Ornithology B/C

Post Reply
User avatar
pikachu4919
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 710
Joined: December 7th, 2012, 2:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: IN
Pronouns: She/Her/Hers
Location: SEPA
Has thanked: 79 times
Been thanked: 111 times

Ornithology B/C

Post by pikachu4919 » August 17th, 2020, 3:21 am

Ornithology B/C: Participants will be assessed on their knowledge of North American birds.

Ornithology Wiki

Ornithology Test Exchange

Past Threads: 2010, 2011, 2020

Past Question Marathons: 2020
Carmel HS (IN) '16
Purdue BioE '20
Nationals 2016 ~ 4th place Forensics


Not throwin' away my shot!
MY CABBAGES!

About me || Rate my tests!
Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.

kman1234t
Member
Member
Posts: 27
Joined: October 14th, 2018, 8:22 am
Division: C
State: CA
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Ornithology B/C

Post by kman1234t » September 8th, 2020, 7:58 am

This year's rules, unlike last year's, don't mention scientific names at all. So theoretically, half the test could be asking the common name of birds, and the other 50% the scientific name.

Is soinc's intention to get rid of asking for scientific names all together?
Also why would the limit the number of birds per station on regionals and states?

User avatar
jaspattack
Wiki Moderator
Wiki Moderator
Posts: 88
Joined: April 30th, 2018, 8:29 am
Division: C
State: MO
Location: within cyberspace
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 61 times
Contact:

Re: Ornithology B/C

Post by jaspattack » September 8th, 2020, 8:06 am

I really hate that they got rid of scientific names - That's the thing I'm most upset about. Especially when there were rules clarifications based around ambiguous species on the list last year... I think eliminating them completely just makes it worse.
2019-20 Events (C): Designer Genes, Forensics, Fossils
2018-19 Events (C): Designer Genes, Fossils, Write It Do It (Mousetrap Vehicle and Experimental Design @ Regionals)
2017-18 Events (B): Rocks and Minerals, Wright Stuff, Write It Do It
I edit the wiki sometimes.

User avatar
SilverBreeze
Member
Member
Posts: 261
Joined: November 28th, 2019, 3:42 pm
Division: C
State: CA
Pronouns: She/Her/Hers
Location: Pretend hugging Umaroth because social distancing
Has thanked: 115 times
Been thanked: 195 times

Re: Ornithology B/C

Post by SilverBreeze » September 12th, 2020, 2:05 am

I wouldn't mind so much if rules had explicitly forbidden scientific names at all, or providing a limit on how much of the event could be based off asking scientific names.

Instead, the rules seem to be written to ignore the existence of scientific names altogether? When people were expecting fixes to the Orni list, they thought they would put in the scientific names of the birds that were missing it, not remove the scientific names for the birds that did have them.
I could probably deal with that. Maybe they just wanted us to compile the scientific names by ourselves, which is what we effectively had to do last year anyway.
Of course, scientific names in the list specify which species when a common name covers multiple (looking at you, Screech Owl). As jaspattack said, removing scientific names doesn't do much for reducing the ambiguity. (although I suppose it removes contradictions between common name and scientific name, like Clapper Rail)

But rather than say scientific names can or cannot be tested, they were simply omitted from the rules. Now scientific names can still be tested, in keeping with the idea that just because rules do not mention it does not mean it's off-limits as long as it's relevant, but instead of being part of ID, they count as information about the bird.


And finally, the new station rule.
I am fairly mad about this. I don't think it actually improves the event, just makes one more thing the test writer needs to work around.
One bird per station at regional level.... that's not a lot. Most challenging Orni tests give you 1-3 minutes per station with a few birds each. To keep the same level of difficulty, test writers would have to split those up to 1 minute or even 30 second stations. This doesn't improve my experience as a competitor. It just means I waste more time moving stations, the invitational host doesn't save any ink or paper because there were already enough stations for each team to be at one anyway, and it gives me less control over how I spend my time on the test.

