gordon,
Bill/Russ or Mike may have taught the class that used the Part 1 test as the basis for discussion. I have attended many of these and without fail it goes something like this:

Week 1) The first twenty five questions are assigned to the rookies. They are asked to answer them and return the following week for discussion.
Week 2) Bill/Rus or Mike will randomly select members and ask the question. He/she will give their answer and the class will either agree or disagree. All rulings are cited with page number and rule number.
Weeks 3-6) These same rookies knock off the remaining questions in the same manner. The funny thing is that they are actually due the week before the last week of training. So, they will not be provided all of the answers at our sessions, prior to the closing of the test!


That's not how I remember it. I can recall sitting in a class room with about 30 guys. Starting at one end of the room starting with question 1 etc. answering them and being given the correct answer. Each one of us in turn until the test was completed. Can't cheat on an open book test that you can do at home, work etc.

I see, by the link to your home association that you provided in another thread, that YOUR exam date is <b>next</b> Monday, November 22nd. Good luck with your studying. Btw, if you are writing the IAABO refresher exam instead of the NFHS exam, another kindred soul has just provided the answers to that one today also. Just look for the IAABO test thread. [/B][/QUOTE]

JR,

I know that I haven't written my exam yet, but a month ago, I came accross a copy. Sine then I've found a rule reference for every single question and came up with my answer from that. I'm only using these answers to check my answers. If I'm wrong, and I was on one, I went and found a different rule reference which better assessed the situation in the question.

I however, am not going to go into the exam with just the answers in my head. I've opened my book, researched the questions. I'm not cheating, I'm studying.

One other thing JR,

In my association the NFHS test is reserved only for those officials in their third year and below. This year I write my last Fed test, next year I go for my IAABO. Thank God I'm never gonna have to write that horrible test after monday.

gordon30307,

I've taught that class many times. Yur memory...from many moons ago...is foggy.

ref18,
If you know the answers ahead of time and can research the appropriate case or rule book scenario, YOU ARE STILL CHEATING. Having the answers ahead of time, when they are not available to everyone, is the difference. You can't justify your actions - the answers helped you learn the way to answer the question appropriately.

My Memory is not foggy. That is how it was done.

I know that I haven't written my exam yet, but a month ago, I came across a copy. Since then I've found a rule reference for every single question and came up with my answer from that. I'm only using these answers to check my answers. If I'm wrong, and I was on one, I went and found a different rule reference which better assessed the situation in the question.

I however, am not going to go into the exam with just the answers in my head. I've opened my book, researched the questions. I'm not cheating, I'm studying. [/B][/QUOTE]Ref 18, I'm glad to hear that. I also know that you are sincere in wanting to improve your rules knowledge. You can tell that from your activity in discussions on this web site, both here and on the football forum. I also sincerely hope that the other people requesting the answers show the same dedication that you do. Unfortunately, quite a few of them seemed to have joined just to receive the answers- and maybe they won't be heard from again here until next year's exam rolls around. That's unfortunate. What is also unfortunate is the perception that cheating could possibly now be present- ie.- WCB's posts. Somebody posting the answers on this site today to this year's IAABO refresher test is a good example of that. I know that there are associations out there that use this test as their main exam, and also haven't had their members write it yet. I'm sure that having the answers out in public before everybody has their exam written can't be making the IAABO people too happy either.

Now you know where I'm coming from. Note that I'm trying very hard to keep away from judging <b>anybody</b> also. I ain't God, and I have a lot of faith too in the integity inherent to sports officials.

Have a good year!

I already answered your other post before I read this one. Please see my reference to the IAABO test in there. The answers are now out for that one too.

Okay, maybe it's not the most ethical thing to do, but it helps me learn. I did the same thing last year, and you know what it helped me. If you ask me any question from last years test, I can give you the correct answer, because it stuck with me. That's what I believe is teh point of all this, getting it in your head, where you need it. I agree, just using the answers are wrong. But when you look through the book and just use the answers to check if your research is correct, I see nothing wrong with that.

My apologies to Rich for bringing him into this, but, Windbag, where were you when he was handing out the test. I didn't hear any objections to that. With the test I was able to come up with my own answers. All I used these ones for was verification and to see if I misunderstood any concepts. I don't get the exam back until Christmas, and I'll do a good deal of games from now till then and I need to make sure that my rulings are accurate. This is one way to ensure that.

It may not be ethical, but it helps improve my on-floor officiating and that is what counts. Anyone can memorize a rulebook, but few people can take it and apply it to a game situation along with game management, a very important part of officiating, but there's no book on it. Doing this makes me a better official and because of that I'll continue doing it.

Well that's interesting...kinda puts all his posts into perspective now, don't it.

I'm going to officiate games now, the main part of officiating, which I feel is more important than a stupid test. I'll be practising my mechanics, another important part of officiating, but no test to evaluate us. And I'll be making the calls. It's one thing to be able to call a game on paper, but a completely different thing to call a game on a court.

Later,

J

Well, that and as long as you realize that his <i>raison d'etre</i> in posting here is mainly to antagonize Rut.

Mmmmmmm....raisins....

I'm hungry!

But there's so many others here who do that already...tell him to go away, JR.

Go away, Windy.

Jurassic,

Mon frêre, you are mistaken about why this thread piqued my interest. Go back and look at my first response. It was not directed at anyone other than the cheaters. Rut took umbrage with a “baseball umpire” projecting his wisdom on his sacred domain. My argument was and remains with the person that began this debacle. Officiating and cheating are polar opposites. We frown on any authority figure caught in the web of deceit and greed. My contention is that if it is a meaningless test, why do you require the answers? Obviously, if he/she has the test and claims to be an official, he/she should have the requisite knowledge to explore those questions with integrity. Rut charged in and attempted to mount a defense of their actions. As we’ve seen, there is none, cheating is cheating.


P.S.: Yes, I’ve spoken in flowery prose in a cheap attempt to confuse and bewilder our little friend.

I must have missed a memo putting you in charge. I will go away when reason returns to this board.