organization should concern itself with national championships, the relationship with FIDE, elite player stuff, and generally only the stuff that doesn't get done at a local level.

In particular, the current membership structure is actively hostile to encouraging recreational players, by which I mean those who play only occasionally, perhaps only at a club level, and who basically don't care about serious competitive play or national level chess.

Encouraging lifetime participation in chess for everyone

blah, blah, blah. Void, and vacuous nice sounding words without any consequence.

Raising visibility and top of mind awareness of chess in Canada and improving the image of chess in the media and among the general population.

Ditto.

Development, training and retention of young players of both genders as active members of the chess community

Really? There are lots of people and organizations doing just that. I don't know about you, but if a job is being done by someone else, I'm a lazy SOB and will go ahead and let them do it. It's certainly not something the CFC does now or has resources to do now. Perhaps you mean something more specific such as norm tournaments or high level training but if so, that distinction should be made.

Promoting and publicizing the mental health and academic benefits of chess for its participants.

Well, I suppose it does no harm to incidentally quote this kind of thing in appropriate circumstances, but to make it an actual "GOAL" of the CFC?

Focus on targeted fund-raising activities such as campaigns to raise the funds to send a men’s and women’s team to each Olympiad

You presumably mean the National Team as there is no "men's team". You are so careful to have repeated mention of chess players of both genders in the previous points that you trick yourself into perpetuating gender based stereotypes in this point.

[Vlad Drkulec]

CFC Goals Am I Missing Anything?

CFC Goals

To promote and showcase chess across Canada and to encourage the knowledge, study and play of chess at the recreational, amateur and elite levels for adults and children of all ages and genders

Encouraging lifetime participation in chess for everyone.

Raising visibility and top of mind awareness of chess in Canada and improving the image of chess in the media and among the general population.

Development, training and retention of young players of both genders as active members of the chess community

Promoting and publicizing the mental health and academic benefits of chess for its participants.

Development of volunteers, organizers, tournament directors and other partners and infrastructure which will allow players the opportunity to study, learn and play chess.

Emphasis on the long term and investment of program funds with full transparency of how funds are spent and assurance that members and participants receive value for money spent.

Focus on targeted fund-raising activities such as campaigns to raise the funds to send a men’s and women’s team to each Olympiad.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: The vision thing

I usually have between 12 and 18 kids in these sessions. I introduce the recording of moves a few weeks before the end of the class and I do not make it mandatory (although I encourage it) in the subsequent classes; there are always some kids who want to record all their games after they learn how.

Twelve to eighteen is a lot of kids for one adult to manage. Do you have help?

The ability to record games and the desire to record and keep games is probably a long term differentiator between those who are serious about chess and those who are more recreational chess players.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: The vision thing

... except one thing I think. And that's having the children come forward and USE the demo board to answer a question I might have or to demonstrate their own chess thinking (even better). The one who does the thinking or the work does the learning.

I will keep your idea of the overhead projector in mind.

I got a really tiny one on sale for about $300 plus tax. It is about four inches by four inches by three inches. I use a netbook computer though I have been considering migrating to a tablet though I am in no hurry. My current setup is quite portable and has worked well so far. Initially I started with a laptop computer and a larger overhead projector. Everything fits in a half size Rubbermaid plastic container with lots of room to spare. The sets and clocks fit in a second full sized container.

Ideal would be an interactive white board (Smart Board, etc.). Then again, who has $18,000.00 in spare change lying around?

The school boards around here apparently, at least in the classrooms I have visited.

I also like the idea of Intermediate and Advanced classes in which it was understood that things would start with a review of a particular game/lecture. This could also be where an introduction to chess notation takes place. Of course that's more work than just a children's chess club with spontaneous lessons derived from events on the chess boards as they come up. Maybe I'll wait until someone offers me gobs of money to do just that. lol.

Week four of the beginners class right after we taught them how the pieces move and the characteristics of the pieces and elementary checkmates with rook and king, queen and king and two bishops and king in week one. We usually get to how to open a chess game in week two along with some elementary pawn endings and rook endings. We also use the game shown in Silman where they try to stop the king from getting to f8 or h8 with the two kings starting on a1 and a8 respectively. We move into pawn endings right away using opposition and square of the pawn and so on to build on the lesson of that exercise.

As I noted earlier, I don't have a lot of true beginners who know nothing, or next to nothing, about chess. Does anyone?

The intermediate class started as a beginner class a few months ago. We started a second class because of a large demand for the Friday class where we have limited seating. There is still a tendency for the kids to want to get into the Friday class as it is perceived to be where the really strong chess players are. We have a simultaneous beginner class in another room at the CAGW (Chinese Association of Greater Windsor) on Thursdays. Presumably they will be graduating on to the intermediate class eventually and in turn will be replaced by a new group of beginners.

