Recert test question

Discussion in 'Referee' started by BlackBart, Jan 17, 2013.

  1. NHRef

    NHRef Member+

    Apr 7, 2004
    Southern NH
    Had not thought of that. However, I'd fall back onto test taking 101: if it's not in there, it didn't happen, so in this case, it's your every day vanilla head, no trickery, but you do have a valid point. What if the words were something like "during the normal run of play a red defender heads....."
     
  2. Rufusabc

    Rufusabc Member+

    May 27, 2004
    If you are following the other thread (about the site with the quizzes) you would know that all of these questions have about five different answers!!! All of them defendable. :):):)
     
  3. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    Nor does it say whether the defender pushed an attacker out of the way to get the ball (maybe PK is the right answer!), nor whether the ball was already in the goal and the defender got it out and headed it to the keeper (a kickoff!), nor whether another attacker punched another attacker in the nose outside the PA (a DFK!) . . . . if there are no facts in the question that suggest trickery, there is no trickery in the question . . . don't add stuff to questions or you go down the rabbit hole . . .
     
  4. Thezzaruz

    Thezzaruz Member+

    Jun 20, 2011
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Sweden
    As I said earlier, the question as posed is certainly answerable but there is still issues with it.

    One thing is, as been mentioned, how did the ball come to the player that headed it. As that is the critical bit of info referees need when faced with such a situation in a game it is rather stupid to leave it out. And because it is the critical bit of info needed to know if an offence has taken place or not I can see why people gets a bit stumped by it being missing.

    Another thing is the somewhat forced "you've stopped play" preamble. Most people taking such a test wouldn't find anything that they would stop play for and by being forced, by the preamble, into having stopped play many will search for a reason to having stopped play. Basic psychology makes it easier to assume there is missing info in the question that would make the stoppage logical (such as trickery as is an available option due to the point above) than assuming that they themselves have made a mistake

    And the fact that the test takers are being forced into a first person perspective of the situations will not make it easier as most people will, mainly subconsciously I guess, try to make up the info that they don't get from the question but certainly would have if they had faced the situation IRL in any way they can, be it by asking an examiner, making assumptions (that are entirely possible in the given situation) or simply making stuff up. It is again basic psychology but could possibly be prevented by posing the questions from a viewers/onlooker perspective instead as people can much easier accept that they don't know what the person they are looking at sees, thinks or assumes than that they wouldn't know what they themselves sees, thinks or assumes.

    There is also the fact that the "you've stopped play" bit is pretty unclear as to exactly when play is stopped and that is a factor that can make much of a difference (not so much in this case perhaps) and that is, once again, a bit of info that the test taker wouldn't have been the least bit uncertain about in a real life situation.
     
  5. QuietCoach

    QuietCoach Member

    Jul 19, 2011
    Littleton, MA
    OK, I'll bite.

    My biggest problem with this question is that it presents a fact (you have stopped play) that implies ITOOR there is a reason to stop play. Nothing in the question suggests the referee's opinion may change. In order for the question not to feel like a trick, it needs a connecting phrase like "after reflection". A second problem is that there is no indication of whether or not trickery was involved, which would be one obvious way to resolve the logical dissonance. Both problems could be avoided by adding a final sentence:

    Upon consultation, your AR saw it the same way, adding that the pass to the goalkeeper involved no trickery. What is the proper restart?

    This information makes the question a more fair test of knowledge. Clever test-takers will pick up that consulting the AR opens the door to new information and creates time to reconsider whether there was any violation at all.

    - QC
     
  6. NHRef

    NHRef Member+

    Apr 7, 2004
    Southern NH
    The problem I have with all that is that it is spoon feeding you the situation. Remember this is NOT the entry level test, so refs are not newbies. The question is really asking you two things which is probably the root of the issue. We've all made a call, then gone "oh crap that's not right", that's what this question is trying to get at without spoon feeding you the situation.

    As for the "how did it get to the head" I'd argue it's basic test taking and reading comprehension, it's not there, so there's nothing else to add. Yes this takes an assumption, which is why I'd suggest chaning it to something like "a defender heads a bouncing ball...." that should remove that ambiguity.
    This is something I never thought of, and in watching others take the tests, none have asked. But that's why I posted, I don't see a problem with the question, want to know why it bothers some, to come up with suggestions to fix what I consider a good question, we should NOT be spoon feeding the question, so pointing out, in teh quesiton that it is a mistake to have stopped, bypasses part of why I like the question.
     
