Ohio 2015

meteorology125
Member
Member
Posts: 31
Joined: February 1st, 2014, 5:18 pm
Division: C
State: OH

Re: Ohio 2015

Postby meteorology125 » April 11th, 2015, 5:45 pm

Here are the results: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/conte ... byoNB?dl=1

Solon and Mentor Memorial are going to nationals for division B. Westlake LBMS was one point away from going to nationals. As a member of Westlake's team, this is one of the most disappointing things ever. Westlake has never been to nationals and it is extremely disappointing. I think this should bring up the point that the way to qualify for nationals is flawed. In a state like Ohio, there are more than two teams that should go to nationals. Many teams in Ohio are a lot more qualified to go to nationals than many other teams in other states. I think Science Olympiad should consider increasing the number of teams advancing to nationals in competitive states like Ohio.
2015 Events: Anatomy and Physiology, Crave the Wave, Entomology, Meteorology, Picture This, Road Scholar, and Simple Machines

Milankovitch1
Member
Member
Posts: 46
Joined: November 15th, 2014, 10:19 am
Division: Grad
State: OH

Re: Ohio 2015

Postby Milankovitch1 » April 11th, 2015, 5:49 pm

Who do you guys think will get second in the state as of right now? It's almost certain that Solon will win first, but second is a toss-up. Personally, my bet is on Mentor Memorial or Tower Heights middle school.
I think you have to consider Magsis, Westlake and Chardon, but Memorial has been splitting their teams all year so you never know. I say, Solon, Memorial, Magsig, Towers, Chardon, Westlake and Mentor Shore in that order. Good luck to all!
WOW, Memorial and Westlake, 1 pt apart for 2nd and 3rd. Both great teams. Great job to all.
Play Hard - Have Fun

chalker
Member
Member
Posts: 2089
Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH

Re: Ohio 2015

Postby chalker » April 11th, 2015, 5:58 pm

Does anyone know why air trajectory was made a trial event at states?

There were numerous issues with the way the event was run, and many complaints and arbitrations were submitted. The main event supervisor was new to running an event and while generally experienced with SO and interested in doing a good job, wasn't fully prepared when the event started. This resulted in delays and trying to scavenge up some missing materials (such as a milk crate instead of a bucket) , as well as some errors and inconsistencies in the application of the rules.

It was an obvious choice for all of us involved to make it a trial/pilot event, and we decided that early on before knowing any significant results. The 'good' news is that even if it wasn't made a trial/pilot event, the top team results would have been the same (i.e. the same teams would be going to nationals).

Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair

chalker
Member
Member
Posts: 2089
Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH

Re: Ohio 2015

Postby chalker » April 11th, 2015, 6:10 pm

I think this should bring up the point that the way to qualify for nationals is flawed. In a state like Ohio, there are more than two teams that should go to nationals. Many teams in Ohio are a lot more qualified to go to nationals than many other teams in other states. I think Science Olympiad should consider increasing the number of teams advancing to nationals in competitive states like Ohio.
I know this is going to sting for a while for you all. Wanted to give you some perspective on why there really isn't a 'better' way. We bring 60 teams to Nationals in each division (120 teams total). It's really not logistically possible to increase that number very much if at all. There would be too many teams to realistically schedule / find space for. We have 50 state orgs, and we need to give each state at least 1 spot to be fair. That leaves only 10 additional spots to delegate (e.g. 10 states get to send 2 teams). We do that based upon total team registrations in each state (which is a reasonable quantifier for the competitiveness of that state). Right now, Ohio is something like the 6th or 7th on that list (e.g. there are at least 5 states ahead of us in terms of membership). In fact, Michigan and North Carolina have nearly DOUBLE the number of teams Ohio does, yet they both get to send only 2 teams in each division. Were we to start changing things up, they could potentially argue they should have 3 or 4 teams each, which might result in Ohio only sending 1 team! The bottom line is that the current method is the most reasonable and equitable way to do it within the constraints we have.

Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair

magicalforest
Member
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: February 25th, 2013, 2:40 pm
Division: C
State: NJ

Re: Ohio 2015

Postby magicalforest » April 11th, 2015, 6:31 pm

The We the People competition has an interesting system for qualifying for nationals. Their format is very similar to Science Olympiad- the national competition hosts 60 teams, and the State tournaments are spread out over several months leading up to nationals. Each of the 50 states is represented by the 1st place team, so there are 10 spots left for nationals. These 10 spots are known as "Wild Cards," given to teams that had very close scores to the 1st place team (such as losing by only 1-2 points) and also randomly given to States to send a second team. This format would also help introduce many new teams to the national competition.

Just a suggestion! Their website can be found here: http://www.civiced.org/programs/wtp

EDIT: This system does have a lot of drawbacks. As pointed out by Crazy Puny Man, it would create more anxiety if the States sending two teams was uncertain. The current system, while having its flaws, at least is consistent and systematic.
Last edited by magicalforest on April 11th, 2015, 6:54 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Asteroidea
Member
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: March 3rd, 2013, 7:10 pm
Division: C
State: -

Re: Ohio 2015

Postby Asteroidea » April 11th, 2015, 6:34 pm

Woah didn't expect that for Div C. Regardless congrats to Centerville and Mentor!! Especially Mentor!

