|
Really could care less about the math part of the thread
(it gives me headaches). Rut makes some good points about testing at the higher levels but why should it be an either or
situation? I would expect a D1 or H.S. finals official to be able score high on the test and have great court presence,
settling for less should be unacceptable and at the very least
have the state or conference reevaluate their training programs. Plain and simple the test is a tool that can be used on different levels. It is not the whole kit but one tool.
More experienced officials use the test to keep up with the rules and trends of the game. For newer officials it is a foundation to build on. For trainers and evaluators it is used
shore up weak spots in the training. For states and conferences
it is used as a minimum qualification(usually accompanied by a time in service for upward movement to gain the game management
skills). while there are always exceptions using the right tool
for its intended purpose leads to superior work and using the wrong tool or using it incorrectly can lead to a sloppy product.
|