Topics covered in Post-National Discussion
- windu34
- Staff Emeritus
- Posts: 1383
- Joined: April 19th, 2015, 6:37 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: FL
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 40 times
Topics covered in Post-National Discussion
Would anyone involved like to share some of the topics/ideas brought up?
Boca Raton Community High School Alumni
University of Florida Science Olympiad Co-Founder
Florida Science Olympiad Board of Directors
[email protected] || windu34's Userpage
University of Florida Science Olympiad Co-Founder
Florida Science Olympiad Board of Directors
[email protected] || windu34's Userpage
-
- Member
- Posts: 2107
- Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: OH
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 56 times
Re: Topics covered in Post-National Discussion
Sure.. I think one of the most important ones is which Chalker looks better in a cheese head hat: me (who was wearing it all over campus all day Saturday), or my mother (who wore one on the stage near the end of the awards ceremony).windu34 wrote:Would anyone involved like to share some of the topics/ideas brought up?
Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair
-
- Member
- Posts: 2107
- Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: OH
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 56 times
Re: Topics covered in Post-National Discussion
On a slightly more serious note though, I'll share with you all some of the info I presented to all the directors / supervisors at the meeting on Sunday. Since I'm the "SONT Numbers Guy", here are some numbers:
6:41 = time Div B scores were finalized
8:12 = time Div C scores were finalized (note awards ceremony started at 7:00)
9 = number of people helping me in the scoring room
6,248 = number of data points we had to enter into Avogadro to generate final results
44,771 = steps I took Friday / Saturday according to my Fitbit
10:59 = total amount of sleep I got Friday - Sunday according to my Fitbit
6:41 = time Div B scores were finalized
8:12 = time Div C scores were finalized (note awards ceremony started at 7:00)
9 = number of people helping me in the scoring room
6,248 = number of data points we had to enter into Avogadro to generate final results
44,771 = steps I took Friday / Saturday according to my Fitbit
10:59 = total amount of sleep I got Friday - Sunday according to my Fitbit
Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair
-
- Coach
- Posts: 345
- Joined: March 11th, 2014, 12:00 pm
- Division: C
- State: FL
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 21 times
Re: Topics covered in Post-National Discussion
That is a massive amount of steps!chalker wrote:On a slightly more serious note though, I'll share with you all some of the info I presented to all the directors / supervisors at the meeting on Sunday. Since I'm the "SONT Numbers Guy", here are some numbers:
6:41 = time Div B scores were finalized
8:12 = time Div C scores were finalized (note awards ceremony started at 7:00)
9 = number of people helping me in the scoring room
6,248 = number of data points we had to enter into Avogadro to generate final results
44,771 = steps I took Friday / Saturday according to my Fitbit
10:59 = total amount of sleep I got Friday - Sunday according to my Fitbit
Also, I really liked the touch in the award ceremony of having student names with the school. Has that been done before? I do not remember seeing that the last eight National Tournaments.
-
- Member
- Posts: 2107
- Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: OH
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 56 times
Re: Topics covered in Post-National Discussion
Not that I'm aware. It's a slick function of the Avogadro system and requires a lot of work on behalf of the coaches to input correct info about who's competing where. It's unlikely that we'll be doing that in the next 2 SONTs due to using different systems.JonB wrote: Also, I really liked the touch in the award ceremony of having student names with the school. Has that been done before? I do not remember seeing that the last eight National Tournaments.
Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair
- Bazinga+
- Exalted Member
- Posts: 383
- Joined: March 8th, 2014, 7:10 am
- Division: C
- State: NY
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Topics covered in Post-National Discussion
I just wanted to ask how the appeals process worked. Im not 100% sure on how it works, but it seems to me its a bit different at nationals than other tournaments. It seems like the decision is not really made by the ES, but rather by some committee. For one of my events i heard that some 'physics board' was to make the final decision, and ruled against me, despite the nationals ES being on our side.
Innovation =/= success
- Unome
- Moderator
- Posts: 4338
- Joined: January 26th, 2014, 12:48 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: GA
- Has thanked: 235 times
- Been thanked: 85 times
Re: Topics covered in Post-National Discussion
I think the thing you're talking about with appeals might be something to do with New York, where I've heard that event supervisors have a lot of power. The only formal process that I've known any tournaments to use is to either set up an arbitration committee; for those that don't have formal processes, I suspect that tournament personnel just take it to the tournament director or some other high-up person and they hash out a decision. I'd think that generally the event supervisor doesn't have final say n an appeal, considering how many appeals have to do with something the event supervisor purportedly did wrong.Bazinga+ wrote:I just wanted to ask how the appeals process worked. Im not 100% sure on how it works, but it seems to me its a bit different at nationals than other tournaments. It seems like the decision is not really made by the ES, but rather by some committee. For one of my events i heard that some 'physics board' was to make the final decision, and ruled against me, despite the nationals ES being on our side.
- Bazinga+
- Exalted Member
- Posts: 383
- Joined: March 8th, 2014, 7:10 am
- Division: C
- State: NY
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Topics covered in Post-National Discussion
And who does the arbitration committee usually consist of?Unome wrote:I think the thing you're talking about with appeals might be something to do with New York, where I've heard that event supervisors have a lot of power. The only formal process that I've known any tournaments to use is to either set up an arbitration committee; for those that don't have formal processes, I suspect that tournament personnel just take it to the tournament director or some other high-up person and they hash out a decision. I'd think that generally the event supervisor doesn't have final say n an appeal, considering how many appeals have to do with something the event supervisor purportedly did wrong.Bazinga+ wrote:I just wanted to ask how the appeals process worked. Im not 100% sure on how it works, but it seems to me its a bit different at nationals than other tournaments. It seems like the decision is not really made by the ES, but rather by some committee. For one of my events i heard that some 'physics board' was to make the final decision, and ruled against me, despite the nationals ES being on our side.
Innovation =/= success
- Unome
- Moderator
- Posts: 4338
- Joined: January 26th, 2014, 12:48 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: GA
- Has thanked: 235 times
- Been thanked: 85 times
Re: Topics covered in Post-National Discussion
Generally/ideally some people that know the intricacies of the rules very well; for example, chalker was on arbitration at Ohio state this year. There are some lists from State and National tournaments on the internet that I don't have time to dig up right now (tournament programs, as well as logs of event sups & VIPs confirming that they arrived) that list some of these people. Usually these people started out as or are still coaches.Bazinga+ wrote:And who does the arbitration committee usually consist of?Unome wrote:I think the thing you're talking about with appeals might be something to do with New York, where I've heard that event supervisors have a lot of power. The only formal process that I've known any tournaments to use is to either set up an arbitration committee; for those that don't have formal processes, I suspect that tournament personnel just take it to the tournament director or some other high-up person and they hash out a decision. I'd think that generally the event supervisor doesn't have final say n an appeal, considering how many appeals have to do with something the event supervisor purportedly did wrong.Bazinga+ wrote:I just wanted to ask how the appeals process worked. Im not 100% sure on how it works, but it seems to me its a bit different at nationals than other tournaments. It seems like the decision is not really made by the ES, but rather by some committee. For one of my events i heard that some 'physics board' was to make the final decision, and ruled against me, despite the nationals ES being on our side.
-
- Member
- Posts: 1653
- Joined: April 30th, 2007, 7:54 am
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 29 times
Re: Topics covered in Post-National Discussion
Arbitration at nationals is VERY formal. There is a written policy and guidelines. Most states have a formal process.
Informal description.
First step, students discuss with ES if they have a concern. If it can be settled there, there is no arbitration. No need for one.
Next step, students discuss with their head coach. Coach has final say if they want to appeal. The coach also discusses with ES, if can be settled, again, no arbitration. If not, fill out form, state issue and desired remedy. Desired remedy is VERY important to think about. Do you want a rescore, do you want a re run, do you want a completely new test and all teams to retest (NOT likely logistically, I mean think about it). The ES has a block on the form to describe situation as they saw it.
This year we had a special support person to help this process, main purpose was to facilitate discussion and avoid appeal if possible.
No agreement, coach thinks its worth it, they turn in paperwork to the tournament team. There is an official appeals committee of VERY experienced national SO members across a range of disciplines who've spent a lot of time over the year (in fact years) studying and applying the rules at all levels across the country.
Depending on the issue, the committee may decide based on what was written.
They might investigate the test or test apparatus as appropriate.
They might interview competitor, coach or ES as needed.
They might examine your device if its that type of event.
They do NOT use video replay. This is considered a matter of fairness. They don't know the conditions the video was made, its angle of view, what about teams with no video, etc.
If its a matter of a difference of opinion, competitor saw it as in bounds, ES out of bounds, they almost always come down on side of ES.
If its a matter of true ambiguity in the rules they tend to come down on the side of the competitor. But their idea of ambiguity is much tighter than many competitors who are pushing the rules or just plain not reading them.
It doesn't matter what the ES did at your invitational/regional/state tournament.
There are other details, I thought they kept a written description on the national website, but I didn't find it with a quick look. It may be in the restricted area.
Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI
Informal description.
First step, students discuss with ES if they have a concern. If it can be settled there, there is no arbitration. No need for one.
Next step, students discuss with their head coach. Coach has final say if they want to appeal. The coach also discusses with ES, if can be settled, again, no arbitration. If not, fill out form, state issue and desired remedy. Desired remedy is VERY important to think about. Do you want a rescore, do you want a re run, do you want a completely new test and all teams to retest (NOT likely logistically, I mean think about it). The ES has a block on the form to describe situation as they saw it.
This year we had a special support person to help this process, main purpose was to facilitate discussion and avoid appeal if possible.
No agreement, coach thinks its worth it, they turn in paperwork to the tournament team. There is an official appeals committee of VERY experienced national SO members across a range of disciplines who've spent a lot of time over the year (in fact years) studying and applying the rules at all levels across the country.
Depending on the issue, the committee may decide based on what was written.
They might investigate the test or test apparatus as appropriate.
They might interview competitor, coach or ES as needed.
They might examine your device if its that type of event.
They do NOT use video replay. This is considered a matter of fairness. They don't know the conditions the video was made, its angle of view, what about teams with no video, etc.
If its a matter of a difference of opinion, competitor saw it as in bounds, ES out of bounds, they almost always come down on side of ES.
If its a matter of true ambiguity in the rules they tend to come down on the side of the competitor. But their idea of ambiguity is much tighter than many competitors who are pushing the rules or just plain not reading them.
It doesn't matter what the ES did at your invitational/regional/state tournament.
There are other details, I thought they kept a written description on the national website, but I didn't find it with a quick look. It may be in the restricted area.
Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests