PGA/USGA Rules of Golf Workshops

[Dormie1360]

The 2013 schedule is now available.

http://www.usga.org/news/2012/September/2013-PGA/USGA-Workshops-On-The-Rules-of-Golf/

[ev780]

So I just sat through the 3 1/2 day seminar.  Not sure why but I have that kind of time on my hands.  The presentations were mediocre at best.   Basically just read the rules to us one by one.  A few video enhancements here and there but not at all what I expected.  This course is stuck in the past.  It could really use an update to more modern teaching techniques such as case studies, group activities and try to teach critical thinking skills rather than try to memorize and regurgitate.

I am a good student and an exceptional test taker, at least in my other endeavors, but I bombed this test.  78% if you must know.  Could not get my brain around the logic of the test questions and how they want us to think through application of the rules.  I don't think any professional educators were involved in the design of the course or the test!

Mostly this was a therapeutic post as I was disappointed in my test but did any one else have experiences with this class?

[Fourputt]

So I just sat through the 3 1/2 day seminar.  Not sure why but I have that kind of time on my hands.  The presentations were mediocre at best.   Basically just read the rules to us one by one.  A few video enhancements here and there but not at all what I expected.  This course is stuck in the past.  It could really use an update to more modern teaching techniques such as case studies, group activities and try to teach critical thinking skills rather than try to memorize and regurgitate.

I am a good student and an exceptional test taker, at least in my other endeavors, but I bombed this test.  78% if you must know.  Could not get my brain around the logic of the test questions and how they want us to think through application of the rules.  I don't think any professional educators were involved in the design of the course or the test!

Mostly this was a therapeutic post as I was disappointed in my test but did any one else have experiences with this class?

I've attended 2 workshops in the past (the last one was 5 or 6 years ago), and enjoyed both.  I'm not sure how you could really cover all of the material and still have time to break down a class of 100 into "group activities".  We did do such a breakdown on the third afternoon and went out on the course for some problem exercises, mostly on the common issues like how to find the NPR in different situations, and how to take relief from various obstacles.  I did somewhat better on the exams, scoring 80% the first time and 85% the second.

[wadesworld]

I just attended one and I didn't feel the same way.

I thought the grouping of rules into related sections was quite useful, as were the video and animations. My favorite part was the "challenging concepts" discussion.

I'm not sure how you could conduct the class without going through the individual rules.  They exact reading of them and understanding of them, is after all, the point.

I can see the value incorporating some new teaching methods.  The problem of course is time.  The course is already 4 days if you take the test.  Every minute of every break is taken up with instructors answering questions.

[Shindig]

I really need to attend one of these when the SCGA does them. I'm a little intimidated by the test now, though; if +fourputt didn't get 100%, I don't think I stand much of a chance.

[Rulesman]

85% is a pretty good score.

[ev780]

I just attended one and I didn't feel the same way.

I thought the grouping of rules into related sections was quite useful, as were the video and animations. My favorite part was the "challenging concepts" discussion.

I'm not sure how you could conduct the class without going through the individual rules.  They exact reading of them and understanding of them, is after all, the point.

I can see the value incorporating some new teaching methods.  The problem of course is time.  The course is already 4 days if you take the test.  Every minute of every break is taken up with instructors answering questions.

It appears then that you actually had "challenging concept discussions."  Every time it started to get interesting with the questions and discussions, the instructors cut it off saying we had to keep on schedule.

(bold sentence)  Yeah easily.  Some of them should be left to the student to study and not use class time.  Clubs, balls, flagstick, alternate forms of play, are all pretty straightforward rules.  Lets use that time to work on more challenging application and leave the easy stuff for independent study.

Plus we can use online resources to read us the rules and leave precious classroom time for a better learning experience.

[Dormie1360]

So I just sat through the 3 1/2 day seminar.  Not sure why but I have that kind of time on my hands.  The presentations were mediocre at best.   Basically just read the rules to us one by one.  A few video enhancements here and there but not at all what I expected.  This course is stuck in the past.  It could really use an update to more modern teaching techniques such as case studies, group activities and try to teach critical thinking skills rather than try to memorize and regurgitate.

I am a good student and an exceptional test taker, at least in my other endeavors, but I bombed this test.  78% if you must know.  Could not get my brain around the logic of the test questions and how they want us to think through application of the rules.  I don't think any professional educators were involved in the design of the course or the test!

Mostly this was a therapeutic post as I was disappointed in my test but did any one else have experiences with this class?

I've enjoyed the classes every year.  This year will be my 8th in a row.

There is sooooo much to cover.  I think a lot of your suggestions, are excellent, but would make it difficult to cover everything required in 3 days with a test on the 4th.

Curious what class you went to?  Instructors can make a difference.

78 the first try is excellent.  I believe the average first time score is in the 60's or less. As a matter of fact, I think the USGA encourages first timers to consider taking the "easier" exam at the end of class instead. Too many first timers get discouraged with a low test score.

Someone once told me 75 is considered an acceptable score to be considered for helping out at local tournaments.  I do know a  score of 92 or better is required by the USGA to be able to officiate at one of their national championships.

Edit: And in case you are wondering I studied my A$$ off in preparation for the class my first year and you still beat me by  2.

