USFA Election 2008 Debate Question #3: Referee Development

[seak]

doh I need to spread some around too

[Peach]

Taken care of.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by bigdawg2121

Rep to Ian when I've spread it around enough.

Also, given the fact that an action begun correctly while on the strip may end with one foot off the strip, there's no real meter losing to worry about.

I don't know what the devil Ian is talking about. I am talking about stepping off the strip, a part of the question under discussion. That is a limited set, consisting of several but not infinite possibilities: Stepping off to avoid a touch ( any location ), stepping off the back of the strip, stepping off the side in the middle of the strip, and stepping off toward the rear of the strip. In vain I look for any sign of meteors in the rule book.

Which of these has happened matters to your question, which was "How many points awarded?".

I think Ian must have been smoking something.

[tchwojko]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

I don't know what the devil Ian is talking about. I am talking about stepping off the strip, a part of the question under discussion.

That is quite a feat of combining a total lack of imagination with an overactive one.

[Inquartata]

You are just imagining that.

[downunder]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Does his counter land before or after he steps off? It makes a difference.

Not with only one foot off it doesn't...

[Inquartata]

Really? You can begin a counterattack with one foot off the strip?

[KD5MDK]

There's a difference between "begin" and "land". You used the second term in the post he was replying to, and the first one just now. If you can't tell them apart, I have a clue why you can't pass the test.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

I've read this whole thread and I still can't get over the fact that Inq is complaining that a test, where every question and answer choice is given to you before hand, is too hard. Honestly, if you over think everything so much (which you obviously do), then maybe you should just ask someone to go over the questions you don't know beforehand. Then you can memorize the test and pass. Can you imagine if exams in college where this easy? Everyone would have a 4.0, yet you're still complaining about how hard it is. It's dumbfounding.

[Peach]

Originally Posted by KShan5[PrFC]

I've read this whole thread and I still can't get over the fact that Inq is complaining that a test, where every question and answer choice is given to you before hand, is too hard. Honestly, if you over think everything so much (which you obviously do), then maybe you should just ask someone to go over the questions you don't know beforehand. Then you can memorize the test and pass. Can you imagine if exams in college where this easy? Everyone would have a 4.0, yet you're still complaining about how hard it is. It's dumbfounding.

Um . . . no. As a teacher, I can tell you that students often do worse when they have the questions & answers ahead of time.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Originally Posted by Peach

Um . . . no. As a teacher, I can tell you that students often do worse when they have the questions & answers ahead of time.

My guess would be because of overconfidence, not how hard the exam is. Kids think they don't have to study as much because they assume it's going to be easier than it is. If you have a true desire to pass a test, with a rule book and a referee handbook to guide you to the answers for questions you already have (along with every possible answer choice so as to not trick during the test) you should be able to pass the test easily. Not to mention you're allowed to ask whomever you want for the right answer to the question beforehand.

This of course is disregarding that the questions generally are not out to trick you, and that if you know the rulebook you should be able to get through most of the test anyways.

[Inquartata]

Frankly I'm confident that the questions are not intended to be tricky or ambiguous. But writing a test question is harder than you'd think, and these are good examples.

Whoever wrote those had good intentions, but not the best skills...

[Peach]

Originally Posted by KShan5[PrFC]

My guess would be because of overconfidence, not how hard the exam is. Kids think they don't have to study as much because they assume it's going to be easier than it is. If you have a true desire to pass a test, with a rule book and a referee handbook to guide you to the answers for questions you already have (along with every possible answer choice so as to not trick during the test) you should be able to pass the test easily. Not to mention you're allowed to ask whomever you want for the right answer to the question beforehand.

This of course is disregarding that the questions generally are not out to trick you, and that if you know the rulebook you should be able to get through most of the test anyways.

It certainly may be partly overconfidence, but keep in mind that having the answers beforehand also leads people to memorize rather than internalize--the old "cramming" method--a method which, while it sticks for a little while. does not result in effective long-term learning. Not knowing the exact format of the question or the answer means that the student has to act on the information--transform it, rewrite it, reproduce it in many different ways--and therefore make it part of his or her long term memory. Therefore a student who has crammed encounters the question and can't retrieve a memorized answer, while a student who has studied and applied the rules in context and in many different ways, without knowing how the question will be phrased exactly, has the advantage of being able to draw on a more nuanced knowledge of the rules which will allow him or her to figure it out.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Frankly I'm confident that the questions are not intended to be tricky or ambiguous. But writing a test question is harder than you'd think, and these are good examples.

Whoever wrote those had good intentions, but not the best skills...

I'd disagree, I'd say the majority of the questions are pretty straight forward.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Originally Posted by Peach

It certainly may be partly overconfidence, but keep in mind that having the answers beforehand also leads people to memorize rather than internalize--the old "cramming" method--a method which, while it sticks for a little while. does not result in effective long-term learning. Not knowing the exact format of the question or the answer means that the student has to act on the information--transform it, rewrite it, reproduce it in many different ways--and therefore make it part of his or her long term memory. Therefore a student who has crammed encounters the question and can't retrieve a memorized answer, while a student who has studied and applied the rules in context and in many different ways, without knowing how the question will be phrased exactly, has the advantage of being able to draw on a more nuanced knowledge of the rules which will allow him or her to figure it out.

Agreed. But we're not talking about learning the material. I'm just saying I find it a little ridiculous that someone claims this test (where the questions are already known, with all possible answer choices, with a text, an explanation of the text [handbook] and unlimited amount of time to confer with others) is too hard.