While I'm not so opposed to the test model (assumign the assumptions are actually provided), there are at least two relatively simple alternatives to building a whistle into the question; Have "none" or "no restart needed" as one of choices Continue the play. Here, for example, it could be "A Red defender heads the ball to her goalkeeper who takes possession of the ball with her hands while in her goal area to prevent opponents from challenging for the ball; as the goalkeeper catches the ball, a blue attacker carelessly runs into the goal keeper, knocking the ball loose." The DB answer gets replaced with a DFK for Red.
The question is fine, it actually requires you to think and read. Two difficult concept for sure but its fine. If this happened in your game, which is entirely possible, you or rather any ref, needs to know the restart.
If it happened in my game, I would be aware of the totality of the circumstances—including whether or not I blew the freaking whistle! It's one thing to test whether you know the correct restart for an obscure corner case. It's quite another to test your ability to decipher a vague description of events while coming up with the same set of assumptions the test writer did. If the question was in fact posed exactly as written, you have to assume something in order for one of the choices provided to be the correct answer. In a real game, you would never have to assume anything. Or if you did, you would by definition be correct in your assumption anyway. So what's the point of making you guess at what the writer of the question intended?
At least in this question there was some way to make an assumption and come up with a correct answer. My online recert test had at least 2 questions that were out and out wrong. I go to class tomorrow so I can see how they justify the answers.
The problem with this question is that it's measuring two separate things and so you can't tell from a wrong answer what the taker doesn't know. A wrong answer could be because the taker doesn't know that the whistle here was inadvertent or that the restart for an inadvertent whistle is a dropped ball (or both). However, that gets into whether the test should just be for evaluation or also for learning. I think we lose a good opportunity for learning by not using the grade 8 recerrt test for learning.
I think at least part of the problem here is that early versions of the RefLink exams didn't appear to have been soak tested. The questions were all the same as the paper test - not fair otherwise - BUT they were in a different order so you wind up with a situation, as described by BlackBart (and maybe ErrolV also) where you have a question but no background, hence the confusion.
For the record, I completely hate the cluster**** questions that are poorly worded or don't give enough information. It's annoying and there's no one to appeal to. However, the original post generated 29 replies so far. 572 people have read part or all of the thread. Ask yourself how many of these people are now guaranteed to never, ever, ever mess up this situation for their career, whether they're the R, AR, or 4th on the crew? For a single question, on a grade 8 recert test, that shows up each year...I think US Soccer would be very satisfied with their return on investment for that question.
As stated earlier this question tests two things: one can you read, two can you follow directions. There is plenty of information to answer the question, if you don't think there is you are wrong. End of discussion. If you take it online and they screw up the formatting well that sucks to be you and you should tell your state you want a live test because a simple asking the instructor what is going on would have solved your problem. This question trips people up for two reasons, both are valid reasons to leave the question on the test. The first group of people that miss this question are the ones that read it and truely don't know the answer (some then jump on the bandwagon of "it wasn't fair"). This is a test of ref knowledge. The second group of people should know the answer, they just chose to take the test with the idea that it was below them and they don't want to put in the effort to read the directions. This is testing whether you will put in the same effort on a game that you think is below you and do it right. You having blown the whistle is implicit in the question because the whole section of the test if prefaced by the directions, "You have stopped the game for this, what is the restart?" If you simply know to repeat this simple direction after every question the answer should you be knowledgable enough to know it is OBVIOUS. There are always questions like this on ever test. Before this it was the one about all free kicks in the PA being from the spot of the foul, before that it was "spits at a teammate". Every time people complain they are unfair for different reasons. Take them as a learning experience and remember them for next time.
Respectfully disagree. The test should be about if you have the knowledge to be a referee, not if you can read and follow directions on a badly worded multiple choice test. Have to agree with Rufusabc that the question is obtuse. Well written multiple choice questions are simple and clear with simple and clear answers. This is a twofer multiple choice question, and the answer to one of the two questions ( Is it an infraction for a defender to head the ball to their goalkeeper?) is "sometimes". Yes, the question doesn't specify any action that could be trickery, but it is unnecessarily tricksey, particularly when you add in the confusion about question prefaces or implicit situations. It is a discussion question, not a multiple choice one. Most (all?) of my young referees would have got the answer to that question wrong, and not because they don't know what to do when they blow the whistle by mistake. Most (some ) of them even know what trickery is and the very specific situation it which it arises. It should be a test of knowledge of the laws of the game, not reading comprehension. You blow your whistle only to realize that you made a mistake and there was no infraction. What should you do? Dropped Ball Direct Free Kick Pretend it never happened and let play continue Kick-Off Indirect Free Kick
The problem with the type of question you propose is it dosn't have any value of testing the knowledge for application to a real world situation. It only tests whether the student paid attention for the 5 min you were talking about this particular thing and can regurgitate the answer. Those types of questions have there place but not on this scenario in my opinion. They are more important for the classic, "what choice does the winner of the coin toss have?". [Soapbox] Asking the question as it is makes the reader put themselves on the field and know what to do. We make things too easy for everyone as it is in the world. Sorry but it is time we went back to actually forcing people to be learn something rather than memorize it. [End soapbox]
Fairplay...are you writing these things? Your response is the REASON we get these types of questions. Memorization actually works for some people. If A then B. If C then D.