  7. QuietCoach

    QuietCoach Member

    Jul 19, 2011
    Littleton, MA
    I actually considered and rejected several other possible wordings for the reason you state: they seemed to give away the fact that it was a mistake. I settled on "Your AR saw it the same way" because that does NOT spoon feed the fact that it was a bad call. The phrase emphasizes that there is nothing more to the situation than was already described. This is what happened. Your AR saw it too. What now?

    One could combine your suggestion (heading the bouncing ball) with mine (AR saw it the same way). Or the question could be fixed in many other ways, such as putting the reader in the role of an AR or a mentor. "You are an AR, and the inexperienced referee looks to you for advice on the proper restart in the following 6 situations."

    - QC
     
  8. Law5

    Law5 Member+

    Mar 24, 2005
    Beaverton OR
    NHRef is correct. In March, USSF will roll out new instructional materials for grades 9, 8 and 7 entry level clinics. That is all that is changing at the present time. Grade 6 instructional materials are still in process.
     
  9. Law5

    Law5 Member+

    Mar 24, 2005
    Beaverton OR
    I do not have any input on the USSF tests. Please do not blame "instructors" or your SDI. They don't have input either. I don't think that anyone on this forum has actual knowledge of how USSF creates and reviews their tests, despite some people's assertions that they know what is or is not happening.

    I do not claim that the tests are perfect. I have found errors and had them corrected. Life goes on. If you need that one or two points in order to pass, maybe you should try getting the right answer on some of the other questions that are not in error or particularly confusing. "The question was confusing" seems to be the standard answer when someone gets the answer wrong. People don't want to admit that they just didn't know the answer. And maybe the question was confusing to them because they are confused about what the correct answer is for this situation, as opposed to some other situation that they half remember from the book.

    I write most of the questions on the NFHS test. It is hard to get enough questions that are distributed over appropriate topics (e.g. you don't want 100 questions that are all on the field markings) but not repetitious or too challenging or too easy. Sometimes, you have to rewrite the question several times to be clear about what's happened. I also try to avoid questions that are strictly about "the book says...." but I can't avoid it on certain topics. Offside knowledge is very difficult to test in written form! I run new questions past a handful of experienced referees but even they do not catch all of the errors. I had one last year that got all of the way through the system, where I had used the wrong word in the question. Sorry. 15 lashes with a wet noodle. Trying to write the perfect, flawless test is like trying to never make a mistake as a referee. It's an ideal but it doesn't happen in real life.
     
  10. camconcay

    camconcay Member+

    Atlanta United
    United States
    Feb 17, 2011
    Georgia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    Just my opinion/thoughts - it isn't so much that perfection is expected, but to have an open mind when another point of view comes up. you said you have found errors and corrected them which is great. There is also an opportunity to see a question from another point of view that sometimes is not done (not saying you particularly but you as in test writers or question defenders as it were).

    It is kind of like when I am thinking about something all day, and when I get home I ask my wife a question about it. She probably knows something about it, but I have not given her a days worth of context and since I have been thinking about it all day, I know EXACTLY what I mean, and EXACTLY what my "right" answer or response is and expect her to give that to me. When she doesn't I start trying to figure out how to get her to see I am right or see it from exactly my point of view.

    So the test maker spends a TON of time making the test, and they have spend a TON of time trying to lay the question out the very best it can be. They try to think of every angle and possibility and often cover everything. However, sometimes not and like my example they do not seem to be very open to another point of view or possibility and instead defend the question from their point of view as they perfectly understand the scenario as they created it. They know what they meant and how it should be perceived so when another perception is advanced, they try to get you to see what they meant (not that their view is wrong, but from the other view the question could be interpreted differently and have a different right answer).
     
  11. NHRef

    NHRef Member+

    Apr 7, 2004
    Southern NH
    Pulling this piece out for comment (though I swore I was done with this topic)!

    YOu say the "test writers" don't listen. Well how do you know? The test writers aren't on this forum. Those of us defending the question are probably instructors. We have a slight advantage over the everyday ref, in that we've seen/read/answered questions on these tests over and over.

