Training Regional and National Assessors

1
Training Regional and NationalAssessors
2
Introduction
3
Assessor Training Competencies

• Plan and organise an assessment process
• Assess the competence of a candidate
• General skills
• Knowing the WSF Guidelines for Regional and
  National Assessors

4
How will you be assessed?

• Practical Assessment
• Completion of Course Exercises

5
General
6
Responsibilities of the Assessor

• Confidentiality and privacy
• Anti-discrimination
• Conflict of interest
• WSF Code of Conduct

7
Standards

• Standards to apply when assessing
• See Guidelines for WSF Assessors

8
Planning the Assessment Process
Module 1
9
Evidence

• Evidence is information which, when matched
  against the relevant criteria, provides proof of
  whether the candidate is competent or not
• There must be sufficient evidence to decide if
  the candidate has reached the required level of
  competence
• Candidate to be advised if evidence is lacking
  and how the candidate might satisfy the
  requirements

10
Non-discrimination

• Assessment process is fair and adaptable to
  individuals
• No discrimination on the basis of physical
  disability, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual
  orientation or language
• No personal bias by the Assessor

11
Special needs

• Flexibility in the case of special needs, such
  as
• Gallery access for disabled candidate
• Allowing for language barriers

12
Using Assessment Teams

• Assessment by more than one Assessor can add
  weight to the assessment decision
• Need to resolve beforehand
• The roles of each member of the team
• How the assessment decision will be reached
• How difference of opinion will be handled
  majority decision or Lead Assessors decision
• How feedback will be given as a team summary
  by one team member, or by each member

13
Assessing Competence
Module 2
14
Creating a Supportive Environment

• Show consideration and regard for the candidate
• Evaluate performance not personality
• Communicate clearly and effectively with the
  candidate in a friendly manner
• Respect the candidates right to have a views
  different to the Assessor

15
(cont)
Creating a Supportive Environment

• The Assessor should behave such as to make the
  candidate believe the Assessor will be just and
  fair, including by
• Remaining out of the candidates view while
  assessing
• Focusing attention on the candidate while
  providing feedback
• Ensuring that the circumstances will allow the
  candidate to perform satisfactorily

16
Creating a supportive environment
Exercise 1
17
Making an Overall Judgement

• The stages in making an assessment judgement are
• Follow the Guidelines for WSF Assessors when
  completing the practical assessment form, then
• Make the decision as to whether the necessary
  competence has been achieved

18
Making an Overall Judgement
(cont)

• The decision will include a degree of informed,
  subjective judgement based on evidence
• The Assessor must document the reasons for the
  decision
• If a final decision cant be reached, the
  candidate will be required to undergo further
  assessment

19
Communication in theAssessment Process

• Communication is a two-way process
• Provide clear instructions in language
  appropriate to the candidate
• Look and listen for indications that the
  candidate is listening and comprehending
• Encourage candidates to ask questions, either
  during explanations or at the end

20
Using Questioning during Assessment

• Plan questions before the assessment
• Plan some follow up questions
• Dont get side tracked by the candidates
  responses
• Ensure questions and answers are relevant
• Try not to interrupt the flow of the discussion.

21
Listening and Responding

• Maintain eye contact
• Listen attentively
• Adopt an open, relaxed posture
• Use nods, smiles and phrases like I see, go
  on, hmm

22
Common Assessment Problems

• Halo Effect - making decisions about a candidate
  based on previous behaviour rather than current
  performance
• First Impression making a decision early in the
  assessment, colouring the assessors later
  judgement
• Contrast Effect - the quality of preceding
  candidates affects assessments made for later
  candidates
• Stereotyping - judgements made about a
  candidates personal characteristics rather than
  performance
• Similar to Me - candidates are judged favourably
  because they have similar characteristics or work
  methods to the assessor

23
Common Assessment Problems
(cont)

• Giving more weight to positives than negatives -
  when a candidate performs unexpectedly well in
  some aspect, the assessor may have excessive
  expectations of the candidate for the rest of the
  assessment
• Experimental Effect - the presence of the
  assessor may affect the outcome of the assessment
• Tall Poppy Syndrome - a candidate may be known to
  have exceptional ability and more weight is given
  to very small errors or differences

24
Giving Feedback

• Choose an appropriate time and private place
• Provide honest, fair, clear and constructive
  feedback
• Encourage candidates to assess their own
  performance (not when performance has been poor
  and the candidate fails to recognise this)
• Focus on performance, not personal characteristics

25
Giving Feedback
(cont)

• Use the sandwich technique
• Outline positive achievements
• Give constructive feedback on gaps or errors
• Finish with a supportive statement
• Be confident, particularly with a Not Yet
  Competent decision based on proper assessment
  process

26
Giving Feedback
(cont)

• Offer suggestions for future goals/training
  opportunities
• Encourage questions and discuss the assessment
  decision
• Give the candidate time to read and sign the
  assessment sheet
• Give the candidate a copy of the assessment
  sheet, including constructive feedback

27
Assessment scenario
Exercise 2
28
Encouraging Not Yet Competent Candidates

• Be precise about gaps in competence
• Suggest strategies for further learning or
  practice to fill gaps
• Be positive without raising false expectations
• Arrange opportunities for further experience or
  and mentoring before re-assessment

