National Test Discussion

[nicholasmaurer]

I am not advocating that WIDI be eliminated as an event, certainly not on the basis of its correlation from a single tournament. Having watched WIDI scores over the years I know there are certain individuals or pairs who communicate effectively and can consistently place in WIDI. However, I also know from feedback from team members that WIDI scoring can often be arbitrary or on a very small scale which doesn't allow effective separation between teams. I think there might be opportunities to improve/standardize the scoring process or offer additional guidance to ES that would improve the event quality.

[maxxxxx]

This is kind of off-topic, but we've reached seven pages of actual discussion, not just bugging chalker for scores.

[Nqures]

Any input about Anatomy division B test.

[superpenguin666]

This is kind of off-topic, but we've reached seven pages of actual discussion, not just bugging chalker for scores.

That's a new
How were you guys able to get ahold of the list of event supervisors before the competition? I looked on the national tournament page, and I can't seem to find it.

[slowpoke]

Astronomy (2) - The test was great as always. The math was pretty simple and straightforward. The DSO section was nice with not too many curveballs. I didn't look too much at the theory/data analysis parts, but seemed pretty challenging and fun! Overall, it was good though maybe a bit on the easier side. Overall 8/10

Chem Lab (5) - I don't really like this format of test. Seems kind of dumb that the event is focused on speed and doing unit conversions for simple plug and chug problems. Though Chem Lab in itself is a simple, taught-in-school event, it's unfortunate to have to separate teams like this. I'm pretty sure we didn't answer around 10-20% (maybe an overestimate?) of the test or something and randomly circled a lot, but we somehow ended up doing OK. However, there were some longer problems that looked interesting/fun that were different from the classic plug and chug problems which is good and cool, though I didn't really attempt or look at much of these for times sake... Overall 3/10

Hovercraft (7) - The test portion was pretty good. It had a good length and had more challenging problems than simply kinetic energy or whatever calculations. Frankly, I was pretty confused about some of the more challenging (mostly fluid) problems which is good for a Nationals test. The build portion was alright. I thought the event supervisors were pretty nice and fun as opposed to some testimonies on the forums. I would’ve liked if the proctors told us we could tamper with the hovercraft with motors on beforehand though! We also had to remass our hovercraft even though we didn’t change anything which was kind of annoying and lost us some time. Overall 6/10

Materials Science (1) - This was probably one of the funnest tests I’ve taken. Not only were the labs exciting to do (smashing pennies, etc.), the test itself was enjoyable with funny introductions to questions and more. Despite this, the test was still fairly challenging and had questions I’d never encountered or thought of before. Huge props. Overall 10/10

[Ionizer]

How were you guys able to get ahold of the list of event supervisors before the competition? I looked on the national tournament page, and I can't seem to find it.

Tournament program has been posted, which also includes the National Event Supervisors list! Lots of interesting stuff on there. Glad to finally confirm that Quartini is doing Dynamic Planet C, that should be fun.

From the National Tournament thread

[sciolyFTW_aku]

Anatomy and Physiology (9) - This test was hard. The BAC formula did not work and that was annoying. The treatments portion of the test was very hard and was probably what determined event placements. I didn’t like how this test was almost all nervous system because that defeats the purpose of having the other two systems. The random trivia number questions were just plain out stupid because they didn’t actually test any understanding of the human body. Better than the last 10 years of Anatomy tests. Overall 7/10

Hi,

Could you please explain the BAC formulas not working part? Also, if you didn't see my previous post, I believe the whole test was geared towards NS due to the publication of the book "Brain Facts" by the SfN, which sponsors the event. Regardless, there should have been more sense organs and ES questions. (Throw out the BAC part and you have like 15 open questions for other legitimate stuff !)

Thanks,
sciolyFTW_aku

[varunscs11]

Anatomy and Physiology (9) - This test was hard. The BAC formula did not work and that was annoying. The treatments portion of the test was very hard and was probably what determined event placements. I didn’t like how this test was almost all nervous system because that defeats the purpose of having the other two systems. The random trivia number questions were just plain out stupid because they didn’t actually test any understanding of the human body. Better than the last 10 years of Anatomy tests. Overall 7/10

Hi,

Could you please explain the BAC formulas not working part? Also, if you didn't see my previous post, I believe the whole test was geared towards NS due to the publication of the book "Brain Facts" by the SfN, which sponsors the event. Regardless, there should have been more sense organs and ES questions. (Throw out the BAC part and you have like 15 open questions for other legitimate stuff !)

Thanks,
sciolyFTW_aku

Well the SfN sponsors the event but that doesn't mean that they actually have control over what goes on the exam - that is up to the proctor, which until this year was Patty Palmietto. Unlike the Disease, the proctor of Anat isn't someone from SfN and if there was then, Patty wouldn't be the one handing out the 1st trophy since as far as I know she isn't associated with the SfN. What I meant by the BAC formula not working is the last question on the BAC set asked about if that guy who drank 48 oz of 5.2% beer was legally allowed to drive and when we plugged all the numbers in, we got a ridiculous number which made no sense.

[sciolyFTW_aku]

@above I'm merely suggesting it could have influenced it.

-sciolyFTW_aku

[Skink]

However, I also know from feedback from team members that WIDI scoring can often be arbitrary or on a very small scale which doesn't allow effective separation between teams. I think there might be opportunities to improve/standardize the scoring process or offer additional guidance to ES that would improve the event quality.

This is a general feature of the inquiry and nature events, though, certainly not a WIDI problem. The difference may be that the rubric for WIDI has to be crafted to the particular model, but it's more cut-and-dry than something like Experimental or Game On.