National test discussion

awesome90220
Member
Member
Posts: 158
Joined: March 10th, 2012, 5:19 pm
Division: B
State: AL
Location: somewhere on this cruel, harsh planet

Re: National test discussion

Postby awesome90220 » May 20th, 2015, 2:44 pm

John Richardsim wrote:
icanteven wrote:Meteorology was great though. As long as you studied everything on the rules sheet thoroughly, it was pretty easy. I liked how they had a survey at the end which asked questions such as: the difficulty of the test, too many, too little or just the right amount of questions, and any comments that you had.

I disagree; easy tests are never good. It may have did a decent job of covering most of the topics in the rules, but the complexity of the majority of the questions were about what someone should expect from an invitational or regional test. I don't know how many total points there was on that test, but I do remember there being less than 70 questions (which is nothing when considering the general rule of thumb for the lengths of tests (twice as many points as the number of teams at that competition)).

It was either 58 or 56 questions, and I remember it being almost the exact same test as the one we took at state. There were literally questions copied word for word.

P.S. My meteorology partner is awesome.
2016 Season: BISOT/Reg/State/Nats
Wind Power:9/1/1/11
Experimental Design:5/1/1/16
It's About Time:-/1/1/20

User avatar
Unome
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4034
Joined: January 26th, 2014, 12:48 pm
Division: Grad
State: GA
Location: somewhere in the sciolyverse

Re: National test discussion

Postby Unome » May 20th, 2015, 3:24 pm

awesome90220 wrote:
John Richardsim wrote:
icanteven wrote:Meteorology was great though. As long as you studied everything on the rules sheet thoroughly, it was pretty easy. I liked how they had a survey at the end which asked questions such as: the difficulty of the test, too many, too little or just the right amount of questions, and any comments that you had.

I disagree; easy tests are never good. It may have did a decent job of covering most of the topics in the rules, but the complexity of the majority of the questions were about what someone should expect from an invitational or regional test. I don't know how many total points there was on that test, but I do remember there being less than 70 questions (which is nothing when considering the general rule of thumb for the lengths of tests (twice as many points as the number of teams at that competition)).

It was either 58 or 56 questions, and I remember it being almost the exact same test as the one we took at state. There were literally questions copied word for word.

P.S. My meteorology partner is awesome.

Yup, events like this are when I wish I had awesome partners. My partner for this was good, but neither of us was good enough to do really well.
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.

Skink
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 947
Joined: February 8th, 2009, 12:23 pm
Division: C
State: IL

Re: National test discussion

Postby Skink » May 20th, 2015, 4:45 pm

I'm not sure how I feel about short exit surveys. On one hand, I like supervisors to get feedback. On the other hand, I'd hate to risk participants who rate them poorly to get stricken back (or the reverse!).

awesome90220
Member
Member
Posts: 158
Joined: March 10th, 2012, 5:19 pm
Division: B
State: AL
Location: somewhere on this cruel, harsh planet

Re: National test discussion

Postby awesome90220 » May 20th, 2015, 5:58 pm

Skink wrote:I'm not sure how I feel about short exit surveys. On one hand, I like supervisors to get feedback. On the other hand, I'd hate to risk participants who rate them poorly to get stricken back (or the reverse!).


While I was somewhat scared that I would be punished for any negative comments I made, I did believe that the people who took the test as a whole should have the opportunity to make corrections to things that they found as a group to be unjust or not national standards.
2016 Season: BISOT/Reg/State/Nats
Wind Power:9/1/1/11
Experimental Design:5/1/1/16
It's About Time:-/1/1/20

chalker
Member
Member
Posts: 2086
Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH

Re: National test discussion

Postby chalker » May 20th, 2015, 6:26 pm

Skink wrote:I'm not sure how I feel about short exit surveys. On one hand, I like supervisors to get feedback. On the other hand, I'd hate to risk participants who rate them poorly to get stricken back (or the reverse!).


At Nationals, the event supervisors don't tabulate the exit surveys, rather the committee chair does.

Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair

User avatar
samlan16
Member
Member
Posts: 523
Joined: December 30th, 2013, 2:54 pm
Division: Grad
State: TN
Contact:

Re: National test discussion

Postby samlan16 » May 20th, 2015, 6:40 pm

xXx_syo_astro_xXx wrote:I think everyone should not be literally asking Chalker for every single score available. You noscoped the guy, okay fine. If the nats people all decide to release it it's on them :P But honestly, it is not yo, and should not be, essential to see the scores for everything (even builds). Sure, some people like AIRHORNS for motivation, but please try to be reasonable when asking Chalker stuff, as we all know he's a busy noscoper. ;). Just keep to the discussions of what the tests were like please, including whether or not Doritos and Mtn Dew were distributed :P.

Wait a minute. There are 46 events. 4+6=10. The national tournament will have started 10 days ago as of May 24. 24 is a multiple of 3. Triangles have 3 sides. Fermi Questions confirmed.

And some more edits.
Remember, we are proud of every team that participated and you are all winners.

User avatar
lumosityfan
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 308
Joined: July 14th, 2012, 7:00 pm
Division: Grad
State: NY
Location: New York, NY
Contact:

Re: National test discussion

Postby lumosityfan » May 20th, 2015, 6:47 pm

Also, keep in mind that the national test scores and tests will be released on a CD next year.
JP Stevens 2015, Columbia University 2019
See my favorite teams' event history: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing
2016-19 UCC Regionals Astronomy ES, 2017 Princeton Invitational Helicopters ES

RontgensWallaby
Member
Member
Posts: 58
Joined: April 14th, 2015, 5:00 pm
Division: C
State: GA
Location: Small Magellanic Cloud (my messages may be a couple of years late)

Re: National test discussion

Postby RontgensWallaby » May 20th, 2015, 7:33 pm

samlan16 wrote:
xXx_syo_astro_xXx wrote:I think everyone should not be literally asking Chalker for every single score available. You noscoped the guy, okay fine. If the nats people all decide to release it it's on them :P But honestly, it is not yo, and should not be, essential to see the scores for everything (even builds). Sure, some people like AIRHORNS for motivation, but please try to be reasonable when asking Chalker stuff, as we all know he's a busy noscoper. ;). Just keep to the discussions of what the tests were like please, including whether or not Doritos and Mtn Dew were distributed :P.

Wait a minute. There are 46 events. 4+6=10. The national tournament will have started 10 days ago as of May 24. 24 is a multiple of 3. Triangles have 3 sides. Fermi Questions confirmed.

And some more edits.


Was that you who "MLGified" the original post?
Every great and deep difficulty bears in itself its own solution. It forces us to change our thinking in order to find it. - Niels Bohr

User avatar
samlan16
Member
Member
Posts: 523
Joined: December 30th, 2013, 2:54 pm
Division: Grad
State: TN
Contact:

Re: National test discussion

Postby samlan16 » May 21st, 2015, 10:57 am

RontgensWallaby wrote:
samlan16 wrote:
xXx_syo_astro_xXx wrote:I think everyone should not be literally asking Chalker for every single score available. You noscoped the guy, okay fine. If the nats people all decide to release it it's on them :P But honestly, it is not yo, and should not be, essential to see the scores for everything (even builds). Sure, some people like AIRHORNS for motivation, but please try to be reasonable when asking Chalker stuff, as we all know he's a busy noscoper. ;). Just keep to the discussions of what the tests were like please, including whether or not Doritos and Mtn Dew were distributed :P.

Wait a minute. There are 46 events. 4+6=10. The national tournament will have started 10 days ago as of May 24. 24 is a multiple of 3. Triangles have 3 sides. Fermi Questions confirmed.

And some more edits.


Was that you who "MLGified" the original post?

No, that was clearly the original post.
Remember, we are proud of every team that participated and you are all winners.

Skink
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 947
Joined: February 8th, 2009, 12:23 pm
Division: C
State: IL

Re: National test discussion

Postby Skink » May 21st, 2015, 3:05 pm

chalker wrote:
Skink wrote:I'm not sure how I feel about short exit surveys. On one hand, I like supervisors to get feedback. On the other hand, I'd hate to risk participants who rate them poorly to get stricken back (or the reverse!).


At Nationals, the event supervisors don't tabulate the exit surveys, rather the committee chair does.

Thanks for the clarification. That's not a bad system.

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

Re: National test discussion

Postby boomvroomshroom » May 21st, 2015, 5:00 pm

RontgensWallaby wrote:
samlan16 wrote:
xXx_syo_astro_xXx wrote:I think everyone should not be literally asking Chalker for every single score available. You noscoped the guy, okay fine. If the nats people all decide to release it it's on them :P But honestly, it is not yo, and should not be, essential to see the scores for everything (even builds). Sure, some people like AIRHORNS for motivation, but please try to be reasonable when asking Chalker stuff, as we all know he's a busy noscoper. ;). Just keep to the discussions of what the tests were like please, including whether or not Doritos and Mtn Dew were distributed :P.

Wait a minute. There are 46 events. 4+6=10. The national tournament will have started 10 days ago as of May 24. 24 is a multiple of 3. Triangles have 3 sides. Fermi Questions confirmed.

And some more edits.


Was that you who "MLGified" the original post?


This was the 31st National Tournament. 31 is on the order of magnitude of 10^1. Take away the 1, and you have 3 left. Triangles have 3 sides.
Fermi Questions confirmed.

trentomology1999
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 6
Joined: October 14th, 2014, 5:37 pm
Division: C
State: MI
Location: Grand Haven
Contact:

Re: National test discussion

Postby trentomology1999 » May 21st, 2015, 6:13 pm

John Richardsim wrote:
icanteven wrote:Meteorology was great though. As long as you studied everything on the rules sheet thoroughly, it was pretty easy. I liked how they had a survey at the end which asked questions such as: the difficulty of the test, too many, too little or just the right amount of questions, and any comments that you had.

I disagree; easy tests are never good. It may have did a decent job of covering most of the topics in the rules, but the complexity of the majority of the questions were about what someone should expect from an invitational or regional test. I don't know how many total points there was on that test, but I do remember there being less than 70 questions (which is nothing when considering the general rule of thumb for the lengths of tests (twice as many points as the number of teams at that competition)).

I agree with John, the both of us were complaining constantly about the low difficulty of the test as we were taking it. I have noticed nobody has mentioned how horrible the supervisor was. For one thing, he somehow had the idea to have test graders grade the test at a table right next to people taking the test. The thing is, the key was on a computer screen that could be easily be seen by anyone in the area, which there was. John and I could rotate our heads 90 degrees and be able to see all the answers.

That wasn't the only problem. The supervisor also was horrible at answering questions. John and I asked 2 questions about vague directions on the test (another problem) and the guy answered our questions by just restating what we asked. For example, we asked if the supervisor wanted us, on a question asking for a description on how certain air masses form, to answer in relation to the US or in general fashion. The supervisor said "You could answer it in relation to the US or just in general " and left.

I was really disappointed in this supervisor and his test.
2017 Season
WOSO/Regionals/State/Nationals
Astronomy: 3/2/ /
Dynamic: 1/6/ /
Hydrogeology: 1/1/ /
Remote Sensing: 1/1/ /
Rocks and Mins: 1/1/ /
Team: 4,5/1/ /
Go Grand Haven!!

User avatar
asthedeer
Member
Member
Posts: 56
Joined: November 5th, 2013, 6:04 am
Division: C
State: MD
Location: On Earth.
Contact:

Re: National test discussion

Postby asthedeer » May 22nd, 2015, 3:26 pm

Don't think anyone has posted anything about CJAP yet.
It was a REALLY REALLY good test, except for one question, although it was really short (25 questions). Although it varies widely, on average, I consider CJAP tests between 25 to 40 questions decent. In this case, 25 was on the short side, especially since there was Benedict's (an extra reagent), a magnet, thermometer, and a flame test. Having the extra stuff was great, because it would stretch our normal water, HCl, NaOH capacities a little without over doing it. Before Nationals, at our last practice, my partner said something like, "It"ll be the perfect test if they give us ONE reagent and only one." The test was very well written; it covered everything that we had done/practiced/learned about for CJAP. The answers were "write the number in the box" without having to justify or anything, which my partner (knittingfrenzy18) and I though slightly weird because of causing ties (but it also made things much simpler!). We were able to answer (with an observation) 23 questions (the 24th one had an observation which I ran out of time to get). The one we didn't understand/get, though, was a question along the lines of "Was there a gas emitted, and if so, what was the pH of the gas?" This was the only time either of us has experienced this type of question and we thought this to be weird. We haven't been able to get a satisfactory answer as to how we should have answered it. (Do any of you science people out there know how to do this??) Overall, it was a WONDERFUL wonderful test and I was really happy with it. :D