"But wait!" you might say. Why not just have one bird per station, but have many in-depth questions about it? Wouldn't that improve the event?
Well to me... yes and no. Nothing forces you to ask mundane questions like clutch size or wingspan. You can have a bird, ask a few interesting/in-depth questions, and move on to the next one. What focusing on one bird too much does, though, is make the test "riskier" for competitors, in terms of point values.
Almost everyone messes up ID sometimes. When you miss an ID, you usually miss the subsequent questions about it, because you are using the wrong information. If every bird only has a few questions attached to it, that's not a big deal and you don't lose too many points.
However, with only one bird per station, if you mess up the ID, odds are that you'll miss the whole station. This format punishes small mistakes far more.
Additionally, not every team has time to study every bird on the list. That's fine, and I'm not arguing it's unfair if they score worse, but I think they should still receive a score that reflects what effort they did put in, rather than luck regarding the test writer's choice of questions. With a lot of birds, odds are that at least some of the birds they did study will appear, and that many birds they did not will also pop up. However, when this is restricted to a few birds, luck is more involved. If the test writer chooses mostly birds that you covered, great, and you score better than if it had been a test with more birds. If the test writer chooses mostly birds you did not cover, you score worse than if it had been a test with more birds and don't get to put what you did study to use.

And, yes, I know that there will always be bad writers with any rules. However, I think the point of the rules is to allow good test writers to continue writing good tests and to give better guidance for writers who write lower-quality tests. In my opinion, the rule changes do neither.

And finally ID stations are put in mostly as easy points for reducing ties near the bottom of the score distribution, and the new rule disallows that as well.
These users thanked the author SilverBreeze for the post (total 4):
CPScienceDude (September 12th, 2020, 6:35 am) • gz839918 (September 12th, 2020, 6:42 am) • sneepity (September 21st, 2020, 7:33 am) • hmmm (September 22nd, 2020, 8:22 am)
Troy SciOly 2019 - now
Suzanne SciOly 2016 - 2019
Events this season: Water Quality, Forensics, Ornithology, (some experience in DP)

The team may be gone, but the program lives on...

Avalanche
Member
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: September 19th, 2017, 6:14 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Ornithology B/C

Post by Avalanche » September 21st, 2020, 7:25 am

Hey,

I'm new to ornithology but did herp last time it was a thing. I was looking for some recommendations for good Ornithology books. If anybody has any just recommend them. Thanks!
These users thanked the author Avalanche for the post:
sneepity (September 21st, 2020, 7:31 am)
Boyceville/Gopher/Regionals/State
Herpetology: 3/2/-/2
Solar System: 12/2/-/5
Road Scholar: -/-/2/1
Experimental Design: -/1/-/-

User avatar
Krish2007
Member
Member
Posts: 30
Joined: September 21st, 2019, 3:05 pm
Division: B
State: TX
Pronouns: He/Him/His
Location: Observing the plants in my mom's garden
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Ornithology B/C

Post by Krish2007 » September 23rd, 2020, 11:24 am

Avalanche wrote:
September 21st, 2020, 7:25 am
Hey,

I'm new to ornithology but did herp last time it was a thing. I was looking for some recommendations for good Ornithology books. If anybody has any just recommend them. Thanks!
I'm mostly quoting the wiki, but if you want a field guide, then Peterson's field guide and Sibley's field guide are both really good field guides with a moderate amount of information and every bird on the list. Those 2 field guides are better if you are using them for identifying the birds, but if you want more information, then use the Smithsonian or National Geographic field guides. If you want a textbook, then Ornithology by Frank B. Gill is a nice one. I use the Peterson guide and it works pretty well for me. I'm not an expert on this, but I hope this helps you.
These users thanked the author Krish2007 for the post:
Avalanche (September 23rd, 2020, 8:23 pm)
Beckendorff Junior High '21
Past events: Ornithology, Game On, Mission Possible, Circuits
2021 events: Game On, Water Quality, Circuits, Mission Possible, Botany

Post Reply

Return to “Study Events”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests