How to Review an Official
Who Should Review an Official?
There are two ways in which officials seeking certification may be evaluated. The first is the Overview of Officiating Skill (OOS), which is a peer assessment of an official’s strengths and weaknesses. The OOS is a requirement for certification. The second is the Evaluation Form to provide feedback on the official’s performance at an event (game or tournament). This section describes each form in detail to assist people providing evaluations in preparing for and completing these documents.
HOW TO COMPLETE AN OVERVIEW OF OFFICIATING SKILL (OOS)
An Overview of Officiating Skill (OOS) is a long-form evaluation designed to capture an official’s performance over the prior two years. These are the most important part of a certification review process, and the sole evidence of performance for officials wishing to enter the system at Level 1.
NOTE: If you would like to fill out an OOS in a language other than English, email email@example.com in advance and we will try to find a translator.
These are the most important evaluations of an official’s performance. Evaluators should be the people an official seeking certification has worked with the most, and who best understand the official’s officiating.
Overviews of Officiating Skill expire 90 days after submission, so an official seeking certification should complete all of the other application materials, including passing the test and completing the coursework, before having an OOS completed. OOSes are confidential to Certification so an official will only see compiled feedback from these in the overall Certification review summary.
Certification requires a different number of and different types of OOSes for different levels. However, Certification would like the OOSes to come from people in the following roles:
- “One must be written on behalf of a Roller Derby League (not necessarily WFTDA or MRDA member league).” The individual best suited for providing this assessment is a skater who the official seeking certification has officiated over the past two years, or the period of time the official has officiated prior to seeking certification.
- “One must be from a Head Official (Head Referee for referee, Head NSO for an NSO, or a League’s Head Official).” For newer officials who are applying for Recognized or Level 1, the league’s Head Official, or someone who has been a close mentor, would be the best person to complete the OOS. For Certified Officials and officials with significant experience seeking Level 2 or Level 3, this should be written by someone who has observed the official seeking certification for more advanced sanctioned or regulation games, including a frequent Crew Head Official or Tournament Head Official of tournaments officiated.
- “One may be from any additional Official.” The individual best suited for providing this assessment is an official that has worked with the official seeking certification during a significant number of games or scrimmages, and it must be someone different from the “Head Official.” We suggest that this come from someone with whom the official seeking certification has worked as a peer, or from someone who has worked under the official when the official was the Crew Head. For officials applying for Recognized or Level 1, it could also come from a second mentor.
- “One must be from an official who meets one of the following criteria: Staffed at a WFTDA Continental Cup, Playoff, or Championship tournament; THO of an NGB tournament; or is already certified at Level 3.” This requirement is for Level 3 applications only. The individual best suited to submit this OOS is someone who would otherwise be qualified to fill out an OOS as a Head Official or an additional official, but must be a different Official from the individuals selected to provide an assessment in those roles.
All of the above categories are designed to be very broad, in case an official doesn’t have someone that exactly fits a title or category for some reason. As a general rule, an official seeking certification should only ask who can provide meaningful responses to all of the questions, and people should only agree to write an OOS if they feel like they can provide meaningful perspective on the questions for the official seeking certification.
The OOS is designed to take about an hour to complete, but could take longer, and includes the following questions:
- Email Address and Evaluator Name of the person completing the OOS. This is to ensure that the person submitting the evaluation is authorized to do so, to send a receipt confirmation and to follow up in case of a future appeal.
- How Long Have You Been Involved in Roller Derby and in What Capacity?
- In What Capacity Are You Completing This Report? See the above categories of individuals who may submit and OOS. Evaluators should inquire with the official seeking certification to ensure that they select the correct role needed for the certification application, as individuals may qualify for more than one.
- Officiating Identity (if applicable). All Certified Officials who have registered with Certification are listed in a dropdown menu. Please select the official being assessed and if the official is not listed on the form, they need to register before you may complete their OOS.
- How Long Have You Known The Official?
- Positions You Have Observed This Official Perform. Select all that apply to this assessment.
- How would you describe the qualifications and abilities of the Official in these roles? Please complete this question with as much detail as possible.
- What sort of demeanor did the Official display before during and after events? Please complete this question with as much detail as possible.
- How did the Official demonstrate that they were qualified to complete the role(s)? Please complete this question with as much detail as possible.
- Were there any situations in which the Official performed above and beyond your personal expectations? Please complete this question with as much detail as possible.
- Were there any situations that appeared to be challenging for the Official, and how did they handle them? Please complete this question with as much detail as possible.
