Science Olympiad Events 2019-2020

[Unome]

The difficulty curve for road should be about the same as codebusters(note:i dont do either event), but code gets nothing while road gets a binder

They are completely different events. I can think of no reason whatsoever that a binder would even be remotely useful for code.

Also in general why would you complain about having a binder instead of a sheet? Less formatting work, no need for like size 2 fonts, better organization, and more information you have the ability to put in. And even with all that information, a binder doesn't really provide that much of a benefit because if you don't underestimate the information you're still not getting the questions right. Maybe you can dig through stuff and find something, but if you try and do that extensively you're just gonna run out of time.

then give every event a binder

Please go back and read the quoted post from chalker.

[JoeyC]

then give every event a binder

I wouldn't have anything against that for most events to be honest, but again it's kind of unimportant anyway

*flashbacks to deleting random stuff from my waqua cheatsheet b/c it was 2.5 pages*

Ehh, I mean for most events you only really need cheatsheets for things like history, lists, maps/pics, and formulas (if you like being able to glance at them).
Most of the conceptual stuff should already be memorized or familiar enough that you shouldn't need to put them in notes.

[primitivepolonium]

I'm not sure about this. I think Astronomy is does a great job of incorporating a binder into the event (and goes even further to let competitors use a computer) while keeping the event conceptually challenging and fulfilling. I completely agree with chalker's rationale for using binders - a lot of my courses in college are structured the same way - and I think that if the events' tests are written well, it can make it a pretty good experience for everyone. Not every event should have a binder, but I think physics events/Astronomy having them is the least of Science Olympiad's problems.

Seconded. I remember when Chem Lab had a binder instead of cheat sheets. That was also the year the rules were phrased in such a way as to allow two partners only one calculator, but that's besides the point. Because most Chem Lab exams tend to be problem-solving based, having a binder really doesn't help. In the event you do stumble upon trivia, you'd have to know enough about chemistry to find information in a timely manner. Even for a more knowledge based event like Dynamic, I'd say that for a lot of the exams I took (and especially the good ones), having a binder wouldn't really help me because a) there was no time to look through a textbook for questions and b) a decent number of the questions were very conceptual and you really wouldn't be able to learn the information on the spot. Of course, there were the really short and simplistic exams that do very little to separate teams, but those are the type of exams everyone's trying to veer from.

It's less about the binders and more about how well-written the exams are for everyone. A binder doesn't destroy derail events; it only highlights the deficiencies of exams that are so short and knowledge-based that a binder can salvage a lack of aptitude. Sure, binders can change up rankings. Despite not knowing very much, I once got 2nd place in MatSci at a small invite because the exam was written off Callister's (it even had a fill in the blank section with sentences taken verbatim from that textbook) and I happened to have the entire book in my binder. But I think we all agree this type of exams should be avoided.

Re: cheat sheets vs binders--I feel like having 5 cheatsheets is basically the equivalent of having a small binder, since most people's 5 cheatsheets are crammed full of info.

The one reservation I have against binder events is that binders (especially if there's no size cap) are way harder to tote around, and the costs do rack up.

[AlfWeg]

Seconded. I remember when Chem Lab had a binder instead of cheat sheets. That was also the year the rules were phrased in such a way as to allow two partners only one calculator, but that's besides the point. Because most Chem Lab exams tend to be problem-solving based, having a binder really doesn't help. In the event you do stumble upon trivia, you'd have to know enough about chemistry to find information in a timely manner. Even for a more knowledge based event like Dynamic, I'd say that for a lot of the exams I took (and especially the good ones), having a binder wouldn't really help me because a) there was no time to look through a textbook for questions and b) a decent number of the questions were very conceptual and you really wouldn't be able to learn the information on the spot. Of course, there were the really short and simplistic exams that do very little to separate teams, but those are the type of exams everyone's trying to veer from.

I have to agree, Chem Lab isn't really an event that needs anything. I didn't really have stuff to put on the cheat sheet, let alone a binder. DP I think does require a cheat sheet because of the sheer amount of stuff you need to know, but a binder is stretching it.

I did Machines, Wind Power, and Thermo and they all needed a binder. There was always stuff that needed to be put into the binder. All of them had history and a lot of formulas. And there were all sorts of specific stuff that was unreasonable to remember. I really don't think binders are a problem or unneeded for the events they are already in.

[hmmm]

Seconded. I remember when Chem Lab had a binder instead of cheat sheets. That was also the year the rules were phrased in such a way as to allow two partners only one calculator, but that's besides the point. Because most Chem Lab exams tend to be problem-solving based, having a binder really doesn't help. In the event you do stumble upon trivia, you'd have to know enough about chemistry to find information in a timely manner. Even for a more knowledge based event like Dynamic, I'd say that for a lot of the exams I took (and especially the good ones), having a binder wouldn't really help me because a) there was no time to look through a textbook for questions and b) a decent number of the questions were very conceptual and you really wouldn't be able to learn the information on the spot. Of course, there were the really short and simplistic exams that do very little to separate teams, but those are the type of exams everyone's trying to veer from.

I have to agree, Chem Lab isn't really an event that needs anything. I didn't really have stuff to put on the cheat sheet, let alone a binder. DP I think does require a cheat sheet because of the sheer amount of stuff you need to know, but a binder is stretching it.

I did Machines, Wind Power, and Thermo and they all needed a binder. There was always stuff that needed to be put into the binder. All of them had history and a lot of formulas. And there were all sorts of specific stuff that was unreasonable to remember. I really don't think binders are a problem or unneeded for the events they are already in.

there can always be size restrictions on binders(1/2 in,1 in;fossils does this already), if not that much info is required

[Unome]

Seconded. I remember when Chem Lab had a binder instead of cheat sheets. That was also the year the rules were phrased in such a way as to allow two partners only one calculator, but that's besides the point. Because most Chem Lab exams tend to be problem-solving based, having a binder really doesn't help. In the event you do stumble upon trivia, you'd have to know enough about chemistry to find information in a timely manner. Even for a more knowledge based event like Dynamic, I'd say that for a lot of the exams I took (and especially the good ones), having a binder wouldn't really help me because a) there was no time to look through a textbook for questions and b) a decent number of the questions were very conceptual and you really wouldn't be able to learn the information on the spot. Of course, there were the really short and simplistic exams that do very little to separate teams, but those are the type of exams everyone's trying to veer from.

I have to agree, Chem Lab isn't really an event that needs anything. I didn't really have stuff to put on the cheat sheet, let alone a binder. DP I think does require a cheat sheet because of the sheer amount of stuff you need to know, but a binder is stretching it.

I did Machines, Wind Power, and Thermo and they all needed a binder. There was always stuff that needed to be put into the binder. All of them had history and a lot of formulas. And there were all sorts of specific stuff that was unreasonable to remember. I really don't think binders are a problem or unneeded for the events they are already in.

there can always be size restrictions on binders(1/2 in,1 in;fossils does this already), if not that much info is required

Note that in practice, the size restrictions are going to be loosely enforced - in general, event supervisors aren't going to do much more than eyeball it.

[AlfWeg]

there can always be size restrictions on binders(1/2 in,1 in;fossils does this already), if not that much info is required

Wouldn't people be shooting themselves in the foot by making huge binders....

[JoeyC]

not if you just put textbooks in it , lol

[pb5754]

not if you just put textbooks in it , lol

thats still pretty inefficient

[Name]

not if you just put textbooks in it , lol

thats still pretty inefficient

(Ik your prob joking but)
Once in astro I had a new partner who filled in who decided the best way to prepare was to download astro textbooks. I asked him if he knew something midway through and he gave me his downloaded textbook. It wasn't even CTRL F able. He told me to find what I need with the index. Especially considering I could barely understand the text book and was super short on time, i chose to just bs something. If you can't find the info within like 30 sec it's sorta useless.