There have been a few kids accepted into the Friday class that probably didn't belong there because of their lower chess strength. Usually it is because they can't make it on Thursday when the intermediate class is taught or they have siblings that do belong in the advanced class and we don't feel the parents should be forced to make two trips a week to put their kids into chess classes since we also want them to take the kids to tournaments on Saturdays. The funny thing is that some of these kids have made significant bursts of progress lately.

My current thinking is that I am not smart enough to decide who is going to be a good chess player down the road. Work with everyone, encourage them, teach them and let them sort themselves out.

[Paul Beckwith]

Re: The vision thing

I usually have between 12 and 18 kids in these sessions. I introduce the recording of moves a few weeks before the end of the class and I do not make it mandatory (although I encourage it) in the subsequent classes; there are always some kids who want to record all their games after they learn how.

[Nigel Hanrahan]

Re: The vision thing

We use an overhead projector in our classes. I used to use a demo board but eventually concluded that the overhead projector did everything the demo board could do for me.

... except one thing I think. And that's having the children come forward and USE the demo board to answer a question I might have or to demonstrate their own chess thinking (even better). The one who does the thinking or the work does the learning.

I will keep your idea of the overhead projector in mind. Ideal would be an interactive white board (Smart Board, etc.). Then again, who has $18,000.00 in spare change lying around?

I also like the idea of Intermediate and Advanced classes in which it was understood that things would start with a review of a particular game/lecture. This could also be where an introduction to chess notation takes place. Of course that's more work than just a children's chess club with spontaneous lessons derived from events on the chess boards as they come up. Maybe I'll wait until someone offers me gobs of money to do just that. lol.

As I noted earlier, I don't have a lot of true beginners who know nothing, or next to nothing, about chess. Does anyone?

[Hal Bond]

Re: The vision thing

I went back over some old notes. At one point I came up against a little too much resistance about recording (perhaps a difficult mix of students?) and resolved to just keep it fun so they would come back. I am encouraged by this notation affirmation so I will return to it as one of the key pillars. Thanks all!

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: The vision thing

My actual experience with my first set of chess classes this past spring was that the children and parents ( I allowed parents to sit in and learn and play as well and it was mostly not a problem at all) wanted a chess club where they could play, having learned most of the moves and rules already, and actually teaching chess was not easy to insert into the club once it got going. As a student teacher, of course, teaching chess was the main reason why I set up the club in the first place. So I would wait for those "teachable" moments in the club and then, using a lesson from a single board try to teach all the children - with a modest interruption of their games - what had been learned on the single board. Therefore, there was only 5-10 minutes of teaching in the whole hour - maximum.

The CFC Demo board was very, very useful in those short lessons.

The children and their parents would wander in, not on time, wander out, and so on. Very difficult to begin the "club" with a lesson. I didn't have nearly enough beginners.

We use an overhead projector in our classes. I used to use a demo board but eventually concluded that the overhead projector did everything the demo board could do for me.

In our children's chess club at the Riverside Library on Wednesday nights we don't have formal lessons though three of the instructors from the advanced Friday class at Sobeys do usually turn up (John Coleman, Herb Alice and myself). The kids like to challenge the adults to games and it is during these games that any teaching occurs.

In the Thursday Intermediate class I usually prepare some games (GM games, my own games, particularly good games of some of my students or sometimes a series of tactical problems or endgames). The lecture starts at the beginning of the evening (7pm). The lecture usually lasts about fifteen or twenty minutes though sometimes it is longer. The kids who didn't like the lecture have stopped coming and the kids that are left seem to want more lecture which is fine by me. I could lecture for two hours but then the kids wouldn't get to play which is the real attraction.

In the Friday Advanced Class at Sobeys we do a 30 minute lecture again featuring GM games, my own games, etc. though we also do endgames and tactics on a regular basis. After the lecture (which starts at 6:30 pm) the kids play one game with a clock set to 30 minutes plus a 15 second increment. They record the game and then afterwards we analyse it with them suggesting improvements to their play. If there is a recurring mistake then it may become part of next week's lecture. There are usually four or five adults there to analyse the kids games which comes in handy for those occasions when twenty or more kids show up.

The kids take these games very seriously. We match the kids up so that we get a good game so stronger kids against stronger kids. We try not to match the same kids against each other within the same calendar month but this often depends upon who shows up. For instance two weeks ago when most of the girls had gone up to Toronto to play in the Ontario Girl's chess championship we only had half the class there (eight boys instead of the usual sixteen boys and girls) so the pairings were made without regard to who had already played recently.