Completely disagree. Not every question has to be grossly plain vanilla. There is no reason not to ask a question that tests the kind of awareness the question in the OP brought up. Of course, including that you already blew the whistle (which apparently didn't happen in the online version the OP took) is critical, but I have no problem at all with the question if that is included. I think two step questions are completely appropriate. (I actually think fill-in-the-blank and short answer questions would be infinitely better and allow for more clear levels of nuance without confusion, but that becomes a resource issue when compared to multiple choice.)
When was the last time your reading comprehension was tested while on the field? ("You Suck Ref" signs don't count!) The question as it is doesn't put the reader on the field, it makes the reader have to figure out what the question is and it doesn't contain all the information that would be available on the field - hence the potential for confusion and 'wrong' answers. I could care less if one of my referees learned that a mistaken whistle is a drop ball or memorized that a mistaken whistle is a drop ball. As a long as they know a mistaken whistle is a drop ball, I'm happy, they are happy, the one or two coaches in our league who know a mistaken whistle is a drop ball are happy. Multiple choice tests ARE about regurgitating answers (learned or memorized). It is a test of knowledge of the laws. You want to test that knowledge for application to a real world situation? Put them on a field and have a mentor or assessor evaluate them.
Coupla things. I've long railed against the poor construction of the questions, which as pointed out, has become as much a reading comprehension test as an examination of a students understanding and application of the LoTG. Secondly a LOT of people, particularly less experienced referees, have real trouble converting words on a page into a 3D colour moving image in their mind AND THEN coming up with a correct solution to the posed situation. This is exacerbated ten fold in the pressure situation of an exam room.
Remember this is NOT the entry level exam, this is from the recertificatoin exam for all grade 8 and 7's. I stand by the view that this question is crystal clear and fair. Yes, you have to realize two things: 1) should not have blown the whistle, but you did, 2) Now what You need to get both right to get the answer right. for those that think "well if you knew it was wrong you wouldn't have blown the whistle", let me spin it slightly: You are the AR, in that end of the field and this happens right infront of you and the CR DOES blow the whistle and tries to award an IFK going in. What are you going to do now? It's a valid question, for those making assumptions - don't - including, don't assume you are the CR As an instructor, I LOVE this question because of the conversations you can have. We do the test in small groups who have to agree on the answer. The fights over this quesiton are great. Funniest one I watched was a BRAND NEW GRADE 8 arguing for a dropped ball against 2 adults who just wouldn't listen to the kid.
The problem here was that the direction wasn't included in the test. That renders the question (and the test) fairly useless. Edit: Re: NHRef - As part of an oral discussion style test I have no issues with the question, it's when the question fails to include the minimum needed information it becomes a problem.
I already explained what this question tests and it is far more than reading comprehension. I will allow you to read and comprehend my previous post so I don't repeat myself. I'm becoming baffled at the repeated claim that the question doesn't give you enough info. It very clearly does as long as you READ. As far as the memorization or teaching value, I think someone has pointed it out already but everyone remembers this question whether you get it right or wrong so the mission is accomplished despite all the grumbling and sour grapes.
I agree with you, but the online testing issue is a whole different ball of wax and this is the risk you take when you remove the human element that an instructor provides. If you like online tests you have to take that risk with the reward, if you don't like online tests, let the state know and maybe things will change.
When I was in fourth grade, they gave us a test where the first item said "Read everything on this page before you do anything else." Subsequent items said stuff like "clap your hands three times," "stand up and say your name out loud," etc. The very last item said "Ignore everything else on this page. Put your pencil down on your desk and fold your hands. You're done." Fourth grade was a LONG time ago, but I've never forgotten it.
BlackBart followed up and said that no such introduction was included. The question was posed as-is. I guess you could say that you should still assume that you must have stopped play, because all of the choices are for restarts, but then that requires you to assume something not explicitly posed in the question. If it were a free-response question, the answer would then be different. In fact, when I've seen this sort of question on exams before, it IS posed as a free-response question, where you are required to write in the restart and for which team, or “none” if there is no violation and play should continue. If the exact same question can have two different answers based on which choices are provided (or not provided) for the answer, it's a bad question.
Does this improve this question? I didn't like this type of question as I always make too many assumptions or see that in certain cases (ie trickery) that the "correct answer" could be different. As one poster suggested, the use of a free response answer could improve this question but free response answers are very difficult with online tests as it typically requires a human read and grade the test/question. Removing the human scoring element is the reason they went to an online test. As to having NONE as an answer, you already blew the whistle and stopped the game. Even if done in error, you must use a restart to get the ball back into play. This is the consequence (restart DB) for your action (whistle in error).