Peer Evaluation Systems

[Scott_Witmer]

This is not necessarily restricted to any one level of Volleyball officiating (HS, USAV, NCAA):

I am interested in learning what other officials' organizations are doing along the lines of peer evaluations. Our local NFHS Chapter has a system which is under attack from within. In order to improve the system, I hope to steal good ideas from elsewhere as opposed to re-inventing the wheel.

What is going on around the country, and how well is it working?

[mcvolleyball]

I was evaluated for the first "official" time this weekend at the State tournament. They used a total of 3 individuals who rated me on: 1) Knowledge and application of th rules, Overall match situation; 2) Judgement, Ball handling, overlapping, libero play, back row paly, decisiveness; 3) Consistency, ball handling, overlapping, libero play, back row play; and, 4) Mechanics, Pre-match conference, reation time, communication, correct signals. The rating system was on a scale 1 - 5 as well as they evaluated the overall difficulty of the game itself. There was an area for comments. We were also simultaneously evaluated by the individual coaches. As you might guess the losing coach was not nearly as favorable as the winning coach. I found the information very useful to me, because I had a total of 7 matches, including the semi-final and Finals match to reflect on immediately following the conclusion of the tournament. It was close enough to remember how I was feeling during the match and how I felt I performed and compare that to the evaluations and comments from the evaluators. The other type of evaluation that I have been told about and that I feel would be even more useful to an official is where they actually video tape you doing a match then review the tape with you and discuss ways to improve your officiating then send you right back out to do the next match implementing the skills that you just discussed and repeat the process (video/discussion). I think this type of approach could be extremely helpful to an official who is wanting to improve their performance. Hope this information is useful to you and your association.

[blueump]

In Michigan (NFHS) the only evaluations we ever get are at the end of the season, based on an average score from all participating coaches. It is on a scale of 1-5. We get one number which is our "rating". It is virtually useless. You get no feedback, you don't know who evaluated you poorly or why, and 1/2 are from coaches who lost while you officiated. I would prefer to have some sort of peer evaluation. The state says they "will occasionally send observers" to see if you are "tournament caliber" but I honestly don't think they ever do.

Last I knew, NCAA - Div. 1 sent an official rater to each game. They would observe and then review the game with both officials after each match. They would ask questions and give suggestions as well as give positive comments to the officiating crew.

[MCBear]

The PAC10 does not send raters to their matches, but they do have observers who are assigned to each match and file a report with the conference office. They are there to observe everything from the Pre-match conference and coin toss to the post-match debriefing with the officiating crew (R1, R2, Line judges and Scorekeepers).

Evaluations and ratings are done by the conference supervisor of officials.