[Dormie1360]

One other thing concerning "challenging discussions".  Remember the class is open to anyone, so the syllabus has to keep beginners in mind.  Once you score 85 or better you can sign up for one of the  classes restricted to those who have scored 85 or higher within the last 6 years.  In these classes more time is devoted to in depth and "nuance" discussion.

[ev780]

Interesting to see everyone's  take on the class.  I agree there is a lot to cover and it is challenging to cover. Dormie.....I studied like a mad man also and just expected to do more.

Not likely to repeat the class unless I get someone else to pay for it.  At $350 and coming out with that score I was just a little disappointed.  Also not likely to repeat it unless someone else is paying the bill.

[Asheville]

One other thing concerning "challenging discussions".  Remember the class is open to anyone, so the syllabus has to keep beginners in mind.  Once you score 85 or better you can sign up for one of the  classes restricted to those who have scored 85 or higher within the last 6 years.  In these classes more time is devoted to in depth and "nuance" discussion.

John, have you attended an 85+ workshop? I'd thought about it but my colleagues who have said that they thought the slide show was the same and were not especially impressed.

cm

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dormie1360

One other thing concerning "challenging discussions".  Remember the class is open to anyone, so the syllabus has to keep beginners in mind.  Once you score 85 or better you can sign up for one of the  classes restricted to those who have scored 85 or higher within the last 6 years.  In these classes more time is devoted to in depth and "nuance" discussion.

John, have you attended an 85+ workshop? I'd thought about it but my colleagues who have said that they thought the slide show was the same and were not especially impressed.

cm

I've never felt that it was worth traveling to take it.  They never hold them anywhere near here, and it costs enough just to pay the course fee.  Two regular workshops I attended were in the Denver Metro area so I could commute from home.

[Dormie1360]

John, have you attended an 85+ workshop? I'd thought about it but my colleagues who have said that they thought the slide show was the same and were not especially impressed.

cm

No, the location and or timing has never worked out.  I think they do only one 85+ class out of the 17 or so they do every year.

I have not talked to anyone who has gone, I'd try one if  David Staebler were teaching for the USGA and I could work it out.

[Dormie1360]

Interesting to see everyone's  take on the class.  I agree there is a lot to cover and it is challenging to cover. Dormie.....I studied like a mad man also and just expected to do more.

Not likely to repeat the class unless I get someone else to pay for it.  At $350 and coming out with that score I was just a little disappointed.  Also not likely to repeat it unless someone else is paying the bill.

Understood.  The test is just hard.  The first year I went, Mike Davis from the USGA and Larry Startzel with the PGA taught the class.  You won't find many better than Davis.  Anyway after the test, my head feeling like jello, I went up to thank Mike and awkwardly asked him how bad a 76 was....because it seemed pretty lousy to me.  He smiled and said you know more about the rules of golf than 95 percent of the people playing.  The test has to be hard because, as he explained it, it's their "Gold Standard".  It's what they use to determine who has the rules knowledge to work their national championships.  It just so happens, guys like you and me can also take it.

I think it's great the USGA/PGA offers the class and test for anyone who wants to take it. I believe things are more restrictive on how the R&A; does their top end training.

I will say the test has gotten easier on how they write the questions.  For example, highlighting the word competitor or opponent, so you clearly understand what the format is.  Although the test is still somewhat an exercise in reading ability and comprehension, it's much better than it use to be.

The USGA and local PGA affiliates put on 1 day seminars that are much less daunting and would still me very beneficial for anyone wanting to increase their rules knowledge.

[Fourputt]

The USGA and local PGA affiliates put on 1 day seminars that are much less daunting and would still me very beneficial for anyone wanting to increase their rules knowledge.

I know that usually the Denver Golf Expo has a rules seminar that you can take too.  My first rules class was there, some 20 years ago.

[Dormie1360]

Just got back from the Workshop in Louisville.

One interesting thing I learned was that the USGA does not use Note 2 under R7-2 in their championships.  In other words players may practice putting on the green last played after holing out.  Never have seen anyone do this in the US Open.  I doubt many know they can.  The USGA instructor said the only person he has seen do it is Tom Watson at a couple of USGA Senior Opens.  Said Tom's fellow-competitors went chasing after a Referee almost immediately.

The exam had a lot of "interesting" questions.

[Fourputt]

Just got back from the Workshop in Louisville.

One interesting thing I learned was that the USGA does not use Note 2 under R7-2 in their championships.  In other words players may practice putting on the green last played after holing out.  Never have seen anyone do this in the US Open.  I doubt many know they can.  The USGA instructor said the only person he has seen do it is Tom Watson at a couple of USGA Senior Opens.  Said Tom's fellow-competitors went chasing after a Referee almost immediately.

The exam had a lot of "interesting" questions.

One of the stipulations is that in doing so, you don't unduly delay play.  Usually there is someone in the fairway waiting to hit, so by practicing, they would be delaying play for the group behind them.  I have seen it done though.

[Dormie1360]

One of the stipulations is that in doing so, you don't unduly delay play.  Usually there is someone in the fairway waiting to hit, so by practicing, they would be delaying play for the group behind them.  I have seen it done though.

Good point, a player could  get carried away.  I think there is leeway for a  quick "try that short putt again".   It's always done in match play and often there is someone waiting in the fairway.  I agree the reason for Note 2 is probably for pace of play.