Copy reviews from one scholarship to another within a reviewer group
When reviewing scholarship by scholarship, our committees often see the same student 5+ times and they have to review from scratch for each opportunity. We would like a way for a a committee member's review to copy over from one scholarship to the others they are reviewing so they only review that student one time.
We have to review anonymously and because conditional applications cannot be reviewed anonymously, we have to review by scholarship.
We would like the option to have rubrics answers copy over across scholarships. (Similar to the post-acceptance function that allows students to copy answers over to multiple PA opportunities) We would also greatly appreciate the ability to review anonymously on a conditional level.
-
Lindley Jones
- Feb 11 2022
- Reviewed: Voting Open
| Client Name "shard name" | appstate |
| User | System Admin |
| Functional Unit | Reviewer Groups, Users, Reviews, Conditional Application, Review |
| Employee Name | Lindley Jones |
Related Enhancements
A more diverse reviewing ability would add a large amount of value to BBAM, faculty and staff who serve on review committees everywhere would advocate to use this software if it had capability like this enhancement request is describing.
The existing functionality is flawed in that some actions like name-blind reviews can only selectively be completed at the opportunity (or general) level and not at the conditional level. I generally agree with Lindley's comments.
I find it very confusing (why do I have a list of applications and reviews and the reviews are the applications in triplicate?); it's redundant in super unhelpful ways.
The organizational structure of this data management system is not helpful. If the idea is that we're trying to streamline work or create efficiencies, this platform doesn't seem to achieve that. Our committee ended up doing our work outside of the system anyway and then going back into the system to tick the right boxes, so to speak.
The committee members were confused, and it seemed to take more time to work with this system than just getting together and having a conversation. I recognize that centralizing the management of scholarships is a good thing, but I just wonder if there isn't a way to simplify this management system.
"The process needs to be reworked. It is extremely cumbersome and utterly time consuming. I would estimate this process takes 15x the amount of time compared to our old process of using paper applications"
"As I finished the ratings for the Sutton scholarship and began the Allen ratings, I realized that many of these are the same students I already evaluated. The evaluation criteria are the same as well. Is there a way to import the scores from one scholarship to the next?"
"The main issue I'm seeing is the review process in BAM. We have a lot of students matched to multiple scholarships (up to 6 per student), multiplying the number of reviews to be done. We are choosing to not move forward with the software for this reason. It is too cumbersome and our Google applications work better for our department."
"There are more than 400 reviews for the STBE scholarships, and it looks like we are assigned to review the same students for multiple scholarships. Is there a way we can do this more efficiently. It seems a waste of my faculty's time to look at the same application many times for different scholarships."
"We all found it very irritating that we had to input the same information over and over again."
I will be posting feedback from our campus faculty as individual comments. Our university requires that reviews be anonymized, so please keep in mind we cannot review on a conditional level.
Commenting to bring this back up to QE staff. We have many departments refusing to utilize Blackbaud for this very reason. It's highly problematic
My university is in a similar boat. We have had many reviewers complain about this very issue. Following - hoping for a new solution.