    My view on these are along the lines of they may be unclear, but often times they are unclear because the reader makes more out of it than is there. The goal of a question is to tell what happened, not explain what didn't happen. Explaining a negative, or a set of things that didn't happen, is an endless chore. Take the question at face value, don't complicate it with "what if", for example the infamous "headed ball" question we've been discussing, someone pointed out you don't know how the ball got to the players head. Perfectly valid because it can make a difference, but if they were trying to get you down the thought process of trickery, they would have put words in to that effect, they didn't, so no trickery involved.

    As Law 5 implied: ya need a 75% (or 85% if you're a G7). That's 25 (or 15) questions wrong. If you are at the point that you need that one point, there's others areas of weakness to address.

    I believe people here are saying "they don't listen", my point is, have you tried talking to "they"? If you don't know who, try your SDI, see if he will bring it up hill. If you don't know who the SDI is, go to www.ussoccer.com, they're all listed there. There are communications paths to the right people, they are not always that clear how, but they are there. Venting on here, while "fun" doesn't resolve the problem
     
  12. Rufusabc

    Rufusabc Member+

    May 27, 2004
    What percentage of referees are Type A personalties? 75% maybe. What percentage of referees who inhabit this board are Type A? 103%!

    My point is the guys that inhabit this board are always going to pass the test. And they strive to get them all correct. So, when they don't they need to find out why. And sometimes the why is a poorly worded question. And sometimes they re-study an arcane section of the ATR. The fury over a poorly worded question is equal to the fury of not knowing the arcane section of the ATR.

    Ain't nobody who peoples this board getting a 75.

    If 70 percent get the question wrong, something is wrong with the question. So, the question needs to be fixed. That's pretty easy.
     
  13. Rufusabc

    Rufusabc Member+

    May 27, 2004
    And one more thing to reiterate....if there is a previous question on a test that involved the referee incorrectly stopping play, then the test taker in all likelihood will be looking out for any other questions that are similar in tone.
     
  14. Law5

    Law5 Member+

    Mar 24, 2005
    Beaverton OR
    Sorry, but no. I will agree that maybe the problem is with the question, but not always. I looked at the NFHS test questions most missed by our state's referees last year. Some of the questions with over 45% wrong answers were straight quoting out of the book questions. The most missed question, over 75% wrong, was a multiple choice where most referees chose an answer that is simply not in the rule book. Essentially, they made up a requirement that doesn't exist. That isn't a problem with the question. That's a problem with not remembering what the rule book actually says.
     
  15. Rafal Wlazlo

    Rafal Wlazlo Member

    Jan 22, 2013
    New York, NY
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This goes beyond recert tests. Let me give you an example of a national test question I find a bit tricky..

    Question:
    After 15 minutes of play, the ball is found to weigh less than 15oz (or just under 430g). Should the referee change the ball?
    Answers:
    A. Yes
    B. No
    C. It is the decision of the referee
    D. Yes, unless another ball is not available
     
  16. camconcay

    camconcay Member+

    Atlanta United
    United States
    Feb 17, 2011
    Georgia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    As a matter of fact I have had the opportunity to DIRECTLY correspond with the test maker and I was DIRECTLY told how I was wrong with no consideration for the point I was trying to make. I made a 93 on the state test, I didn't need any points to pass. I DID need to know why I was wrong in my thinking on the test so that I would hopefully not be wrong on the field. 4 questions I readily messed up, another I mis interpreted, and the two I specifically asked the test writer about I got a scenario that I tried to convey here.

    Since you assumed I had no contact with the test writers, and you assumed I needed points, and therefore railed me for a post maybe you could do to listen (or read) a bit better and not assume I was trying to vent here while not taking any steps to correct the situation.

    Also you need an 80 on the state test in Georgia to upgrade to a 7 so you assumed the math wrong as well, at least for me and my situation.

    BTW - the problem as lowly little grade 8 me sees it is that I was not asking or expecting you or anyone to defend the question. I was asking why answer x was "right" and why my selected answer was wrong in light of the point of view I laid out. In my specific situation my instructor agreed with me and thought the test might have been wrong. He gave me a state contact who gave me the test writer name and email. As I stated elsewhere I am VERY grateful the test writer took his time to read and reply to my inquiry. The response was a defense of the question and answer and detailed why I was wrong. It did not take into consideration the point I was trying to make thus my attempt above to explain what I thought might be the case. Well enough, I adapted my thinking to what he explained as the right answer and I will not mess those two situations up on the field (nor will I miss it on the test again).
     