ScaredPotatoe
Member
Member
Posts: 2
Joined: May 5th, 2014, 7:25 pm
Division: C
State: PA

Re: Ohio 2015

Postby ScaredPotatoe » April 11th, 2015, 6:45 pm

Wow congrats to centerville.
MIT/Soup/regionals/states/nationals
Forensics:1/?/?/?
Towers:7/?/?
Helicopters:17/?/?

User avatar
EastStroudsburg13
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 3028
Joined: January 17th, 2009, 7:32 am
Division: Grad
State: MD
Location: At work trying to be a real adult
Contact:

Re: Ohio 2015

Postby EastStroudsburg13 » April 11th, 2015, 8:42 pm

The We the People competition has an interesting system for qualifying for nationals. Their format is very similar to Science Olympiad- the national competition hosts 60 teams, and the State tournaments are spread out over several months leading up to nationals. Each of the 50 states is represented by the 1st place team, so there are 10 spots left for nationals. These 10 spots are known as "Wild Cards," given to teams that had very close scores to the 1st place team (such as losing by only 1-2 points) and also randomly given to States to send a second team. This format would also help introduce many new teams to the national competition.

Just a suggestion! Their website can be found here: http://www.civiced.org/programs/wtp

EDIT: This system does have a lot of drawbacks. As pointed out by Crazy Puny Man, it would create more anxiety if the States sending two teams was uncertain. The current system, while having its flaws, at least is consistent and systematic.
Wild Card systems have been brought up as suggestions nearly every year on the forums (usually around this time, when state competitions are happening). It's just too difficult to a) organize, and b) keep consistent. There are always going to be scenarios where one team would say "we deserved to go", and at least this way, that is kept to a minimum.

Also keep in mind that Nationals is NOT intended to be a competition of the 60 best teams in the country. It is intended to be a competition of the best teams from each state. So unfortunately for third-place teams, it's not looking like nationals spots are going to be given to three teams in any state in the forseeable future.
East Stroudsburg South Class of 2012, Alumnus of JT Lambert, Drexel University Class of 2017

Helpful Links
Wiki
Wiki Pages that Need Work
FAQ and SciOly FAQ Wiki
Chat (See IRC Wiki for more info)
BBCode Wiki


If you have any questions for me, always feel free to shoot me a PM.

User avatar
boomvroomshroom
Member
Member
Posts: 189
Joined: February 19th, 2015, 5:10 pm
Division: C
State: CA

Re: Ohio 2015

Postby boomvroomshroom » April 12th, 2015, 3:00 pm

Here are the results: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/conte ... byoNB?dl=1

Solon and Mentor Memorial are going to nationals for division B. Westlake LBMS was one point away from going to nationals. As a member of Westlake's team, this is one of the most disappointing things ever. Westlake has never been to nationals and it is extremely disappointing. I think this should bring up the point that the way to qualify for nationals is flawed. In a state like Ohio, there are more than two teams that should go to nationals. Many teams in Ohio are a lot more qualified to go to nationals than many other teams in other states. I think Science Olympiad should consider increasing the number of teams advancing to nationals in competitive states like Ohio.
Same in CA. Not trying to be judgmental, but there are some amazing teams in CA that never make it to Nats, ever. Meanwhile (not naming any names) there are some schools at Nats that don't even compete in every event. I'm not saying that those schools shouldn't be allowed to compete, but it's like they don't even care. Unfortunately there's not enough room for so many schools, and of course Scioly has to be fair to every state.

User avatar
Unome
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4105
Joined: January 26th, 2014, 12:48 pm
Division: Grad
State: GA
Location: somewhere in the sciolyverse

Re: Ohio 2015

Postby Unome » April 12th, 2015, 3:24 pm

Here are the results: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/conte ... byoNB?dl=1

Solon and Mentor Memorial are going to nationals for division B. Westlake LBMS was one point away from going to nationals. As a member of Westlake's team, this is one of the most disappointing things ever. Westlake has never been to nationals and it is extremely disappointing. I think this should bring up the point that the way to qualify for nationals is flawed. In a state like Ohio, there are more than two teams that should go to nationals. Many teams in Ohio are a lot more qualified to go to nationals than many other teams in other states. I think Science Olympiad should consider increasing the number of teams advancing to nationals in competitive states like Ohio.
Same in CA. Not trying to be judgmental, but there are some amazing teams in CA that never make it to Nats, ever. Meanwhile (not naming any names) there are some schools at Nats that don't even compete in every event. I'm not saying that those schools shouldn't be allowed to compete, but it's like they don't even care. Unfortunately there's not enough room for so many schools, and of course Scioly has to be fair to every state.
Maybe a FAQ would be useful, since these types of questions seem to come up every year.
Userpage
Chattahoochee High School Class of 2018
Georgia Tech Class of 2022

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.


Return to “2015 Invitationals, Regionals, and States”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest