IHSA Officials

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fullor30

That's great. Much more convenient and cost effective.

Thanks

Do not get so excited. You do not have hours to take the test. Once you start the test you have a 2 hour limit. You can take a break and come back to the test, about 5 days to completely finish the test. Also the questions are scrabbled. Your #1 question might be someone's #53.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Do not get so excited. You do not have hours to take the test. Once you start the test you have a 2 hour limit. You can take a break and come back to the test, about 5 days to completely finish the test. Also the questions are scrabbled. Your #1 question might be someone's #53.

I am excited. Wow, five days to complete? Law boards aren't that lenient. I just appreciate not having to drive somewhere to take it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fullor30

I am excited. Wow, five days to complete? Law boards aren't that lenient. I just appreciate not having to drive somewhere to take it.

Change that to 3 days.

You just have to have all your recommendation letters in before November 17. It should be easier for winter sports than it was for the fall sports to accomplish this requirement. At least school is in session.

Peace

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Also the questions are scrabbled.

You mean the test answers are in crossword style? Note: no picture of a Scrabble board.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Also the questions are scrambled. Your #1 question might be someone's #53.

Gasp!

What's that gonna do to the people who come here every year at this time and make their ONE post of the year pleading with somebody...anybody... to supply them with ALL of the answers in numerical order for either the FED Part 1 or 2 exam?

It's just not fair, damnit! After all, they only want the answers for study purposes. They'd never, ever dream of cheating. "Never, ever", I tell ya.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Gasp!

What's that gonna do to the people who come here every year at this time and make their ONE post of the year pleading with somebody...anybody... to supply them with ALL of the answers in numerical order for either the FED Part 1 or 2 exam?

It's just not fair, damnit! After all, they only want the answers for study purposes. They'd never, ever dream of cheating. "Never, ever", I tell ya.

I realize this is going to tick you off, but the NCAA has an online test and it is encouraged to go over the test with other officials. Not only that I have heard Hank Nichols and Dave Yeast (Baseball Coordinator) openly advocate taking the exam with other officials in the room or at the computer. The NCAA has a similar testing process without as many questions and if I remember no time limit.

Actually it is encouraged by the IHSA to get help if needed (especially in football) because a lot of issues in football were crew decisions. This actually makes the test a little easier than previously where you could not get help on the test at all while taking the test (other than open book). To get to the highest level (Certified), you now can take an open book test, where before it was closed. That sounds a little easier than when I was taking the test.

I know you throw out the term "cheating" all the time. It is only cheating when you are violating a specific rule disallowing very specific practices. If you ask me the process is a lot easier than it used to be.

Peace

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I realize this is going to tick you off, but the NCAA has an online test and it is encouraged to go over the test with other officials. Not only that I have heard Hank Nichols and Dave Yeast (Baseball Coordinator) openly advocate taking the exam with other officials in the room or at the computer. The NCAA has a similar testing process without as many questions and if I remember no time limit.

Actually it is encouraged by the IHSA to get help if needed (especially in football) because a lot of issues in football were crew decisions. This actually makes the test a little easier than previously where you could not get help on the test at all while taking the test (other than open book). To get to the highest level (Certified), you now can take an open book test, where before it was closed. That sounds a little easier than when I was taking the test.

I know you throw out the term "cheating" all the time. It is only cheating when you are violating a specific rule disallowing very specific practices. If you ask me the process is a lot easier than it used to be.

Peace

The goal obviously is have officials learn. It certainly is easier to have an open book on a C test. Our association as do many others, go over part one as a group and review answers. Like anything else, you get out of it what you put in.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fullor30

The goal obviously is have officials learn. It certainly is easier to have an open book on a C test. Our association as do many others, go over part one as a group and review answers. Like anything else, you get out of it what you put in.

I am not upset about the current process at all. I just think it is easier. And if I had to go through this process in football (which involves many group ruling and is much harder from a rules standpoint), I would have been a C long time before I actually was. That being said, if someone wanted help I would be happy if someone wanted my help to go through the test. After all, the test does not mean a damn thing if you cannot referee. The test alone is not going to make you work more varsity games.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I know you throw out the term "cheating" all the time.

Yup, and I'll continue to do so for every single unprincipled ethics-lacking clown that comes here just wanting the bulk exam answers instead of wanting to discuss individual questions, situations, etc. There is one helluva big difference between discussing the exam questions and just regurgitating a list of supplied answers. The difference is that you might actually learn something using the one method; you don't learn diddly-squat memorizing provided answers.

Being able to attain a higher certification level without having to learn the appropriate rules is just wrong imo. They're just cheating themselves, but they don't think of that.

It is kind of a pet peeve with me...along with midgets, BoSox fans and anything to do with Notre Dame football.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yup, and I'll continue to do so for every single unprincipled ethics-lacking clown that comes here just wanting the bulk exam answers instead of wanting to discuss individual questions, situations, etc. There is one helluva big difference between discussing the exam questions and just regurgitating a list of supplied answers. The difference is that you might actually learn something using the one method; you don't learn diddly-squat memorizing provided answers.

Being able to attain a higher certification level without having to learn the appropriate rules is just wrong imo. They're just cheating themselves, but they don't think of that.

It is kind of a pet peeve with me...along with midgets, BoSox fans and anything to do with Notre Dame football.

Every request is not cheating. Everyone does not take every test for the same reasons. Everyone is not a regular to know that kind of information. And taking a test does not mean anything. It never has and it never will. When coaches start asking us what our test score is, I will buy into that logic. They never do or even know we actually had to take a test, so who cares what someone asks about a stupid test. You need to do more reading of a rulebook anyway than when you have to take a silly test.

Peace

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Every request is not cheating. Everyone does not take every test for the same reasons. Everyone is not a regular to know that kind of information. And taking a test does not mean anything. It never has and it never will. When coaches start asking us what our test score is, I will buy into that logic. They never do or even know we actually had to take a test, so who cares what someone asks about a stupid test. You need to do more reading of a rulebook anyway than when you have to take a silly test.

Peace

I'm just going to jump in with a quick observation - doesn't the IHSA require a minimum test score to keep your license every year? If that's the case, the test score does mean something. And I know of officials that have copied the answers just so they don't have to go through the process of discussing the rules, or looking them up on their own. So, in that case, they really are cheating.

In this case, I agree with the Really Old One, in that there are people that come here just to get the answers, not to discuss and learn about the answers. There's a diffference.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I'm just going to jump in with a quick observation - doesn't the IHSA require a minimum test score to keep your license every year? If that's the case, the test score does mean something. And I know of officials that have copied the answers just so they don't have to go through the process of discussing the rules, or looking them up on their own. So, in that case, they really are cheating.

I will concede that you do need a certain test score (80/100), but the test is open book and we have weeks to turn in the test. The online version of the test has been available since Tuesday and we do not have to turn in the test until the middle of November. We have just short of two months to take the test. There are association meetings during that time and other events that people can get the answers for the test or some idea what the answers are long before the season starts. It is not against any rule to get the answers by everyone to work with others to get those answers.

As I said before, I have a group of individuals that we go over the test every single year. Only a couple of us do the actual background work and just about every person in our little group of about 10-15 people has not taken the test or reviewed the test before our meeting. This is also very common all over the state with officials I know all over the state. And if the state was totally against this reality, they could completely change the process and require officials to take the test at a set site on a specific date and everyone that wanted to get through the process would be willing to go through that process.

I have a friend that is retired and has some flexibility and applied for a license in another state in the southeastern part of the country (I am not giving the state). He took their test and just based on his test alone, he got varsity games and even has the opportunity to work the post season all based on his test. He had to take their state run test (not the NF test). He had to go down to the state and take the test on a specific time and he never had to attend a camp or prove that he had ability of an official. Now this person is older and once was a very good official, but he is declining on that side of his career (he would admit this) and he was shocked that he was put in such an important situation all based on a test. Now you want to talk about retaining officials that is a great way to get officials that have worked hard their entire career to have an "outsider" possibly pass them or be eligible for those kinds of assignments without having to prove it more than a test.

Retention of officials is a problem in our state and officials are getting older and older even when you include the age of many starting their respective sports (Their not starting in their early 20s anymore. The starting age is more like in the 40s now) and if you want to make it harder to keep officials, start requiring officials to have to take tests in that manner and Illinois will have a bigger problem then other places do across this country.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

In this case, I agree with the Really Old One, in that there are people that come here just to get the answers, not to discuss and learn about the answers. There's a diffference.

Not everyone takes the NF Test the way many here do. I suspect that many of those requests are innocent people trying to get answers to a test they did not have to take. After JR goes off on them, that becomes rather obvious if you look at their state's requirements. Of course we have the people trying to get over, but you do not need to come here to do that either.

I look at it simply this way. It is not illegal when there are no rules against it. The same applies to the rulebook. We cannot make something illegal because we do not like the practice.

Peace

[Bearfanmike20]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I realize this is going to tick you off, but the NCAA has an online test and it is encouraged to go over the test with other officials. Not only that I have heard Hank Nichols and Dave Yeast (Baseball Coordinator) openly advocate taking the exam with other officials in the room or at the computer. The NCAA has a similar testing process without as many questions and if I remember no time limit.

Actually it is encouraged by the IHSA to get help if needed (especially in football) because a lot of issues in football were crew decisions. This actually makes the test a little easier than previously where you could not get help on the test at all while taking the test (other than open book). To get to the highest level (Certified), you now can take an open book test, where before it was closed. That sounds a little easier than when I was taking the test.

I know you throw out the term "cheating" all the time. It is only cheating when you are violating a specific rule disallowing very specific practices. If you ask me the process is a lot easier than it used to be.