- Describe a time when the Official appeared to struggle. Did they receive feedback? Were they able to adapt based on that feedback? If yes, how so (please describe)? Please complete this question with as much detail as possible.
- Has the Official demonstrated the ability to organize, communicate, and execute plans? Include examples. Please complete this question with as much detail as possible.
- When in a leadership position during a game, how did the Official give feedback to other Officials? Please complete this question with as much detail as possible. If you have not observed this Official in a leadership role, you may leave this question blank.
- How effectively did the Official communicate with the organizers, teams, and other Officials? Please complete this question with as much detail as possible.
- Did the Official complete all paperwork and reports to the governing body completely and in an appropriate manner? If not, please explain the circumstances. Please complete this question with as much detail as possible.If you have not observed the official’s behavior when they had such a responsibility, go on to the next question.
- What level of certification you are recommending, and is there any additional information you wish to provide that was not covered on this form? Please explain why you are making this recommendation.
- Would you want to work with this Official again? Please rate the extent to which you would want future games to include this Official in this role. On a scale of 1 (Definitely Not) to 5 (Definitely) the assessor is asked to rate the extent to which they would want the official to be staffed in the assessed role(s) in future games. This information is not shared with the official.
How to Complete an Evaluation Form for a Certified Official
The evaluation form is located at: https://www.wftda.org/officiating/certification/evaluate
Anyone involved in an event (game or tournament) may use the Evaluation Form to provide feedback on a Certified Official’s performance at the event. Certified Officials may also choose to provide a self-evaluation!
Certification estimates that an evaluation should take 15 minutes to complete.The evaluation form requests the following information:
- Email Address and Name of the person completing the evaluation. This is to ensure that the person submitting the evaluation is authorized to do so, to send a receipt confirmation and to follow up in case of a future appeal.
- Role in the event of the person completing the evaluation. Options are: CHO (Crew Head Official), THO (Tournament Head Official), Peer Official, Skater/Coach/League Representative, Official Evaluator, or self.
- Official to Evaluate. All Certified Officials who have formally opted in to receive evaluations are listed in a dropdown menu. Please select the official being evaluated and follow instructions on the form if you have issues finding an official. If an official is not listed on the form or the master spreadsheet, they may not have opted in to the system or are not certified. If you wish to contact Certification on an official for whom this system is not available, email firstname.lastname@example.org.
- Shared Performance Analysis. This is a paragraph field in which the evaluator should describe the official’s in-game performance, and how the performance affected the game. This information will be shared with the official being evaluated. The performance analysis is always shared with the official.
- Broader Feedback. In this paragraph field, you can note how performance or conduct shown in this game may have an impact beyond the game in question and should be considered by Certification in the official’s review, even if the specific performance or conduct did not have an effect on this specific game.
- Share Broader Feedback? The evaluator has the option to share the broader feedback with the official. Providing or sharing the broader feedback is not required.
- Would You Want to Work With This Official Again? On a scale of 1 (Definitely Not) to 5 (Definitely) the evaluator is asked to rate the extent to which they would want the official to be staffed in the evaluated role in future games. This information is not shared with the official.
- Type of Evaluation. Indicate if this evaluation applies to a Single Game or to a Multi-game/Tournament. The selection will submit to a page to obtain information for the selected evaluation type:
- Enter the High Seed/Home Team – please type the full name of the league and team, no abbreviations.
- Enter the Low Seed/Away Team – please type the full name of the league and team and do not use abbreviations.
- Date of Game
- Game Status. Select Regulation, Sanctioned or Other Game. WFTDA Strength Factor Challenge and Mock Sanctioned games should be considered sanctioned.
- Roles Fulfilled. Select the role(s) in which the official performed.
- Game Association. Select WFTDA, MRDA, JRDA or Other.
Multi-Game Event or Tournament
- Enter the Event Name.
- Enter the Start Date and End Date of the event.
- Enter the Count of Sanctioned Games and/or the Count of Regulation Games. WFTDA Strength Factor Challenge and Mock Sanctioned games should be considered sanctioned.
- Description of Other Games. For any games evaluated please describe why they don’t fit in the categories above (association, rule changes, etc.) and how many of these games are being evaluated.
- Positions Evaluated. Select the role(s) in which the official performed.
- Teams Involved – Please list the leagues and teams competing in the games evaluated. Do not use abbreviations.
- Game Associations. Select WFTDA, MRDA, JRDA or Other.