The procters were really nice too- they gave us very specific instructions on what to do. We weren't supposed to get the temperatures of the reagents, apparently because she didn't want us contaminating her samples. (Huh? Don't you pour the reagents out to measure temperature? Err I guess normal people don't do that....). So if you're out there- THANK YOU for a great and well run event!!

Anyone out there who has raw scores for CJAP, I'd love to see them. (We placed 7th...one short from medaling.) I'd really enjoy being able to see how close we were to getting a medal! Thanks!!
Pilgrimage Homeschool Science Olympiad 2017!!!
Anatomy, ExD, Rocks and Minerals, Helicopters.

Check out my blog!
rockandminerals4him.wordpress.com

For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.
~God, Jeremiah 29:11

UnprunedShrub
Member
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: April 26th, 2015, 3:44 pm
Division: C
State: TX

Re: National test discussion

Postby UnprunedShrub » May 22nd, 2015, 7:38 pm

liberalartslover wrote:Dynamic Planet (4)
I wasn't too pleased with this test. I think the guy that wrote it underestimated just how in depth we all studied for it and made the test was ridiculously basic. While there weren't bad questions, they just weren't nationals level. If the questions aren't going to be difficult, at least make a bunch of them so that there's some sort of way to differentiate the top teams. Instead, there were 12 MC questions at one station... in 11 minutes. Not even close to the kind of quality/difficulty I was expecting at nationals. I felt the test turned into who made the least number of mistakes rather than who actually understood oceanography the best. Yes, if it's so easy you shouldn't make stupid mistakes. But I also feel that there should be more difficult content to really separate the best teams.

3/10 (The buoyancy section was awesome)

Geologic Mapping (6)
This was more like what I was expecting from a nationals level test. My partner and I split it up and worked individually for the entire time, and still probably left 30% at least blank. The problems were a wide variety of difficulties as well as an impossible amount of questions. I doubt anybody finished, and that's okay because it's nationals and you shouldn't be getting 100% on the test. Instead, the best team will answer the most questions and will win. The hands-on maps were a great touch, and the problems were extremely well-written. I really hope the same person proctors next year, but I also hope there are some more mathematical calculation problems with strike/dip etc. rather than just the straight map analysis.

10/10


I agree with the assessment of the Dynamic Planet test. My partner and I got 3rd place, and I feel like all of the top 15ish teams would have had very close scores. I also think that "stations" should not mean "lets just print out a regular test and put the pages on different tables". Hopefully they can incorporate some level of interactivity into the test next year, although that may be tough to do considering the limited time on each station. In addition, not all topics stated in the rules were covered (there was no coral reef stuff), and they decided to add some things not even mentioned in the rules (water masses).
MIT class of 2022
Alumnus of the Liberal Arts and Science Academy
National Medalist in Dynamic Planet

varunscs11
Member
Member
Posts: 163
Joined: March 14th, 2015, 9:02 pm
Division: Grad
State: PA

Re: National test discussion

Postby varunscs11 » May 22nd, 2015, 8:20 pm

The nationals test does not have to cover everything that is written on the rules. For example, Green Generation did not cover Stewardship of Aquatic Ecosystems, Nuclear Pollution, etc. Also since the proctor of each event writes the rules (typically), it is up to their interpretation and as long as it follows the spirit of the rules it is allowed.
Liberal Arts and Science Academy 2015-2017
University of Pennsylvania 2021
MIT Rocks and Minerals 2018, Fossils 2019

varunscs11's Userpage


Return to “2015 Nationals”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest