Week 07 · lesson
Rules, Officials, and Disputes
Receive: A Dispute Needs a Path, Not an Audience
A team thinks a score was recorded incorrectly. The useful next action is not a post, a pile-on, or an argument at the station. It is a factual report to the person authorized to review the record.
Learning target: I can distinguish a claim from evidence and write a short dispute report that supports a fair ruling.
Process: Authority and Evidence Work Together
An official applies the published process. Evidence is a relevant record: a score sheet, timestamp, rule citation, or complete event log. A ruling is the documented decision. Students may report a concern; they do not need to investigate, punish, or persuade the public.
| Step | Responsible action |
|---|---|
| Observe | Name the score, time, or rule at issue. |
| Preserve | Keep the relevant record without editing or broadcasting it. |
| Report | Use the stated official or advisor channel. |
| Review | The authorized role checks the rule and record. |
| Record | State the ruling and any correction consistently. |
Practice: Remove the Argument
Rewrite: “They cheated and everyone knows it.” Use this structure: “At ____, the record shows ____. The published rule says ____. We request review through ____.” If you cannot name a fact, you are not ready to make the claim.
Apply: Write a Factual Report
Use a supplied scenario to create a four-sentence report naming the observable issue, relevant evidence, rule or record, and approved handoff. Do not include insults, guesses about motive, or private information.
Correct: Review for Ruling-Readiness
Can an official identify what to check without asking what happened? If not, add the time, rule section, or record name. Precision protects everyone involved.
Prove: Exit Evidence
Submit the report and one sentence explaining why public retaliation makes fair review harder.
Takeaway
Good dispute systems make it possible to correct an error without creating a second problem.