It's About Time C

[tad_k_22]

That sort of thing happens at invitationals.
The problem with the study portion of this event is that the rules are so vague that coordinators interpret them in any which way, which can also be to...wow, yuck, you're right.
But in any case, the only person who we can all be sure knows what is kosher for a test and knows the information for the test is the National Event Supervisor. Everybody else, from an invitationals level to a states level, can interpret the rules in different ways or simply not know anything. Your regionals should be better, just be glad that this didn't count.

[saturnian]

tad_k_22 wrote on Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:57 pm
That sort of thing happens at invitationals.
The problem with the study portion of this event is that the rules are so vague that coordinators interpret them in any which way, which can also be to...wow, yuck, you're right.
But in any case, the only person who we can all be sure knows what is kosher for a test and knows the information for the test is the National Event Supervisor. Everybody else, from an invitationals level to a states level, can interpret the rules in different ways or simply not know anything. Your regionals should be better, just be glad that this didn't count.

Actually, last year's national astronomy test had 3 mistakes, not interpretation, but things like forgetting to square period in the Kepler's third law. I sent email to the person who wrote the test and got no response. Three mistakes can make a difference not only in your own placement on the event, but determine the place of your team.

I think all event supervisors, starting at invitationals and ending with national competition, must be more careful and perhaps give the test to someone to solve before giving it to teams.

Also, I agree that the rules for this event allow for anything to be on the test. But that is not the point here.

[Flavorflav]

tad_k_22 wrote on Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:57 pm
That sort of thing happens at invitationals.
The problem with the study portion of this event is that the rules are so vague that coordinators interpret them in any which way, which can also be to...wow, yuck, you're right.
But in any case, the only person who we can all be sure knows what is kosher for a test and knows the information for the test is the National Event Supervisor. Everybody else, from an invitationals level to a states level, can interpret the rules in different ways or simply not know anything. Your regionals should be better, just be glad that this didn't count.

Actually, last year's national astronomy test had 3 mistakes, not interpretation, but things like forgetting to square period in the Kepler's third law. I sent email to the person who wrote the test and got no response. Three mistakes can make a difference not only in your own placement on the event, but determine the place of your team.

I think all event supervisors, starting at invitationals and ending with national competition, must be more careful and perhaps give the test to someone to solve before giving it to teams.

Also, I agree that the rules for this event allow for anything to be on the test. But that is not the point here.

While you are absolutely right that it is irresponsible to produce an event with errors in it, remember that event writers are donating their time.

[binary010101]

I seriously doubt that there will be mistakes that serious on the regional and states test, where ranking actually counts.

[Flavorflav]

I seriously doubt that there will be mistakes that serious on the regional and states test, where ranking actually counts.

If only that were true.

[tad_k_22]

Look. Mistakes happen, event supervisors are human.
Plus, unless the questions simply make no sense, wrong answers won't make a difference. If everybody gets a question wrong, what does it matter? It's just like the question never existed.

What I'm trying to say is that science olympiad is about learning what you need to learn to do as well as possible in any given situation, and attempt to have fun while doing that. We have no responsibility for what event supervisors do and must adapt to anything that they put there for us to take, so concentrate on what you can do to help our team do as well as possible. Let the supervisors do their job, and keep studying as hard as possible. These people are donating hours of their lives to make a test as well as an entire day to put together this competition for us, don't forget that. Just do your job, and don't complain, we're all lucky to even have this chance in the first place.

[saturnian]

Look. Mistakes happen, event supervisors are human.
Plus, unless the questions simply make no sense, wrong answers won't make a difference. If everybody gets a question wrong, what does it matter? It's just like the question never existed.

What I'm trying to say is that science olympiad is about learning what you need to learn to do as well as possible in any given situation, and attempt to have fun while doing that. We have no responsibility for what event supervisors do and must adapt to anything that they put there for us to take, so concentrate on what you can do to help our team do as well as possible. Let the supervisors do their job, and keep studying as hard as possible. These people are donating hours of their lives to make a test as well as an entire day to put together this competition for us, don't forget that. Just do your job, and don't complain, we're all lucky to even have this chance in the first place.

Just because people volunteer, it does not mean they should compromise the quality. In fact, if someone knows he or she does not have the time or knowledge, I would rather he or she not volunteer.
Just back from this weekend's invitational, I was disappointed to find that people writing the tests are absolutely ignorant of the subject, such as stating that an AU (astronomical unit) is the distance from the earth to the moon or that BCE stands for "Before the Christian Era".

[L42]

Just remember that Time is a new event this year (at least, it hasn't been around in recent times) so nobody really knows how to do it, or knows a lot about it. Things might get better as people gain knowledge. Also, a bad test is a bad test for everyone. It's not just effecting you. To my way on thinking, that's fair (as long as it's sort of on what is in the rules).

[jazzy009]

I have found that new events are yeah, poorly conducted. But that's how new events go i guess. It does suck when you're the one who studies all night to make sure your models are legal and then other teams slip by instructors who aren't knowledgeable but you should at least feel good knowing your model was accurate and who knows, maybe the other teams will get disqualified at a later time.

[captbilly]

Look. Mistakes happen, event supervisors are human.
Plus, unless the questions simply make no sense, wrong answers won't make a difference. If everybody gets a question wrong, what does it matter? It's just like the question never existed.

What I'm trying to say is that science olympiad is about learning what you need to learn to do as well as possible in any given situation, and attempt to have fun while doing that. We have no responsibility for what event supervisors do and must adapt to anything that they put there for us to take, so concentrate on what you can do to help our team do as well as possible. Let the supervisors do their job, and keep studying as hard as possible. These people are donating hours of their lives to make a test as well as an entire day to put together this competition for us, don't forget that. Just do your job, and don't complain, we're all lucky to even have this chance in the first place.

Just because people volunteer, it does not mean they should compromise the quality. In fact, if someone knows he or she does not have the time or knowledge, I would rather he or she not volunteer.
Just back from this weekend's invitational, I was disappointed to find that people writing the tests are absolutely ignorant of the subject, such as stating that an AU (astronomical unit) is the distance from the earth to the moon or that BCE stands for "Before the Christian Era".

The problem is that in many areas events would have to be canceled if SO insisted that the event coordinator was truely knowledgable. We live in an area full of engineers and scientists but we get very few who are willing to sacrifice an entire day (plus probably 10 - 40 hours of time preparing) on SO. I believe they get a free lunch on competition day for their trouble. Maybe if the economy really tanks we will get out of work engineers who will be happy to work for a free lunch, but until then we will have to make do with the kindness of whoever volunteers. I do think that it is entirely appropriate to politely speak to the event coordinator if you see a problem. I have changed the mind of an event coordinator more than once by appearing really knowledgable and convincing (I would like to think I really did know what I was talking about, rather than just appearing to know). Try to talk to the event coordinator about serious errors in the event BEFORE the event is scored, preferably before the event starts. THey are much more likely to listen and do something about the problem before the event is done. If you appeal an event after it was badly run rather then before, you may get the entire event dropped. That might be good if you did much worse then the competition, but not so good if you were going to come in the top three.