Scioly.org

As far as I know, it is incredibly rare for any state tournament to release raw scores. I do not know of a single state tournament which has done so.

EastStroudsburg13 wrote:As far as I know, it is incredibly rare for any state tournament to release raw scores. I do not know of a single state tournament which has done so.

I believe Georgia releases raw scores for their state tournament

Adi1008 wrote:

EastStroudsburg13 wrote:As far as I know, it is incredibly rare for any state tournament to release raw scores. I do not know of a single state tournament which has done so.

I believe Georgia releases raw scores for their state tournament

I've heard some tournaments in Florida release raw scores.

bernard wrote:

Adi1008 wrote:

EastStroudsburg13 wrote:As far as I know, it is incredibly rare for any state tournament to release raw scores. I do not know of a single state tournament which has done so.

I believe Georgia releases raw scores for their state tournament

I've heard some tournaments in Florida release raw scores.

All florida regionals and states release full excel spreadsheets including raw scores in each event 24 hrs after tournaments

windu34 wrote:

bernard wrote:

Adi1008 wrote:
I believe Georgia releases raw scores for their state tournament

I've heard some tournaments in Florida release raw scores.

All florida regionals and states release full excel spreadsheets including raw scores in each event 24 hrs after tournaments

Whenever it is held at Emory, the Georgia Div C state tournament releases all raw scores. In general most regional tournaments here do not, but almost every invitational does (UGA being the exception here). It's definitely one of the best aspects of the state.

Adi1008 wrote:

EastStroudsburg13 wrote:As far as I know, it is incredibly rare for any state tournament to release raw scores. I do not know of a single state tournament which has done so.

I believe Georgia releases raw scores for their state tournament

Only Div C, and only some years. Releasing raw scores isn't as much of a problem as releasing tests. Returning State and Regional tests is a bad idea and creates more problems than it solves.

rfscoach wrote:

Adi1008 wrote:

EastStroudsburg13 wrote:As far as I know, it is incredibly rare for any state tournament to release raw scores. I do not know of a single state tournament which has done so.

I believe Georgia releases raw scores for their state tournament

Only Div C, and only some years. Releasing raw scores isn't as much of a problem as releasing tests. Returning State and Regional tests is a bad idea and creates more problems than it solves.

Why is that? I'm just curious because I can't imagine why that would be a problem.

lumosityfan wrote:

rfscoach wrote:

Adi1008 wrote:
I believe Georgia releases raw scores for their state tournament

Only Div C, and only some years. Releasing raw scores isn't as much of a problem as releasing tests. Returning State and Regional tests is a bad idea and creates more problems than it solves.

Why is that? I'm just curious because I can't imagine why that would be a problem.

Consider the amount of grading errors in the test that you've graded (probably - not many, but significant). Then consider the amount of errors that would be made by the average regional or state event supervisor (who may or may not be the person who wrote the test, and may or may not know anything about the event). It makes it very likely for teams to go over and try to appeal everything (and it's not like it's going to make future tests graded better).

Unome wrote:

lumosityfan wrote:

rfscoach wrote: Only Div C, and only some years. Releasing raw scores isn't as much of a problem as releasing tests. Returning State and Regional tests is a bad idea and creates more problems than it solves.

Why is that? I'm just curious because I can't imagine why that would be a problem.

Consider the amount of grading errors in the test that you've graded (probably - not many, but significant). Then consider the amount of errors that would be made by the average regional or state event supervisor (who may or may not be the person who wrote the test, and may or may not know anything about the event). It makes it very likely for teams to go over and try to appeal everything (and it's not like it's going to make future tests graded better).

Well you could just make it a rule that once you get your test back you can no longer appeal. Or if you are to appeal it would have to matter for the standings to change otherwise and if the mistake was egregious enough to warrant an appeal (i.e. they added up the numbers wrong).

lumosityfan wrote:

Unome wrote:

lumosityfan wrote:
Why is that? I'm just curious because I can't imagine why that would be a problem.

Consider the amount of grading errors in the test that you've graded (probably - not many, but significant). Then consider the amount of errors that would be made by the average regional or state event supervisor (who may or may not be the person who wrote the test, and may or may not know anything about the event). It makes it very likely for teams to go over and try to appeal everything (and it's not like it's going to make future tests graded better).

Well you could just make it a rule that once you get your test back you can no longer appeal. Or if you are to appeal it would have to matter for the standings to change otherwise and if the mistake was egregious enough to warrant an appeal (i.e. they added up the numbers wrong).

There are a couple factors going on here:

1. Inertia. Historically, it was hard enough to publish just the overall results to the teams, particularly when it used to be all done by hand. It's only been in recent years that most of the scoring process has been digitized and thus would be relatively easy to release raw results. But since the process has been a certain way for so many years, there hasn't been a big reason to change it.

2. Labor. At most invitationals I'm aware of, the complete tests and raw results are returned to the teams. I help run the WSU Invitational, which is about the same size / scale of the Ohio State Tournament. The amount of volunteer time required to sort through all the paperwork and divide it into envelopes for each team is immense. We generally haven't budgeted for such time / labor at the State Tournament.

3. Evidence. On the rare occasion that a post-tournament appeal is submitted that has sufficient reason for us to investigate it, we need to have the raw tests available to analyze and report back on. Thus we need to hold on to all the raw tests for a while to ensure we can do this.

4. Errors. With any large scale human endeavour, there are bound to be errors. It's no secret that these occur in Science Olympiad scoring, particular in light of the time crunches, volunteer staffing, and limited financial resources. We do our best to ensure any errors are caught or not substantial in nature. To illustrate this, take a typical State Tournament: 80 teams * 23 events * ~50 data points / team per event (some events have only a few, like helicopters, others have over a hundred questions) = 92,000 data points to process in the period of a few hours. Even if we only have a 0.1% error rate, that's still around 92 errors. Teams would scrub through the data for days afterwards, sending in tons of appeals and requiring a lot of effort to go through and check / correct those errors.

5. FERPA. This is a federal law that restricts the release of personal student information. There are a lot of nuances involved in the law, but I know that several lawyers have looked at it and indicated that various SO related institutions might be at risk were they to release detailed information on competitor performances. There is some ambiguity here, but some of the guidance that's been provided is to NOT release raw data / tests.

That's not to say there isn't room to improve our processes and change things in the future with regard to the release of info.