Hello Chalker,
Since Div C DyPlan is being universally described as too easy and short on this thread, could you please give us a general idea of how close the scores were?
My partner and I got 9th and we would like to know how close we were to medalling.
National Test Discussion
-
UnprunedShrub
- Member
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2015 3:44 pm
- Division: C
- State: TX
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: National Test Discussion
MIT class of 2022
Alumnus of the Liberal Arts and Science Academy
National Medalist in Dynamic Planet
Alumnus of the Liberal Arts and Science Academy
National Medalist in Dynamic Planet
-
antoine_ego
- Exalted Member
- Posts: 387
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 5:37 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: MA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: National Test Discussion
Does anyone know the top 6 scores for Air Trajectory for Div C? We got 3rd but I would like to see how close to the competitors we were.
Rest in Peace Len Joeris
Acton-Boxborough Regional High School Captain 17-19
[b]2016 Air Trajectory Nationals - 3rd 2018 Hovercraft Nationals - 6th 2018 Mousetrap Nationals - 6th 2018 Nationals - Team 9th Place! 2019 Astronomy Nationals - 3rd! 2019 Nationals - Team 9th Place! [/b]
-
chalker
- Member
- Posts: 2107
- Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:30 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: OH
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 56 times
Re: National Test Discussion
1 pointUnprunedShrub wrote:Hello Chalker,
Since Div C DyPlan is being universally described as too easy and short on this thread, could you please give us a general idea of how close the scores were?
My partner and I got 9th and we would like to know how close we were to medalling.
Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair
-
chalker
- Member
- Posts: 2107
- Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:30 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: OH
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 56 times
Re: National Test Discussion
40 points would have gotten you 1stantoine_ego wrote:Does anyone know the top 6 scores for Air Trajectory for Div C? We got 3rd but I would like to see how close to the competitors we were.
Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair
-
Magikarpmaster629
- Exalted Member
- Posts: 578
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 3:03 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: MA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: National Test Discussion
...Can I see my Astronomy score, please? I got 7th.
Ladue Science Olympiad (2014ish-2017)
A wild goose flies over a pond, leaving behind a voice in the wind.
A man passes through this world, leaving behind a name.
A wild goose flies over a pond, leaving behind a voice in the wind.
A man passes through this world, leaving behind a name.
-
daydreamer0023
- Member
- Posts: 198
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2015 5:44 pm
- Division: Grad
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: National Test Discussion
Hi Chalker (apologies for joining the score-spam-questioning train)! I was wondering how close everyone was for Division C fossils since everyone said the test was easy...and I ended up getting 22nd place. 
"I am among those who think that science has great beauty. A scientist in his laboratory is not only a technician: he is also a child placed before natural phenomena which impress him like a fairy tale." - Marie Curie
Enloe '19 || UNC Chapel Hill '23
See resources I helped create here!
Enloe '19 || UNC Chapel Hill '23
See resources I helped create here!
-
chalker
- Member
- Posts: 2107
- Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:30 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: OH
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 56 times
Re: National Test Discussion
There appears to be a nice spread. Max was 156, Average 109, and Min 55.daydreamer0023 wrote:Hi Chalker (apologies for joining the score-spam-questioning train)! I was wondering how close everyone was for Division C fossils since everyone said the test was easy...and I ended up getting 22nd place.
Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair
-
chalker
- Member
- Posts: 2107
- Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:30 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: OH
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 56 times
Re: National Test Discussion
You missed out on a medal due to a tiebreaker it appears.Magikarpmaster629 wrote:...Can I see my Astronomy score, please? I got 7th.
Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair
-
varunscs11
- Member
- Posts: 163
- Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2015 9:02 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: PA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: National Test Discussion
chalker wrote:There appears to be a nice spread. Max was 156, Average 109, and Min 55.daydreamer0023 wrote:Hi Chalker (apologies for joining the score-spam-questioning train)! I was wondering how close everyone was for Division C fossils since everyone said the test was easy...and I ended up getting 22nd place.
Wow!!! Huge congrats to Iolani for getting 156/160 that's very impressive!
Liberal Arts and Science Academy 2015-2017
University of Pennsylvania 2021
MIT Rocks and Minerals 2018, Fossils 2019
varunscs11's Userpage
University of Pennsylvania 2021
MIT Rocks and Minerals 2018, Fossils 2019
varunscs11's Userpage
Re: National Test Discussion
What an amazing tournament. Thank you to everyone behind-the-scenes that put so much effort into putting together this National tournament. It was by far the best Nationals I have ever attended (out of 4, so not that bad of a sample size), and possibly the best tournament I've attended. Definitely an unforgettable experience for our entire team.
Onto the tests:
(1) Geologic Mapping: What an amazing test. Man, that was so fun. The concept questions in the beginning were a blast, and the various structural problems (including the bonus) truly tested one's 3D conceptual knowledge. Though some other tournaments interpreted the rules of this event a bit (or a lot) differently, I can sincerely say that this was one of the best executed events I know of. This test is a prime example of what a top-tier (Nationals) study event should look like: conceptually challenging, but with easy questions for a nice gradient; long and thorough, but not too focused on one section of the rules. Again, this was awesome.
