Write It Do It B/C

[robotman]

Discussion for Write It Do It B/C.

Resources:
Write It Do It Wiki
2009 Thread
2010 Thread
2011 Thread
2012 Thread
2013 Thread
2014 Thread
2015 Thread
Write It Do It Test Exchange 2016
Write It Do It Image Gallery

[InfiniCuber]

What does everyone think about the new rule of not having to define abbreviations and such?

I LOVE IT

[samlan16]

What does everyone think about the new rule of not having to define abbreviations and such?

I LOVE IT

It's so fantastic, isn't it? I practiced yesterday, finished earlier than normal, and had more time to check over.

[InfiniCuber]

What does everyone think about the new rule of not having to define abbreviations and such?

I LOVE IT

It's so fantastic, isn't it? I practiced yesterday, finished earlier than normal, and had more time to check over.

Yes! I'm glad they made the change. Having it in didn't really prove a team better than the other or make competition any harder. It was more so a nuisance!

[brayden box]

Yeah, I agree! It will help a lot!

[zyzzyva980]

What does everyone think about the new rule of not having to define abbreviations and such?

I LOVE IT :D

Is this a thing? Haven't read the rules. Is this really a thing?

I'm gonna come off like a curmudgeonly old man here, but I'm actually opposed to this change. I've always thought that the theory of Write It Do It was to explain a process in such a way that anyone can complete the process without needing to have prior knowledge. That's a pretty important concept in science. (Yes, writing is important in science! Don't slack off in English class.)

I haven't read the new rules, but it would make a lot more sense to allow common abbreviations without explanations (e.g., SW = southwest, etc), but require explanations for more obscure abbreviations.

For example, if I write:

+ 2 gr b 2 l o pc

Clearly, my teammate knows that I want him/her to add two green beads to the left orange pipe cleaner, but literally nobody else is going to get that.

Not a good change for this event, in my opinion. If this is really the way it's gonna be from now on, WIDI becomes just who can come up with the best shorthand code.

[samlan16]

What does everyone think about the new rule of not having to define abbreviations and such?

I LOVE IT

Is this a thing? Haven't read the rules. Is this really a thing?

I'm gonna come off like a curmudgeonly old man here, but I'm actually opposed to this change. I've always thought that the theory of Write It Do It was to explain a process in such a way that anyone can complete the process without needing to have prior knowledge. That's a pretty important concept in science. (Yes, writing is important in science! Don't slack off in English class.)

I haven't read the new rules, but it would make a lot more sense to allow common abbreviations without explanations (e.g., SW = southwest, etc), but require explanations for more obscure abbreviations.

For example, if I write:

+ 2 gr b 2 l o pc

Clearly, my teammate knows that I want him/her to add two green beads to the left orange pipe cleaner, but literally nobody else is going to get that.

Not a good change for this event, in my opinion. If this is really the way it's gonna be from now on, WIDI becomes just who can come up with the best shorthand code.

Unfortunately, yes. I interpreted it as not having to define every abbreviation for units, but some team somewhere could interpret it as that. The penalty for drawing a picture has also been reduced from zero tolerance DQing to a tier 2 for a portion of the model.

I honestly feel like SciOly is becoming more about winning than learning, which is unfortunate because the learning emphasis in SciOly is what drew me to materials science, whereas the winning emphasis in math team is what alienated me from math/ physics.

[bernard]

I could also imagine the old abbreviation rule causing issues for students with poor handwriting. In my current handwriting, often some of my letters are merged so "brick" might look like "brck" which would be interpreted as code or abbreviations...

Coming up with the shortest abbreviations might save time, but it's also more processing for your brain. No matter how much practice we do, understanding "red brick horizontal north" will be faster than understanding "r b h n."

[InfiniCuber]

I could also imagine the old abbreviation rule causing issues for students with poor handwriting. In my current handwriting, often some of my letters are merged so "brick" might look like "brck" which would be interpreted as code or abbreviations...

Coming up with the shortest abbreviations might save time, but it's also more processing for your brain. No matter how much practice we do, understanding "red brick horizontal north" will be faster than understanding "r b h n."

Completely agree here.

Is this a thing? Haven't read the rules. Is this really a thing?

I'm gonna come off like a curmudgeonly old man here, but I'm actually opposed to this change. I've always thought that the theory of Write It Do It was to explain a process in such a way that anyone can complete the process without needing to have prior knowledge. That's a pretty important concept in science. (Yes, writing is important in science! Don't slack off in English class.)

I haven't read the new rules, but it would make a lot more sense to allow common abbreviations without explanations (e.g., SW = southwest, etc), but require explanations for more obscure abbreviations.

For example, if I write:

+ 2 gr b 2 l o pc

Clearly, my teammate knows that I want him/her to add two green beads to the left orange pipe cleaner, but literally nobody else is going to get that.

Not a good change for this event, in my opinion. If this is really the way it's gonna be from now on, WIDI becomes just who can come up with the best shorthand code.

Unfortunately, yes. I interpreted it as not having to define every abbreviation for units, but some team somewhere could interpret it as that. The penalty for drawing a picture has also been reduced from zero tolerance DQing to a tier 2 for a portion of the model.

I honestly feel like SciOly is becoming more about winning than learning, which is unfortunate because the learning emphasis in SciOly is what drew me to materials science, whereas the winning emphasis in math team is what alienated me from math/ physics.

What I myself at least was excited for was not at all about creating "code", as some have implied. I honestly doubt many teams at all will do so. I was glad because it was a nuisance to write out "horizontal" when many people would understand "horiz." instead so it then becomes "red brick horiz. N" which is understandable, not code. Like bernard said, a code would take too long to make, commit to memory, and then execute.
And one more thing. samlam, I haven't particularly noticed this change myself thankfully, but I know everywhere I have been and competed at has been about learning, and the people who join join for learning. That's not to say there aren't places where people do this to win, I'm sure there are, but I haven't noticed this at all

[rosebiju123]

Is there a way to become more familiar with the objects they might use because what we are not able to make words of it?