Frequently Asked Questions

Your questions, our answers

WhatsNew:

Breaking News!

Thursday, September 30, 2010

 

 



 

Year end Party bash! 

Click here for event details and to get your reservations in now.


 

CurrentNews:

Current Events

Monday, August 16, 2010


 

The Certification test is posted

Tom O'Brien Memorial fund at Bank of America, account # 0670374784.

 

RecentEvents:

Recent important notes

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

The Certification test has been published. 

demoFrom the main menu, select Training/Classes - Classification Test. 

Only registered members who have paid dues will be able to take this test.

 

 

 

Frequently Asked Questions

Thanks to everyone who has submitted questions about the new career path and rating system.  Dialogue only makes us stronger.
 

Type in your Search Term

 

Q.  In reviewing my beginning of the season ratings I am a little confused. I am rated/ranked in the top 10 as a referee, does this mean top 10 officials in this category, or top 10% of qualified officials who work/assigned as a referee. Now how will this affect assignments on Saturdays and Thursdays if I would rather work a flank position on those days?

  • A: The relative ranking for officials was calculated by weighted averaging based on actual varsity game ratings from the 2009 season.  This means we calculated an average rating for an official from an entire year of game ratings at a position, and then divided that rating by the number of games worked at that position.  Here is an example:  Suppose an official (A) worked one game at Referee, and achieved a 1.0 rating for the game.  That official would have a non-weighted average of 1.0 for the season.  Then another official (B) who worked ten games in a season achieved a season average rating of 1.4.  Without weighting the average, the data would tell us that Official A was a better Referee than Official B.  We felt this was inaccurate, because it did not consider consistent performance indicators.  So we divided the season average by the number of games worked, which yielded an average performance per game worked; therefore, the lower the number, the higher the ranking.  We believe that this was the most objective approach, and yielded a rank distribution that we believe to be, for the most part, in line with assignments from the 2009 season.
    In cases where officials had no game rating data from 2009, we used the rating values that already existed in Arbiter from the previous committee, without any changes, to reflect the relative rank position for an official.
    As for Saturday assignments, our entire football group has been quite vocal over the past 5 years that Saturday assignments should not be driven based entirely on seniority.  In a performance based culture, the highest ranked officials at a given position will have priority for those assignments on any day of the week.  Since Arbiter auto assigns, there won't be an easy way to achieve such an individual preference based assignment on a specific day of the week.  If the group decides that weekend assignments need to be driven by something other than relative ranking, perhaps the assignor will need to take preference into consideration via manual assignment; however, this would become visible to the entire group, as higher ranked officials would not be getting assignments at their normal positions.
Back to Top

Q. Now, as far as officials performing ratings, how can an official who has limited experience on the field be qualified to rate another official if he has no knowledge of that position?

  • A:  Assuming the Instruction Committee and the Classification Committee have done their jobs, the better question may be why can’t an official with fewer years in the group rate an official at any position?  To become a Journeyman Official, an Apprentice must demonstrate adequate knowledge of rules and mechanics via classroom participation and testing, will have been observed as an Apprentice by a Journeymen evaluator to have acceptable mechanics and maturity (which are part of the new rating criteria) over several games, and judged by the full rating committee and group leader to be capable of working a varsity assignment.  Observing an official they can see on the field has no minimum years of experience requirement.  We have no disagreement that an official may not have full knowledge of all positions, but the evaluation criteria cover many more attributes than just the position worked by another official.
Back to Top

Q. What safeguards have you developed for ratings that may not be correct?

  • A:  Statistical Variance and Data Quality Analysis.  We have designed an interim MS Access based ratings system, and have worked with Arbiter to create a weekly download of the rating data every week.  Data Quality is a primary objective of our new methodology, and we will quickly identify officials that are “lazy raters” or out for retribution.  We expect that this process will evolve, but there will be consequences for officials that do not follow rating guidelines, or participate in a proactive way (i.e., just give everyone a “2”).   But beyond that, isn't every rating someone's opinion of how an official worked a particular game, and as such (an opinion) it can be neither correct nor incorrect.
Back to Top

Q. Why are you putting all officials with experience over the threshold number to be classified as " journeyman" in the same category, when there is measurable differences in abilities, knowledge, ( rules and mechanics ) and game experience ( on field snaps )?

  • A. Because NCOA wants to focus on continued performance, and the progress of officials who improve year after year.  We agree that maturity is a significant attribute of overall leadership, but we also believe that officials must demonstrate excellence and continuous high levels of performance year-over-year.  Our direction is to achieve a balance between demonstrated performance and years of experience, with an emphasis on rewarding continuous excellence in performance.
Back to Top

Q/Opinion: What you are telling people that a 30 year officials is equal to a 6 year official, when there are definite differences in these officials.

  • A: We disagree.  We are telling people that do make it to the top is that continued high levels of performance is what will keep them there.  We are also telling all officials that the career path has two directions, and you, as an individual official, have primary responsibility for the evolution of your career.
    The new career path establishes a clear process for Apprentices to evolve into a Journeyman classification.  Once Journeyman classification is attained, the differentiation comes from relative ranking.  Relative ranking is based on demonstrated performance during the year.  Is it possible for a 6 year official to achieve better test scores than a 30 year Journeyman official?  Yes, in fact it has happened for years.  Is it possible for a 6 year Journeyman official to achieve a higher game rating than 30 year Journeyman official?  Yes, absolutely.  Is it possible for a 6 year Journeyman official to get better assignments than a 30 year official?  That is up to the assignor; but the question really is, why would an assignor not put the highest rated Journeyman official on the field?  That is a question that needs to be answered when the time comes, and we will have the data to create the transparency.  And, this approach is exactly what our members have asked the leadership to deliver for several years in a row.
Back to Top

Q. Can I appeal my Initial 2010 Ranking?

  • A. No.  It is time to look forward.  New rating data will drive ranking changes in 2010.
Back to Top

Q. Can I see where others are ranked around me?

  • A. No. We will provide you with the 2009 Rating details we used, but that is all.
Back to Top

Q. Are you saying that all officials can submit a game evaluation?

  • A. All Journeymen officials that work as part of a Varsity Game Crew MUST submit a post game evaluation within 72 hours of game time.
Back to Top

Q. Why allow  a less experienced official evaluate a more experienced official?

  • A. Why not?  To become a Journeyman, an Apprentice must demonstrate sufficient knowledge of our rules and mechanics to the extent that the Classification Committee and Group Leader approve the promotion.
Back to Top

Q. How do we prevent retribution in a game evaluation?

  • A.  Officials WILL NOT be able to view their own game evaluations on Arbiter.  And, all evaluations must be submitted within 72 hours.  Afterwards, evaluations will be downloaded into our rating system, and reported to each official on their ncoafootball.org account.  Lastly, negative comments MUST be supported by written comment.
Back to Top

Q. I am too busy to submit ratings.  What if I don’t want to do them?

  • A. Failure to comply with game rating policy (submitting ratings as required, on time, and with appropriate comments as required) will result in negative consequences, and may impact future assignments.
Back to Top

Q. Can I appeal my Initial 2010 Ranking?

  • A. No.  It is time to look forward.  New rating data will drive ranking changes in 2010.
Back to Top

Q. Everybody knows JSS will ignore the rankings for assignments.  Why are we doing this?

  • A. Because our membership wants us to do this.  This provides the transparency between actual game assignments and how we believe our officials should be assigned.  Everyone will know if we are not aligned.
Back to Top