[Nigel Hanrahan]

Re: The vision thing

... french schools in northern Ontario are way ahead of us in terms of penetration into the regular curriculum. The Nadeau family (Denis, Ellen and François) and Pierre Hardy spent last fall between 250 and 300 full days teaching chess in various schools belonging to the french school boards (and getting paid for it by the school boards). And it seems that more people will be needed next year since that teachers and school principals appear extremely happy about the positive impact that learning chess has on the kids.

... but unfortunately neither the federations nor CMA seem to be interested in lobbying for chess lessons within the regular curriculum.

Arne Nermo had some success in B.C. on this issue. What needs to be done is that chess needs to be added to the curriculum through the authority of the local school board. Then, if the individual school is interested in offering such an elective and credit course as (high school) chess, it can be done. Once a single school board in the province offers such a course, other school districts can "piggy-back" on the efforts of the first district and mimic the offering. That is really, really important. Here are some more particulars ... from my blog and original sources as well ...

Chess in BC public schools (from my weblog)

The other important point right now in BC is that the relationship between the province and the organization representing teachers (BCTF) is at an extremely low level. Teachers have taken the extraordinary measure of protesting the actions and legislation of the Clark regime by withdrawing from extra-curricular activities such as chess. It's not clear whether this protest will continue into the fall of this year. For myself, this means that I'm not sure whether I want to continue to offer children's chess at the local branch of Vancouver Island Regional Library in the fall. I don't want to step on toes, if that's what it is, seeing as I'm going to be joining the profession next year. I rather expect that it will be OK as, despite their outrage at the government, teachers love to teach children in all ways that they can. That's why the overwhelming majority of them got into the profession in the first place - whatever teacher-hating politicians think.

My actual experience with my first set of chess classes this past spring was that the children and parents ( I allowed parents to sit in and learn and play as well and it was mostly not a problem at all) wanted a chess club where they could play, having learned most of the moves and rules already, and actually teaching chess was not easy to insert into the club once it got going. As a student teacher, of course, teaching chess was the main reason why I set up the club in the first place. So I would wait for those "teachable" moments in the club and then, using a lesson from a single board try to teach all the children - with a modest interruption of their games - what had been learned on the single board. Therefore, there was only 5-10 minutes of teaching in the whole hour - maximum.

The CFC Demo board was very, very useful in those short lessons.

The children and their parents would wander in, not on time, wander out, and so on. Very difficult to begin the "club" with a lesson. I didn't have nearly enough beginners.

In regard to the discussion about getting children to write down their moves and so on ... Grade 6 and 7 (ages 11-12) in BC is the age group in which children learn, in their math classes, about coordinate systems (in all four quadrants) and I was able this year to use chess as a means to teach math for grade 7 students. In fact, I even used the knight tour to teach math. heh.

Thanks to all of you for this discussion. I've found that some of the contributions have been helpful in organizing my thinking ... about teaching chess.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: The vision thing

I teach groups of 7 year old kids and I always teach them how to write down the moves and encourage them to play over their games at home. I do this because they always have a lot of fun in the process, even though it is usually impossible to play over the game later from what they have written down. Accurate recording is not the point, the point is that the writing process makes them think more carefully about their moves; they concentrate more and organize their thoughts better; and thus fool around less and learn more from their games. If they try to play over the game later, even though they invariably get lost at some point, the process improves their memory and play since they need to try to remember what happened in the game. All good...It also impresses the heck out of their parents; also some kids have learned to write far better from the exercise...

I have had children as young as five record their moves after one or two sessions without making too many mistakes though as I said we start with a couple of games of about 25 moves and full of tactical fireworks.

How many seven year olds do you have in a group? Our classes tend to be a mix as far as age is concerned with the median age about 12 and the oldest in the advanced class being 18 and the second oldest 14. In the intermediate class our oldest is probably 12 or 13 with a median of about 10. Some seven year olds tend to be a bit rambunctious in my experience. Five year olds tend to be a bit too shy to benefit from a chess class unless it is all five year olds.

[Paul Beckwith]

Re: The vision thing

I teach groups of 7 year old kids and I always teach them how to write down the moves and encourage them to play over their games at home. I do this because they always have a lot of fun in the process, even though it is usually impossible to play over the game later from what they have written down. Accurate recording is not the point, the point is that the writing process makes them think more carefully about their moves; they concentrate more and organize their thoughts better; and thus fool around less and learn more from their games. If they try to play over the game later, even though they invariably get lost at some point, the process improves their memory and play since they need to try to remember what happened in the game. All good...It also impresses the heck out of their parents; also some kids have learned to write far better from the exercise...