Do people normally get States/Regionals tests back?

[Name]

I've been told NY doesn't really do arbitrations/score questions at all. My friend went to Great Neck South, which finished 4th in 2016 and 2017. One year, they really tanked 1 or 2 written events--I don't remember the details--that'd they'd always done well in and felt good about. They asked States if there was a grading error or something that went catastrophically wrong, because they were apparently close enough that if they didn't tank those 2 events (even if they didn't medal in them), they would have gotten 2nd. NY refused to look further at the situation.

IIRC you can arbitrate in NY if they broke a rule or something during that event, but I don't think you can arbitrate on the reasoning that you didn't do as well as you thought you did.

[primitivepolonium]

I've been told NY doesn't really do arbitrations/score questions at all. My friend went to Great Neck South, which finished 4th in 2016 and 2017. One year, they really tanked 1 or 2 written events--I don't remember the details--that'd they'd always done well in and felt good about. They asked States if there was a grading error or something that went catastrophically wrong, because they were apparently close enough that if they didn't tank those 2 events (even if they didn't medal in them), they would have gotten 2nd. NY refused to look further at the situation.

IIRC you can arbitrate in NY if they broke a rule or something during that event, but I don't think you can arbitrate on the reasoning that you didn't do as well as you thought you did.

Thanks for the clarification! Yeah, that makes sense--a rule violation is (edit: usually) very objective and clear cut.

For me, it was definitely a contrast to how in SoCal, we were able to ask Caltech to basically take a second glance at our exam to make sure our low score wasn't a fluke.

[TheCrazyChemist]

I've been told NY doesn't really do arbitrations/score questions at all. My friend went to Great Neck South, which finished 4th in 2016 and 2017. One year, they really tanked 1 or 2 written events--I don't remember the details--that'd they'd always done well in and felt good about. They asked States if there was a grading error or something that went catastrophically wrong, because they were apparently close enough that if they didn't tank those 2 events (even if they didn't medal in them), they would have gotten 2nd. NY refused to look further at the situation.

IIRC you can arbitrate in NY if they broke a rule or something during that event, but I don't think you can arbitrate on the reasoning that you didn't do as well as you thought you did.

Thanks for the clarification! Yeah, that makes sense--a rule violation is very objective and clear cut.

For me, it was definitely a contrast to how in SoCal, we were able to ask Caltech to basically take a second glance at our exam to make sure our low score wasn't a fluke.

You guys could do that! lucky! We can't really do that in CT unless you know the es. Even then, they might not tell you.

[Unome]

I've been told NY doesn't really do arbitrations/score questions at all. My friend went to Great Neck South, which finished 4th in 2016 and 2017. One year, they really tanked 1 or 2 written events--I don't remember the details--that'd they'd always done well in and felt good about. They asked States if there was a grading error or something that went catastrophically wrong, because they were apparently close enough that if they didn't tank those 2 events (even if they didn't medal in them), they would have gotten 2nd. NY refused to look further at the situation.

I've definitely heard the same, that it's unusually unlikely to have a successful appeal in NY. But, NY hasn't had a big controversy since 2014 so I guess it's hard to tell without being there.

[syo_astro]

I've been told NY doesn't really do arbitrations/score questions at all. My friend went to Great Neck South, which finished 4th in 2016 and 2017. One year, they really tanked 1 or 2 written events--I don't remember the details--that'd they'd always done well in and felt good about. They asked States if there was a grading error or something that went catastrophically wrong, because they were apparently close enough that if they didn't tank those 2 events (even if they didn't medal in them), they would have gotten 2nd. NY refused to look further at the situation.

I've definitely heard the same, that it's unusually unlikely to have a successful appeal in NY. But, NY hasn't had a big controversy since 2014 so I guess it's hard to tell without being there.

To expand on that (as GNS is a kinda specific ancedote), issues like that have come up since my freshman HS yr in like 2009/10...like, the 3rd and 4th place were Spackenkill and Syosset, each having an event they claimed they should've done well in and thus could've made nats, etc etc. Admittedly, the admin has changed some since 2014, but I'm not knowledgeable on what has/hasn't changed in practice.

Overall, I think giving a second look at tests upon asking could indirectly drive inequalities among teams (yes, even if all teams "can" do it). Not meaning to start a fight or anything, as polonium said, it was allowed in socal, that was nice to have etc, so this is just opinion going off that. Scores themselves are easier to give back to everyone equally if people find that helpful. Especially as scores are reported electronically.

That said, not sure how much giving back scores or stats changes things in practice. I thought some say this is to prevent complaints or something, though I'd figure teams and individuals would complain about ranks regardless.

[primitivepolonium]

Overall, I think giving a second look at tests upon asking could indirectly drive inequalities among teams (yes, even if all teams "can" do it). Not meaning to start a fight or anything, as polonium said, it was allowed in socal, that was nice to have etc, so this is just opinion going off that. Scores themselves are easier to give back to everyone equally if people find that helpful. Especially as scores are reported electronically.

That said, not sure how much giving back scores or stats changes things in practice. I thought some say this is to prevent complaints or something, though I'd figure teams and individuals would complain about ranks regardless.

Yeah, thinking further about my experience: it helped that regardless of what happened, the ranks wouldn't have changed. If our XPD score was accurate, then the ranks would have stayed the same; if it turned out we were inaccurately scored and did better or worse, it wouldn't have raised/tanked us a rank.

I do agree that if even if "everyone can do it", giving back all scores is preferable to giving back no scores unless you ask. For instance, if one school had an egregious scoring error that tanked them, it's probable that there were various levels of scoring errors on all the other exams for that event, which would change up the rankings.