(1) Astronomy: As Adi (my partner) already said, this test was incredibly fun and challenging to take. Astronomy, for me, was the pinnacle of the day for the most hard and downright fun test (in a very good way!) for me to take. The DSO ID was nice (especially the double M42!) and the math questions were splendid. What a great application of various concepts one should pick up while studying this intimidating event. Again, this event shows what a top-tier study event should embody, but several other prestigious tournaments tend to take the scope of Astronomy much too far. Again, this is in the spirit of Sci Oly I believe; you can't expect every tournament to feed you the same experience, and you can't expect to win all the time. Life is inherently full of surprises, and Sci Oly is no different.
(1) Dynamic Planet: I love Dynamic Planet; I have for the 5 years I've been doing Science Olympiad. The concepts are so enjoyable to learn and satisfying to apply. Nevertheless, I know this may seem a bit hypocritical, but I agree with the majority that this test was too short and too easy. As some have cited before, the MIT test was incredibly challenging and well done, a true test of knowledge, problem solving, and performance under pressure. However, this test kinda tests these same qualities, albiet in a slightly different, perhaps underhanded way. Extensive amounts of studying may have led you to examine well known estuaries (hence North Caroline) and topographical features in the ocean (hence the good drawing). Certain other questions were good, such as the water mass multiple choice. Let me be clear though: the test, frankly, should have been three times in length and much more high in difficulty. However, DP is still an outstanding event, and I am looking forward to closing out my Sci Oly career with Volcanoes and Earthquakes!
(7) Cell Biology: What can I say; I love biology, and this test was fantastic. Really nice critical thinking questions, an absolutely amazing microscope, and a really nice, effective lab (that I happened to screw up, haha). Not much to say here, except that this year's test was miles better than last year's. However, an entire station on the cell cycle may have been too narrow; indeed, it is difficult to study for such a broad scope in the first place (biology is generally this way). Anyway, another extremely fun part of my day, and I do know just how close we were to medaling, but what's done is done!
(4) Fossils: I can see how many thought this test was too easy, but I still had lots of fun. ID was great because of the high quality specimens (I personally do not believe in giving "difficult" ID questions just because it's really hard to tell what exactly the sample is, e.g. testing a unique bone is great, but testing a blurry black-and-white picture of some random brachiopod is probably not). The format was great, and we felt as if we did well walking out of that event room. Some questions/choices were reused, but I guess that's how it goes with repeated events. Fast stations with rapid ID/comprehension test competency well, and this test excelled in this.
I really never post on scioly.org, but I had to now to applaud these (mostly) magnificent tests and the magnificent tournament overall. Congratulations to everyone!
Onto the tests:
(1) Geologic Mapping: What an amazing test. Man, that was so fun. The concept questions in the beginning were a blast, and the various structural problems (including the bonus) truly tested one's 3D conceptual knowledge. Though some other tournaments interpreted the rules of this event a bit (or a lot) differently, I can sincerely say that this was one of the best executed events I know of. This test is a prime example of what a top-tier (Nationals) study event should look like: conceptually challenging, but with easy questions for a nice gradient; long and thorough, but not too focused on one section of the rules. Again, this was awesome.
(1) Astronomy: As Adi (my partner) already said, this test was incredibly fun and challenging to take. Astronomy, for me, was the pinnacle of the day for the most hard and downright fun test (in a very good way!) for me to take. The DSO ID was nice (especially the double M42!) and the math questions were splendid. What a great application of various concepts one should pick up while studying this intimidating event. Again, this event shows what a top-tier study event should embody, but several other prestigious tournaments tend to take the scope of Astronomy much too far. Again, this is in the spirit of Sci Oly I believe; you can't expect every tournament to feed you the same experience, and you can't expect to win all the time. Life is inherently full of surprises, and Sci Oly is no different.
(1) Dynamic Planet: I love Dynamic Planet; I have for the 5 years I've been doing Science Olympiad. The concepts are so enjoyable to learn and satisfying to apply. Nevertheless, I know this may seem a bit hypocritical, but I agree with the majority that this test was too short and too easy. As some have cited before, the MIT test was incredibly challenging and well done, a true test of knowledge, problem solving, and performance under pressure. However, this test kinda tests these same qualities, albiet in a slightly different, perhaps underhanded way. Extensive amounts of studying may have led you to examine well known estuaries (hence North Caroline) and topographical features in the ocean (hence the good drawing). Certain other questions were good, such as the water mass multiple choice. Let me be clear though: the test, frankly, should have been three times in length and much more high in difficulty. However, DP is still an outstanding event, and I am looking forward to closing out my Sci Oly career with Volcanoes and Earthquakes!
(7) Cell Biology: What can I say; I love biology, and this test was fantastic. Really nice critical thinking questions, an absolutely amazing microscope, and a really nice, effective lab (that I happened to screw up, haha). Not much to say here, except that this year's test was miles better than last year's. However, an entire station on the cell cycle may have been too narrow; indeed, it is difficult to study for such a broad scope in the first place (biology is generally this way). Anyway, another extremely fun part of my day, and I do know just how close we were to medaling, but what's done is done!
(4) Fossils: I can see how many thought this test was too easy, but I still had lots of fun. ID was great because of the high quality specimens (I personally do not believe in giving "difficult" ID questions just because it's really hard to tell what exactly the sample is, e.g. testing a unique bone is great, but testing a blurry black-and-white picture of some random brachiopod is probably not). The format was great, and we felt as if we did well walking out of that event room. Some questions/choices were reused, but I guess that's how it goes with repeated events. Fast stations with rapid ID/comprehension test competency well, and this test excelled in this.
I really never post on scioly.org, but I had to now to applaud these (mostly) magnificent tests and the magnificent tournament overall. Congratulations to everyone!