Proper channels

[UmpJM]

So, let's just say, for the sake of argument, that an umpire applied for "promotion" within his state's HS association, and one of the requirements was to attain a "passing" grade on the FED "Part II" multiple choice online test.

Further, let's say while taking said test, the umpire found 2 questions (8% of the questions presented) were simply "wrong". Let's say for one, the "answer key" was wrong - though one of the multiple choice options was a correct answer to the question presented, while for the other, NONE of the choices presented was correct. I'm not saying "poorly worded", "too tricky", "ambiguous", or anything like that - just flat-out, demonstrably WRONG.

Let's also say that the umpire achieved the required score and couldn't care less about having his score "adjusted" or anything like that.

What would be the "proper channel" to point out these errors to the proper people without coming across like a whiner, a know-it-all, a jerk, or whatever? Who ARE the proper people? Does it vary from one state to the next? Would they care? Would they just as soon not be bothered?

What say you?

JM

[UmpTTS43]

Which #'d questions are you refering to?

[UmpJM]

UMPTT,

I thought I had presented it as a "hypothetical".

But, you might want to check your e-mail.

JM

[dash_riprock]

Leave it alone. I have yet to see a test without mistakes.

[yawetag]

If the questions had no bearing on the promotion, or you missing the questions became the difference of a certain level (for example, you're the #2-ranked instead of the #1-ranked), I would bring it up to the association. Have the questions exactly as written, as well as rule book cites, case plays, and any other relevant information to prove the answer was incorrect. I would request a meeting with whomever is responsible for the promotions.

Now, the ethical question is whether someone else was passed up for a promotion (or someone got a promotion) because of the incorrect answers. In your case, where the questions don't have a huge bearing on your status, I'd probably email the same details to the people responsible for the promotions. It's possible they'll evaluate the questions and re-evaluate the promotions or non-promotions.

Other than your association, good luck. There's wrong questions every year, and we're instructed by our association to either (1) give the incorrect answer on the test, knowing what the correct answer is; or (2) miss the question.

[jicecone]

I agree, every state does it differently and for as long as I've known, there is always some that feel the test is totally unfair. I also know that there are blantly wrong answers too.

However it always basically came down to "it is what it is". Good Luck

[Simply The Best]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

...an umpire applied for "promotion" within his state's HS association, and one of the requirements was to attain a "passing" grade on the FED "Part II" multiple choice online test. What say you?

Pass the test.

[DG]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

Further, let's say while taking said test, the umpire found 2 questions (8% of the questions presented) were simply "wrong".

Let's also say that the umpire achieved the required score and couldn't care less about having his score "adjusted" or anything like that.

What would be the "proper channel" to point out these errors to the proper people without coming across like a whiner, a know-it-all, a jerk, or whatever? Who ARE the proper people? Does it vary from one state to the next?

JM

In my state 2 questions would be 2% of the test. And there is a process to appeal...in writing to the state association, with documentation to backup claim, within 10 days of the test. I doubt local assoc ever knows about it, and it has no impact on assignments. I have sent in a few times and they agree sometimes, sometimes not. I don't do it anymore, waste of time.

[MikeStrybel]

JM,
This year, the Part II test was conceived by the IHSA Rule Interpreters. If you are seeking redress then Craig A. would be the man to handle issues. Drop me an email and we can talk about specifics.

Mike

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

JM,
This year, the Part II test was conceived by the IHSA Rule Interpreters.

Thanks for clearing that up. I see various posts come up on various boards and some people were clearly talking about a "different" Part II test.

If you are seeking redress then Craig A. would be the man to handle issues. Drop me an email and we can talk about specifics.

Mike

Not how I would say it, because I don't have any kind of "grievance" that I want addressed. I just thought they'd want to know. Were it me, I would.

JM

[piaa_ump]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Leave it alone. I have yet to see a test without mistakes.

got to agree with dash here....if you arent on the test committee....leave sleeping dogs lay......

[UmpJM]

piaa_ump,

I believe that's "lie". (Damn Jesuits!)

Nonetheless, thanks to you, dash, and the other gentlemen who have offered me your wise counsel and assistance in the matter.

I believe my question has been answered.

JM

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by piaa_ump

leave sleeping dogs lay......

Yikes! A double grammar disaster there!