29
Reasons for Dissatisfaction with Feedback

• Feeling uncomfortable with face-to-face
  communication
• Assessor and candidate not skilled in giving and
  receiving feedback
• Assessor and candidate believe too much time and
  energy expended with little result
• Candidates perceive little gain from the process

30
Tips for Giving Feedback

• Encourage openness
• Praise good work
• Make feedback timely
• Keep comment impersonal and related to
  officiating
• Focus on specific tasks

• Ensure comment is clear and understood
• Be honest
• Support negative feedback with data
• Link negative feedback to actions for improvement

31
Tips for Receiving Feedback

• Listen objectively without interrupting
• Take feedback as advice, not personal attack
• Summarise feedback

• Take a problem solving approach
• Ask for suggestions for improvement
• Thank the Assessor
• Practice to improve

32
Not yet competent discussion
Exercise 3
33
Recording Assessment Results

• Assessors should keep records to clarify queries
  or appeals that may arise
• The candidate has a right to receive a copy of
  the assessment
• Original assessment sheet is forwarded to the WSF
  Office within 1 week of the end of the event.

34
WSF Guidelines forRegional and National Assessors
35
Applying the Guidelines
While the assessment of a candidates performance
is always dependent on the judgement of the
Assessor, Assessors are required to follow these
guidelines in reaching their overall assessment.
Where an Assessor decides not to apply a specific
guideline, this must be documented (with reasons)
on the assessment form.
36
Key to Incorrect Decisions
37
Key to Incorrect Decisions

• Marginal Difference applies to a situation
  where the candidates decision is different to
  that of the Assessor but within an acceptable
  limit.
• Incorrect Decision the decision is clear to the
  Assessor, but the candidate gives a different
  decision
• Totally Wrong Decision the candidate completely
  misinterprets the situation and gives a totally
  wrong decision

38
Example- Marginal Difference

• On a close call the referee awards a let, but the
  Assessor would have given a stroke. However, on
  the first occasion in a particular situation when
  the referee gives a decision which is marginally
  different from the Assessors, the Assessor
  should note that decision but not mark it as
  Marginally Different at that point Then
• If this decision is the only one made in this
  situation during the match, the Assessor should
  mark it as Marginally Different at the end of the
  match

39
Example- Marginal Difference
(cont)

• If the candidate makes more decisions in this
  situation during the match, and is consistent in
  giving the same decision as on the first
  situation, the Assessor should consider marking
  all of these as being correct or
• If the candidate is inconsistent, the Assessor
  should mark all decisions that are different from
  the Assessors as at least Marginally Different.

40
Example Incorrect Decision

• The referee awards a let when the strikers
  backswing is clearly prevented, but the Assessor
  would have (correctly) awarded a stroke. Unlike
  a Marginal Difference, if a referee consistently
  makes Incorrect Decisions in the same situation,
  the Assessor should mark all of these incorrect

41
Examples Totally Wrong Decision

• An interference situation demands that the
  referee award either a let or (possibly) a
  stroke, but the referee awards a no let
• The referee applies the wrong rule, such as
  applying the injury rule when there is blood
• The referee misinterprets a rule, such as
  allowing 1 hour to recover from an injury after
  first ruling the opponents play was dangerous
  and imposing a conduct warning

42
Knows the Rules
43
Interference Decisions
44
Other Decisions
45
Demonstrate Consistency
46
Understand the Game
47
Recognise Tactics
48
Demonstrate Control
49
Communicate Effectively
50
National Referee Exceeding Standard

• Where an Assessor determines that a National
  Referee has exceeded the required standard
  against most competencies, the Assessor may also
  choose to fill in Rules Interpretation
  Decision-Making Regional Standard before the
  assessment sheet is signed. It will provide the
  candidate and the Regional federation with more
  specific information on the candidates
  performance against the Regional standard and
  areas requiring improvement before that standard
  is reached.

51
Description of the Match

• The Assessors judgement of the level of
  difficulty of the match is crucial in gaining an
  overall appraisal of the candidates performance
• If the match was very one-sided, or if there were
  comparatively few decisions, or if most of the
  decisions were straightforward, this should
  result in the Assessors designating the match as
  easier than the required standard
• In assessing the difficulty of the match,
  Assessors need to pay attention to the quality of
  the players, their behaviour on court, and the
  importance of the match

52
Description of the Match
(cont)

• A guideline for a match that meets Regional or
  National standard of difficulty might be one that
  lasts at least four games and in which the
  candidate had to make at least 25 decisions, of
  which a significant number were difficult rather
  than easy

53
Position of the Referee and Assessor

• Excellent in the position prescribed by the
  Rules, immediately over the back wall, or on an
  overlooking balcony.
• Reasonable seated in the audience in a central
  position (in line with the T) no more than 15
  feet (4.5 metres) from the back wall and raised
  sufficiently to permit the officials a good view
  of the action on court.
• Not Reasonable further back from the court
  and/or without sufficient elevation.

54
Assessors Summary

• The Assessor should fill in the Assessors
  Summary section prior to discussing the
  assessment with the candidate
• After discussion, the Assessor should fill in the
  Receptive to Feedback section and the Final
  Comments section, prior to signing and having the
  candidate sign.

55
Final Assessment