As we move towards finals, I would like to continue the process of assisting our CGBs in ‘getting it right’ so that our finals appointments reflect the importance of each of the games.
As a CGB, we often see our core purpose being a mix between:
- Coaching
- Assessing, and
- Grading.
Coaching
Is an ongoing process designed to help the referee gain greater competence and overcome barriers to improving performance.
Differs from training, which is a structured process to provide referees with the knowledge, skills and fitness to perform effectively.
Is appropriate when the person has the ability and knowledge but he or she has not met expectations.
Involves a change in behaviour.
The idea is to move the referee from where he or she is to where you want him or her to be.
Coaching can be conducted by a senior / experienced referee or mentor.
Ideally, this would be done by somebody who has at least Level 1 Referee Coach accreditation.
It can be an informal process.
Assessing
Performance assessment is a tool for evaluating a referee’s knowledge and understanding and if they’re able to apply that knowledge in specific situations.
Performance assessment often is used to identify the best methods for assisting referees through their development.
Assessing provides us with greater understanding of ‘where’ the referee is at in their development and what coaching strategies might assist in moving them forward.
Assessments can be conducted by experienced referee coaches.
This is a more formal process than coaching.
Ideally, this would be done by somebody who has at least Level 2 Referee Coach accreditation.
Grading
The goal of grading performance assessment is to arrive at an accurate and meaningful indicator of each referee’s level of achievement on tasks they have had to exhibit.
Doing this fairly and accurately, however, often raises lots of questions.
We grade our referees (in the lead up to finals time) to be able to appoint the appropriate referee to the appropriate game.
In grading our referees, we need to be aware that we grade referees within their ‘groups’ based on their experience and comparing ‘like’ referees. i.e. we don’t grade our senior referees in the same ‘group’ as our junior/less experienced referees.
Grading should be done by a select ‘band’ of assessors, They should take into account all of the information available from coached and assessors.
So, how do we grade our referees using our current processes and resources?
Using the Likert scale on RefReview:
1 – Not shown
2 – Needs Attention
3 – Competent
4 – Good
5 – Excelling
Can these somehow be used to ‘score’ a referees performance?
We can certainly make appropriate comments in the 4S&I sections of RefReview.
Referee assessment conversations between coaches and assessors.
What about Law and those key events in a game, and how the referee handled them? How do we record these so they can be taken into account and assessed for grading?
Remember we need to take into account the level of experience of the referee for any system to work. We must have an idea of the level of game and which ‘groups’ of referees are likely to be appointed to each level of game.
Most importantly, referees need to be told of their grading and why they are graded at that level / rank. Ideally, this would be done prior to finals games so that they might be able to work with coaches to improve performance before finals time.
Remember, across our associations and zones, what will work for one, may not work for another. This might be due to the size of the Association, the experience of referees, the number of coaches and/or assessors, how the CGB is set up.