February 2009 Blogs
The OBELISK Monthly Assessments
Waltham Pitglow - RWA Compliance Specialist
26 Feb 2009, 14:16 PM
I was fascinated to read some feedback from an OBELISK user the other day. Apparently they felt that the monthly assessments were too general and that they wanted assessments strictly relating to their work.
There are two important points here. In the first place any OBELISK user has inclusive access to the technical area where there is a host of technical assessments (and more if you want them).
Secondly and perhaps more importantly, the monthly assessments are intended to be both general to specific areas of the industry. They are also intended to stretch the person being assessed and to raise learning points.
If you want to stay in your comfort zones and continually answer questions to which you know the answer then stick to the technical assessment area and your own specialist subjects.
The OBELISK is unique with its “Ask the OBELISK” learning feature and whether you are a starter in the industry or a seasoned campaigner, we have a raft of specialists available to answer questions and help you find the right learning material or training.
Think about assessment of knowledge as something that stretches over say a year. If you complete 2 of the monthly assessments and 1 technical assessment each month (less than an hour of your time), then over those twelve months you will be able to look at some 300 questions which you have both answered and followed through until you know the right answer. More importantly you have a fantastic record of knowledge assessment and development. You will know strong and weak areas and you will have records of all activity and follow up learning.
Some of these will have nothing specifically to do with your job but they will improve your general understanding of the market, insurance principles, regulation and insurance practice. This is good CPD and good risk management.
The other interesting comment we get is that some OBELISK members want feedback on the wrong answer. A good coach shows a student how to find the right answer by themselves and so the standard feedback for an answer which is wrong is, “That was the wrong answer…Try Again”. The trouble is that over the years we have become used to being fed the right answer without looking for it ourselves.
It is interesting to note from our research that where we give feedback on wrong answers the number of retakes of a test reduces significantly and where there is a retake, short term memory means that someone who gets under 50% is likely to jump to a high grade, but when asked to retake the assessment in a month’s time the result falls to under 50% again.
When we do not give feedback on wrong answers, not only is the retake rate almost universal but when asked to retake in a month’s time, the result generally remains above 70%.
That is what real life is about. Recognising a mistake (hopefully before the negligence claim or the FSA enforcement) and finding the answer. A good supervisor will not give you the answer immediately but ask you to look at the problem again. If you cannot work it out or understand why the answer is what it is then “Ask the OBELISK”.
Clearly there will be occasions where a wrong answer deserves credit (this often happens in the case studies) and there will be feedback .
. |
