Miscellaneous and Cross-disciplinary questions
Re: Miscellaneous and Cross-disciplinary questions
But I don't really see a reason to consider that a lit question that's being contaminated. More exactly, I guess, there's no better reason for you to feel screwed because that's a lit tossup being spoiled than there is for David Seal to feel screwed because that's a tainted TV tossup. If anything, these tossups are annoying and maybe should be junked because they play with expectations like this, having players primed for a category they like only to have it take a left turn. Maybe this negative impression would be mitigated if there was a more even split between academic and trash clues?
Michael Arnold
Chicago 2010
Columbia Law 2013
2009 ACF Nats Champion
2010 ICT Champion
2010 CULT Champion
Member of Mike Cheyne's Quizbowl All-Heel Team
Fundamental Theorem of Quizbowl (Revised): Almost no one is actually good at quizbowl.
Chicago 2010
Columbia Law 2013
2009 ACF Nats Champion
2010 ICT Champion
2010 CULT Champion
Member of Mike Cheyne's Quizbowl All-Heel Team
Fundamental Theorem of Quizbowl (Revised): Almost no one is actually good at quizbowl.
- Captain Sinico
- Auron
- Posts: 2675
- Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:46 pm
- Location: Champaign, Illinois
Re: Miscellaneous and Cross-disciplinary questions
Let me re-state the "anti" case in a way that I think isn't subject to the kind of cycle of reductiones ad absurdum we've seemingly fallen into here. NAQT has too many non-academic clues and should reduce the number of them. It's self-evident that that's at least potentially true; after all, we definitely need a certain level of academic clues to have an academic game and there's no reason to expect the level to be "all of them" a priori (though a girl can dream...)
It is a related but slightly different issue that NAQT has too many defined-by-NAQT non-academic questions, almost all of which consist entirely of non-academic clues. It is also a related but separate issue that any question with a substantive non-academic clue is considered non-academic by the standards of pretty much every other tournament. I am far from alone in having standards that align with the circuit's on this matter, but NAQT's do not. NAQT should be and act aware of that fact, but we don't have to debate using my or the circuit's terms; those I outlined above should be mutually comprehensible (and if they're not, propose a different set.)
I propose that NAQT partition its interdisciplinary questions into academic interdisciplinary questions, consisting of questions with only academic clues, and non-academic interdisciplinary questions, consisting of questions that contain any non-academic clues, and then count the latter against its current non-academic distribution. If that's too at odds with then end of providing non-academic questions or not Fabian enough or something, NAQT can placate me by at least distributing its non-academic interdisciplinary questions separately, probably by partitioning the current interdisciplinary distribution, to put a predictable, hard distributional cap on the number that appear. I further propose that NAQT eliminate non-academic clues from its other academic questions, which is something just about every other tournament at least promises to do. If NAQT does neither of these things, it will probably continue to contain too many non-academic clues for my and many other people's liking.
MaS
It is a related but slightly different issue that NAQT has too many defined-by-NAQT non-academic questions, almost all of which consist entirely of non-academic clues. It is also a related but separate issue that any question with a substantive non-academic clue is considered non-academic by the standards of pretty much every other tournament. I am far from alone in having standards that align with the circuit's on this matter, but NAQT's do not. NAQT should be and act aware of that fact, but we don't have to debate using my or the circuit's terms; those I outlined above should be mutually comprehensible (and if they're not, propose a different set.)
I propose that NAQT partition its interdisciplinary questions into academic interdisciplinary questions, consisting of questions with only academic clues, and non-academic interdisciplinary questions, consisting of questions that contain any non-academic clues, and then count the latter against its current non-academic distribution. If that's too at odds with then end of providing non-academic questions or not Fabian enough or something, NAQT can placate me by at least distributing its non-academic interdisciplinary questions separately, probably by partitioning the current interdisciplinary distribution, to put a predictable, hard distributional cap on the number that appear. I further propose that NAQT eliminate non-academic clues from its other academic questions, which is something just about every other tournament at least promises to do. If NAQT does neither of these things, it will probably continue to contain too many non-academic clues for my and many other people's liking.