  17. meyers

    meyers Member

    Jun 11, 2003
    W. Mass
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Even if you have everything in the question, it's still a poor question. Answerable? sure, but still poor. Making a student "assume" they've done something wrong to get to an answer is no way to test or teach.
     
  18. Rafal Wlazlo

    Rafal Wlazlo Member

    Jan 22, 2013
    New York, NY
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Isn't there a test review at the following or the same meeting??? It was always the case after I took the state exam..
     
  19. camconcay

    camconcay Member+

    Atlanta United
    United States
    Feb 17, 2011
    Georgia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    yes - as I typed the instructor felt the test could be wrong and referred me to a state contact who referred me directly to the test writer.
     
  20. Law5

    Law5 Member+

    Mar 24, 2005
    Beaverton OR
    But, as you know, it is an on-line test and, therefore, open book, open friend, and it is the National test, not the grade 8 test, and I, at least, expect a National to know the Laws at this level of detail. Mine did.
     
  21. NHRef

    NHRef Member+

    Apr 7, 2004
    Southern NH
    I keep going back to the question that started this topic, that's the one I am defending. Is it perfect? Nope, but if you read it, everything is there.

    Are there piss poor questions? Yes. There was one on the exam we used last year. It was worded so vague by refering to "red player in the penalty area" problem was you didn't have a clue what penalty area and nohting in the question helped. As the instructor I couldn't answer it, or clarify it, until I looked at the answer (power of hte instructor, we have the answer!), I then told the class, fixed the test and off we went.

    So, yes, it happens.
     
  22. MetroFever

    MetroFever Member+

    Jun 3, 2001
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    Croatia
    There is. At the NJ recert, they did not go over all of the questions since the online testing period is still going on. However, they did go over the most common questions folks got wrong.

    One of them is the question 74% of folks got wrong that is being discussed here. Anyone with any common sense would say, "gee, if that many folks got a simple question wrong, maybe we could have it reworded". To the credit of the two gentlemen running the recertification, they admitted this and that at least one other question was poorly worded. As a hint, one of the two instructors was a Grade 3 who has been your AR in matches. ;)

    So if someone at that level is admitting there is faulty wording, to me it is comical that here there are still a handful of folks still coming onto the boards to this day defending the verbiage by saying basically "well, there was still sufficient info to answer the question".

    I have noticed that they did improve the wording on this year's recert as perhaps they have been perceptive to feedback from referees. But the stubborn attitude we are seeing here from some ("Yeah, but it's still answerable...") is troubling and probably shared by those who have had a say in the wording of previous test questions.
     
    NBTHOMCCC repped this.
  23. Gary V

    Gary V Member+

    Feb 4, 2003
    SE Mich.
    One of the advantages presented to us for going to an online test was that they could compile the results, and focus discussion on the questions that more people got wrong.

    Unfortunately we didn't go over any of the test questions. Instead we were treated to words of wisdom such as, "If the player himself benefits from it, it's always handling." But I digress ...

    Part of the value of the test is learning what you got wrong, why you got it wrong, and how to not get it wrong on the field.
     
  24. camconcay

    camconcay Member+

    Atlanta United
    United States
    Feb 17, 2011
    Georgia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Another tricky wording as this says second touch so the kicker had to have touched it, along with the corner flag which is considered an outside agent I guess per the test answers. 62% of test takers said 2 test says correct answer is 1.
    As worded this would be simultaneous infractions so doesn't the worst get penalized? IFK for the opposing team and not a dropped ball.
     
  25. Thezzaruz

    Thezzaruz Member+

    Jun 20, 2011
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Sweden
    How would this ever be a DB??? Either you consider touching the flag as a procedural infraction (which IMO would be wrong as the ball is in play by that time) and award a re-take or you penalise the second touch violation and award an IDFK.


    I don't see why this would be considered a simultaneous offence situation tbh, the two incidents quite clearly happens sequentially. And even if you for some reason considered them simultaneous a DB is still not an option (as you need two opposing players for that).
     

Share This Page