Peace

I sit down with a senior official and go over it. It helps me understand. He gives examples.. its great. I feel more prepared too IMO.

[BillyMac]

Here, on my local Connecticut board, we've gone through a few different procedures regarding taking the annual IAABO Refresher Exam, which counts ten percent toward our individual rating, and ranking.

Many years ago, we were all expected to take the exam, individually, as an open book exam, at home, over a two week period. This was when the internet was nothing more than a twinkle in Al Gore's eye.

The way it always turned out was that some officials, usually some of our more veteran officials, would somehow gain access to the IAABO answer sheet, I'm not sure how, but those answer sheets always seemed to be available to a few officials. In some cases those officials with the answer sheets would simply fill in the IAABO answers and submit their exams. In other cases, those officials would give the answers to some of their close friends on the board, who would then simply fill in the IAABO answers and submit their exams. In yet other cases, officials would meet in small, informal groups, having already filled in their own answers on their open book, take home exam, and go over the answers together, comparing their answers with the IAABO answers, that, as I already stated above, seemed to be available to a few officials every year. When the meeting was over, all the officials in this small, informal group, would have the IAABO answers on their answer sheet.

Back then, I was on the rating committee that was in charge of correcting these submitted exams. For those of you not familiar with the annual IAABO Refresher Exam, it's contains many hard, tricky, often poorly worded, questions, with answers that, very often, hinge on a single word in the question. When we were using this procedure, and I remind you, "officially" we were all expected to take the exam, individually, as an open book exam, at home, the scores fell into two groups. Those who did not follow the "official" procedure, and had access to an answer sheet, either individually, from a friend, or after participating in one of these small, informal, groups, had almost all the questions correct. The reason I say "almost" is that every year the international IAABO organization, for reasons that I could never fathom, makes at least one mistake on the answer sheet, and I'm not talking about a mistake in interpretation, I mean an outright mistake, like two plus two equals five. The group of officials that followed the "official" procedure, that is, without any access to the answer sheet, usually got many questions incorrect, I told you the exam is very difficult, even as an open book exam, with many tricky, often poorly worded, questions, with answers that hinge on a single word in the question, in other words, it's a poorly constructed exam.

Our rating committee saw the disparity of the scores, and the unfairness, with these two groups of officials, so we came up with a new procedure, in which we "officially" encouraged officials to get together in informal, small, study groups, to go over their answers together, without acknowledging the existence of the availability of the answer sheets. We kind of covered our eyes to the existence of "the elephant in the room", i.e. the existence of these answer sheets. We did this for several years, and noticed a change in the scores. Now, a much larger group of officials would get "almost" all the questions correct, but there was still a sizable group that would get many questions incorrect. Looking into this, our committee discovered that some of our newer officials had trouble, not yet having made friends on our board, finding an informal study group to participate in.

Our newest procedure actually sets up about a dozen "official" study groups, held at different locations, on different dates, in a two week time frame, with at least one study leader, usually a member of our executive committee, who has the answer sheet. We must complete our exam, at home, on our own, which is our "ticket" into one of these groups. We go over each question, discussing the answer, before getting the correct answer, which often leads to further discussion. Those of us who participate in these "official" study groups must sign in at these meetings, and by doing so, get full credit for the exam. We don't even have to submit our exam.

Attendance at these study groups is voluntary. There are some officials who choose not to attend, and they can submit their individual exam to the rating committee for scoring. Again, these exams fall into two groups. Some have many incorrect answers, again a testament as to how difficult, and poorly constructed, the exam is. Another group has "almost" perfect scores, "almost" because these officials got the answers from some of their friends who had attended a study group, and the "mistakes" from IAABO answer sheet showed up in these scores.

Our latest change will try to stop the group of officials who do not actually take the exam, who do not attend a study group, and simply copy the answers from a friend. At our final business meeting last season, we tried to pass a constitutional by-law change that would make it mandatory to attend one of these study groups, again with a completed exam needed as a "ticket" into one of these meetings. Those that attend one of these study groups would get full credit, again counting toward their rating, and ranking, on the exam. Those who didn't attend a study group would get no credit, a major hit, ten percent, against their ratings, and ranking. The constitutional by-law change didn't pass after a vote, because someone brought up the fact that an official who is unable to attend a meeting due to a health issue, family emergency, or business emergency, will have no option, the way the by-law change was written, but to get no credit for the exam. Next year this change will be voted on again, but with a option that in such emergency circumstances, the executive committee can vote to give full credit to officials who are unable to attend a study group as a result of such an emergency circumstance.

What's our purpose in regard to the exam? First, to get everyone to actually take the exam, individually, as an open book exam. The second purpose is to get everyone to attend a study group to get involved with discussions about the exam questions, and answers.

[Jurassic Referee]

Study groups, open-book exams, etc. etc. do not test an official's true rules knowledge imo. The only test that will really do that is a closed-book, time-limited proctored exam. Anything else...you're just kidding yourselves.

Just my probably very unpopular opinion....