MaS
Mike Sorice
Former Coach, Centennial High School of Champaign, IL (2014-2020) & Team Illinois (2016-2018)
Alumnus, Illinois ABT (2000-2002; 2003-2009) & Fenwick Scholastic Bowl (1999-2000)
Member, ACF (Emeritus), IHSSBCA, & PACE
Former Coach, Centennial High School of Champaign, IL (2014-2020) & Team Illinois (2016-2018)
Alumnus, Illinois ABT (2000-2002; 2003-2009) & Fenwick Scholastic Bowl (1999-2000)
Member, ACF (Emeritus), IHSSBCA, & PACE
- Birdofredum Sawin
- Rikku
- Posts: 400
- Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 11:25 pm
- Location: Mountain View
Re: Miscellaneous and Cross-disciplinary questions
Mike, this is exactly what NAQT currently does. There is a subdistribution for "miscellaneous questions, purely academic." There is also a subdistribution for "miscellaneous questions, 'impure academic'" (i.e. "containing pop culture clues"). The former subdistribution consists of questions "with only academic clues," while the latter consists of "questions that contain any non-academic clues." There is thus a "predictable, hard distributional cap" on the number of the latter that appear in any given set (it was a total of 6/11 at this year's SCT, as against a total of 8/15 "purely academic" miscellaneous questions). Let me know if this placates you.Captain Sinico wrote:
I propose that NAQT partition its interdisciplinary questions into academic interdisciplinary questions, consisting of questions with only academic clues, and non-academic interdisciplinary questions, consisting of questions that contain any non-academic clues, and then count the latter against its current non-academic distribution. If that's too at odds with then end of providing non-academic questions or not Fabian enough or something, NAQT can placate me by at least distributing its non-academic interdisciplinary questions separately, probably by partitioning the current interdisciplinary distribution, to put a predictable, hard distributional cap on the number that appear.
MaS
Andrew
Ex-Virginia, Ex-Chicago, Ex-Stanford
Ex-Virginia, Ex-Chicago, Ex-Stanford
- Captain Sinico
- Auron
- Posts: 2675
- Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:46 pm
- Location: Champaign, Illinois
Re: Miscellaneous and Cross-disciplinary questions
It goes some distance toward doing so! So, is it the case that non-academic clues can only appear in non-academic questions, or not*? If that's the case, then what I'm saying is: there are too many non-academic questions. If it's not, then I'm saying is: there still are too many non-academic clues, and I want NAQT to remedy that by removing non-academic clues from academic questions and then maybe reducing the number of non-academic questions. I'm asking that because that's the game I'd like to play; I bring up the fact that that's what every other tournament does to support the thesis that I'm not alone in feeling that way, not to make some argument that that's the right/only thing to do because everyone else is doing it.
MaS
*I have in mind the question on "Clarissa" from this year's SCT (D2 set.) That had four or maybe five literature clues and then what everyone would agree is a trash giveaway. Is that an academic question according to NAQT?
MaS
*I have in mind the question on "Clarissa" from this year's SCT (D2 set.) That had four or maybe five literature clues and then what everyone would agree is a trash giveaway. Is that an academic question according to NAQT?
Mike Sorice
Former Coach, Centennial High School of Champaign, IL (2014-2020) & Team Illinois (2016-2018)
Alumnus, Illinois ABT (2000-2002; 2003-2009) & Fenwick Scholastic Bowl (1999-2000)
Member, ACF (Emeritus), IHSSBCA, & PACE
Former Coach, Centennial High School of Champaign, IL (2014-2020) & Team Illinois (2016-2018)
Alumnus, Illinois ABT (2000-2002; 2003-2009) & Fenwick Scholastic Bowl (1999-2000)
Member, ACF (Emeritus), IHSSBCA, & PACE
- Captain Sinico
- Auron
- Posts: 2675
- Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:46 pm
- Location: Champaign, Illinois
Re: Miscellaneous and Cross-disciplinary questions
I wish someone from NAQT would answer my question about including non-academic clues in core academic questions. It seems at least somewhat odd if NAQT's saying "non-academic clues are strictly not allowed in academic cross-distribution questions, but are allowed in just normal academic questions."
MaS
MaS
Mike Sorice
Former Coach, Centennial High School of Champaign, IL (2014-2020) & Team Illinois (2016-2018)
Alumnus, Illinois ABT (2000-2002; 2003-2009) & Fenwick Scholastic Bowl (1999-2000)
Member, ACF (Emeritus), IHSSBCA, & PACE
Former Coach, Centennial High School of Champaign, IL (2014-2020) & Team Illinois (2016-2018)
Alumnus, Illinois ABT (2000-2002; 2003-2009) & Fenwick Scholastic Bowl (1999-2000)
Member, ACF (Emeritus), IHSSBCA, & PACE
- Important Bird Area
- Forums Staff: Administrator
- Posts: 6113
- Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:33 pm
- Location: San Francisco Bay Area
- Contact:
Re: Miscellaneous and Cross-disciplinary questions
Sorry I missed this one. Clarissa: I'm displeased to report that this was officially classified as "literature." That's a bad idea, and I would certainly have removed this giveaway had I seen it in editing. I'll remind our editors not to do things like this in the future.
Jeff Hoppes
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF
"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred
President, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
former HSQB Chief Admin (2012-13)
VP for Communication and history subject editor, NAQT
Editor emeritus, ACF
"I wish to make some kind of joke about Jeff's love of birds, but I always fear he'll turn them on me Hitchcock-style." -Fred