True and False questions are BS - it doesn't require one to have that much knowledge. I agree with JRut - if this test is a placement test, then why not make it harder??? Then, we'll know who are actually qualify to referee at a higher level. Any fluke can pass a T/F test. I bet if the format of the test is multiple choice with 4-5 possible answers, half of you will not be able to get over a 80%. If the test is fill-in-the-blank, probably more than half of you will fail! HAHA! =)

BTW, did someone mentioned this test can be taking online at home?

And I'd bet that half of you newbies would be lucky to get over 40% on the same test.:)

How many years have you been refereeing, anyway? Not that it matters...just wondering.

1st season baby!!!! Woohooooooo! Hence, that's why I need all of you to teach me everything I need to know about officiating! =) It isn't that easy to take a multiple choice test, especially when you have to read 200 questions and over 1,000 possible answers. By the 50th questions of A1 pushing B1 and simultaneously B2 ran into A3, and both coaches moving out of the coaching box, someone is bound to misread a question or two and answer it incorrectly. Not to include your eyes and mind will probably be out of it after reading such boring materials.

Hey Jurassic, when was the last time you took a course at a University? Not that it matters, just wondering…

Iirc, I took various University and other professional courses to upgrade, stay current and just because I was interested until just before I turned 50. The last courses that I took were computer-related.

Btw, I always found multiple choice tests easy, as long as I did the proper studying first to learn the subject. Iow, they're no different than the current NFHS tests. Cheating works just as well, but I always thought that the cheater was just cheating himself. That's just me though.

The rules might be boring, but they're kinda necessary to know if you really want to be a <b>good</b> official imo.

You want to learn everything possible about being a basketball referee but you find the rules test boring?

Isn't that like saying you want to be a chemist but find chemistry boring?

The NFHS test isn't multiple choice, it's T/F, and there are only 100 or fewer questions, not 200. There aren't 1,000 possible answers. There's just one sentence for each item, and then you state whether that sentence is true or false. Most of the questions aren't "A1 pushing B1 and simultaneously B2 ran into A3" complicated. There are a few like that, but not many.

The test gives you a chance to feel that you know what you are doing when you're out on the floor. Knowing the rules is very, very important, and you'd be amazed how much you don't know that you thought you knew. Studying for the test, and then carefully looking up everything you got wrong afterward, is a great way to develop a solid grounding in the rules.

If you enjoy basketball, and want to move up in reffing, it's not boring or tedious at all. If you really can't be bothered, then don't bother stepping out onto the floor in stripes.

It's easy to study for the test, if you just find some tests from last year, and the year before. Answer about 10 questions, then check to see if they're correct. If they're not, look up the correct answers -- the official answer sheet gives references to the rules books that you can use to find their thinking. If you go through 2 or 3 past tests in this fashion, you'll do fine on the current test when you take it.

And if you really want to impress people, find the one wrong answer in the test. It seems like every year the powers-that-be get at least one of their asnwers wrong, and the administrating people have to tell you that such-and-such asnwer should be F, not T. If you are the person who can find that without being told, and show the references that prove your point, you'll get plenty of brownie points!!

The problem I have with the tests are their feeble attempt to trick you with one word. ie: "recommended" instead of "must be" and that kind of crap.

I would be much happier with the questions being straight forward and then they could use whatever format of answers they want.

I have always complained about the use of words to trick you into responding with an incorrect answer. Like most of you, I have taken the NFHS test (closed book in my board) for many years. But as my understanding of the rules became more solid, I discovered those words did make a difference in the context of most of the rules.

We get our tests back with a form that tells what questions we missed. After going back to the rule book to look up a miss, I have usually discovered I didn't know the rule as well as I thought.

The better you know the rule, the less chance of getting it wrong from some type of tricky wording.

Iaabo
 

Well,

Our board uses the IAABO test instead of the NFHS test, and it has the same problem of the questions not being clear. However, i can tell you that it does not matter how the question is phrased because if you know the rules then you will know the answer. They gotta make the sentence sound complicatd because otherwise, let's face it, everybody would have 100% on the exam.

The IAABO test in particular focuses very heavily on new rules followed by last year's new rules and then the rest. Just last year there were 4-5 out of 50 questions about the same new rule with the SAME situation just rephrased differently. If you get familiar with the test you are writing, especially like somebody suggested if you read old tests, you can recognize the patterns and score high easiy.

Rules as they are written in the book are fairly simple and straightforward. It's either a travel or it is not, it is either a foul or it is not. Hence, the tests can only be as difficut as the rues themselves. It's either true or false.

And let's not forget, if you don't know the rule when you have minutes to ponder about one situation how in the world can you judge the same situation on the court when you have a few seconds to make the call.

if you love refereeing then you gotta love the rules

peace

It's not a trick question if you know the rules. The specific wording is relevant and important. "Recommended" means there is a choice. "Must" implies no choice. Is a player who is fouled recommended to shoot the FTs or must that player shoot the FTs (excepting injury, etc.).

And that is my point. Life is all "story problems and essay questions." It in no way resembles college exams. But in every college class I ever took there was a group in the back who were constantly whining, "Is this going to be on the test?". Sadly it is a predictably mindless reaction to an evironment that places too much emphasis on the worthless ability re-profess what the professor has professed. The last thing we want our universities to do is further reinforce the notion that answering test questions is what's important. That's my issue with Mwanr1's statement.

As for being locked in a room and left to solve problems, of course not. And what's more, often those problems have no well-known answers. Not only does a person need the ability to solve novel problems, but also the ability to evaluate their solutions to see if they really are solutions. And never once has the answer to a real problem been:

D) A and B, never C.

And rarely in real life has guessing "C" when I didn't know an answer work out well.

As for being an elitist prick: Every society needs a healthy supply of skilled and unskilled laborers. If all of the computer geeks and garbage collectors took the month off, there's no doubt which group would be missed most. However, just because a job is necessary, and honorable, doesn't make it desireable. People go to college so they don't have to collect garbage to pay the bills.

It's good to be me. ;)

Ahhh...the ability to focus on the keys to success is a bad thing now. Interesting. I find in my real life job if you can't get what the critical factors are and focus and execute on them then you are ****ed.

Maybe your job allows you the latitude to spend half your time navel gazing. Good for you.

I did mention your views are those of an elitist prick, didn't I? Yeah I think I did.

Anyways...*going* to college don't mean sh1t. Even if you are you.

You gotta graduate. And you don't graduate unless you know what's gonna be on the finals. And the mere act of graduating doesn't mean you're better than a garbage collector or a computer programmer. It just means you had the ways & means & knew how to play the game.

The keys to success? It depends on whether you consider graduation to be the end goal, or a step towards the end goal. If you look at college as preperation for career and a fuller, richer life, then an attitude of "I don't want to have to think about this unless it's going to be on a test" is a pretty poor way to prepare.

If you're in a science/technical major, you have no way of knowing while you're in college which bits of knowledge will be important and relevant after college. So being unwilling to spend time on concepts that won't be on the test is doing yourself a disservice. Not to mention, the concepts tend to build on each other so you gotta know A to learn B, even if A isn't on the test.

If you're in a more liberal arts major, the only really useful thing it's going to teach you is how to think and learn. And if you spend all four years dodging the thinking part on the pretext that this or that concept won't be on a test, you're selling yourself short.

If your job is like most I've had, yes, you have to know what the critical success factors are. You also have to know what the unspoken success factors are. You also have to be able think, learn, adapt, sometimes tap dance, and generally do whatever it takes to deliver on the critical success factors. In a world where jobs and roles and responsibilities shift rapidly, the idiot who came out of college with the attitude of "is this going to be on the test," will soon find his job has passed him by. YMMV

As for being an elitist prick, so be it. I look at it as being a realist. But I guess that wasn't on the final. :cool:

So let's say you're taking a course in...I dunno...let's say music of the 15th century. But you decide you'll have a fuller,richer life if you focus on music of the 18th century. "Screw you Dufay and your parallel fifths!" you say, "Mozart for me!!"

That's a good way to prepare, right?

:rolleyes:

Puh-leeze. You have no argument. Maybe you should take out the garbage?

and BTW...I've never, ever taken an advanced science or engineering course without the instructor telling us exactly what's to be on the final.

Too much to cover my small minded friend. Too much to cover.

Wwwhhhheeeeeee---- eeewwwwwwww!!! I go out for groceries, and come back to find two of my favorite people tearing out hair, and poking out eyes!!

Jeff, now that I've got the hang of this popcorn thing, how about you join me in egging these guys on, eh? Anybody else? Don't forget that I bought it with salt....