The disease test was pretty vanilla. I liked the shots at SnD, but also I'm pretty sure info needed to complete all the calculations in the stats sections was missing. Better than the average test, but not as great as the massive MMWR case study packets the Ohio state people drop on us.theres been a significant lack of bio event talk. any comments on disease or microbe? any medaling raw scores??
I think someone already said their 3rd place score was in the mid teens on the mousetrap forum. I think a score in the 30s would probably have placed ~15th.Can anyone report what the lower range of mousetrap car scores were? Like, in the 30s?
When I visited Harvey Mudd they talked a lot about being rated the ugliest college campus in America, maybe you should visit them!Microbes (9): Just got the answer key today, but 4 of the MC questions had wrong answers (our answer was correct, answer key was wrong). Obviously can't share, but point differences between the top 10 teams were very small. Good test overall, though none of it was particularly difficult.
Ecology (2): Lost the tiebreaker with Mason (sad). Same proctor and format as last year, but easier questions (our raw score was 8% higher than last year). Great for differentiating between top teams.
Dynamic Planet (1): Good, comprehensive test but left most of it blank.
Experimental Design (4): MIT could and should have been more creative/elaborate with this (I mean, they had lasers last year!). We had nearly the same experiment at a lower tier invitational. Also, complaints with grading; we lost points for sections that had obviously been done (i.e. no points at all were given).
MIT Campus: 0/10. Reminded again of how depressing the brutalist architecture is. UChicago > Caltech > Ivies >>> MIT.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest