Back to the classroom - Revision history

Albert Yingzhi Nyang: /* Discussion */

2026-03-11T21:34:45Z

Discussion

Andrew Wang NT: In case Kevin is curious i looked through this for wao 3 and WAO 3 packet merchant 15/8/0 just kinda guessed 4/2/0 med school merchant 2/1/0 undergrad coursework (STEM) 1/0/0 I wanna say a podcast 1/0/0 writing/editing 3/1/0 food tu 1/0/0 I went there in real life 1/0/0 real life famous 0/4/0 high school stem class 0/1/0 pre-ftp/ftp 0/15/0 bounceback 1/6/0

2026-03-10T02:51:26Z

In case Kevin is curious i looked through this for wao 3 and WAO 3 packet merchant 15/8/0 just kinda guessed 4/2/0 med school merchant 2/1/0 undergrad coursework (STEM) 1/0/0 I wanna say a podcast 1/0/0 writing/editing 3/1/0 food tu 1/0/0 I went there in real life 1/0/0 real life famous 0/4/0 high school stem class 0/1/0 pre-ftp/ftp 0/15/0 bounceback 1/6/0

Mattias Ehatamm at 00:48, 10 March 2026

2026-03-10T00:48:54Z

Kevin Wang: /* Discussion */

2026-03-09T23:30:05Z

Discussion

Henry Atkins: fixed math

2026-03-09T23:07:54Z

fixed math

Ryan Rosenberg: /* Discussion */

2026-03-09T22:45:23Z

Discussion

Kevin Wang: /* Discussion */

2026-03-09T22:22:58Z

Discussion

Kevin Wang: /* Discussion */

2026-03-09T22:18:36Z

Discussion

Kevin Wang: /* Discussion */

2026-03-09T22:18:23Z

Discussion

Kevin Wang: /* Discussion */

2026-03-09T22:17:25Z

Discussion

@@ Line 208: / Line 208: @@
 [https://discord.com/channels/275279348855209984/275279348855209984/1480643290918555669]</ref>
 |-
-| [[Albert Nyang]]
+| [[Albert Nyang Ying Zhi]]
+| Maths and Economics
 |data-sort-value=3.0| 2/67 (3.0%) at Regs<ref>Regs (Excluding Rebounds)
 packet study 28

@@ Line 53: / Line 53: @@
 |-
 | [[Andrew Wang]]
-| undergrad science + med school
+| undergrad chemistry + physics minor + Anking
 |data-sort-value=9.8| 5/51 (9.8%) at [[NAFTA]]<ref>[https://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=410961#p410961 Re: What Exactly is Grad Student Dominance?] by [[Good Goblin Housekeeping]] » Sun Mar 08, 2026 1:47 pm</ref>
 |-

@@ Line 178: / Line 178: @@
 |-
 | [[Mattias Ehatamm]]
-| math + Latin
+| Computer Science, Math
 |data-sort-value=4| 2/50 (4%) at [[NAFTA]]<ref>NAFTA Buzzes (n=50)
 carded: 29

@@ Line 111: / Line 111: @@
 | [[Henry Atkins]]
 | poli sci + english undergrad + grad school
-|data-sort-value=11.1| 4/63 (6.3%) at [[WAO III]]<ref>i did this for wao iii (discounting negs)
+|data-sort-value=6.3| 4/63 (6.3%) at [[WAO III]]<ref>i did this for wao iii (discounting negs)
 Writing/Editing questions - 6/4/0
 Things I just kinda knew - 1/10/0

@@ Line 111: / Line 111: @@
 | [[Henry Atkins]]
 | poli sci + english undergrad + grad school
-|data-sort-value=11.1| 4/63 (11.1%) at [[WAO III]]<ref>i did this for wao iii (discounting negs)
+|data-sort-value=11.1| 4/63 (6.3%) at [[WAO III]]<ref>i did this for wao iii (discounting negs)
 Writing/Editing questions - 6/4/0
 Things I just kinda knew - 1/10/0

@@ Line 160: / Line 160: @@
 |-
 | [[Ryan Rosenberg]]
+| political science
 |data-sort-value=1.5| 1/65 (1.5%) at Regs<ref>from Regs
     mindless packet studying

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 This is a direct consequence of the choice to make quiz bowl's measure of "importance" based on academia, as well the original "back to the classroom" movement itself.
-The major advantage of sourcing clues from "the classroom" is that they are more generally more "important" - however, it is important to remember that this is somewhat tautological and not synonymous with "well-known" or (more to the point) convertible, meaning that it is possible (and honestly very easy) to produce questions that accurately reflect a hypothetical member of academia but no actual quiz bowl players.
+The major advantage of sourcing clues from "the classroom" is that they are more generally more "important" - however, it is key to remember that this is somewhat tautological and not synonymous with "well-known" or (more to the point) convertible, meaning that it is possible (and honestly very easy) to produce questions that accurately reflect a hypothetical member of academia but no actual quiz bowl players.
 Modern critics of the "back to the classroom" idea are typically referring to this phenomenon.

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 It is basically never accurate to say that the quiz bowl [[canon]] will (or should) overlap with any particular person's learning: one's experiences knowing or not knowing something cannot be generalized, even when focusing on just this one specific avenue. One issue is that one's coursework will almost never span the curriculum of a major, but the more pressing one is that the canon is (and must be) much larger than just the set of all facts in all curricula. This means that it is always the case that anyone who wants to know a large fraction of the quiz bowl canon (i.e. become good) will have to do so entirely outside the classroom (i.e. study for quiz bowl).
-Despite this general rule of thumb, the actual relationship between a subject and its corresponding curriculum varies from major to major. STEM majors, zspecially physics and math, tend to have much more ability to buzz on their classwork, while literature and history majors fare the worst in this metric. The most extreme outliers are med students, who spend all their time reviewing flashcards on atomic facts that also happen to make up ~0.4/0.4 of every packet.
+Despite this general rule of thumb, the actual relationship between a subject and its corresponding curriculum varies from major to major. STEM majors, especially physics and math, tend to have much more ability to buzz on their classwork, while literature and history majors fare the worst in this metric. The most extreme outliers are med students, who spend all their time reviewing flashcards on atomic facts that also happen to make up ~0.4/0.4 of every packet.
 The following is a collection of anecdata volunteered by various people in response to recent discussions about whether the classroom is a good source of clues:

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 Another downside of this idea is that mirroring the classroom does not represent a complete vision of what the canon should look like. Even in subjects like science where it is possible to choose many topics that people can answer directly based on their coursework, there are not enough to fill the distro nor will these topics cover everything that is important, interesting, or otherwise worth asking about. As a result, even advocates of a "back to the classroom" approach will use it as one tool in a kit with other options.
-It is basically never accurate to say that the quiz bowl [[canon]] will (or should) overlap with any particular person's learning: one's experiences learning or not learning something cannot be generalized. One issue is that one's coursework will almost never span the curriculum of a major, but the more pressing one is that the canon is (and must be) much larger than just the set of all facts in all curricula. This means that it is always the case that anyone who wants to know a large fraction of the quiz bowl canon (i.e. become good) will have to do so entirely outside the classroom (i.e. study for quiz bowl).
+It is basically never accurate to say that the quiz bowl [[canon]] will (or should) overlap with any particular person's learning: one's experiences knowing or not knowing something cannot be generalized, even when focusing on just this one specific avenue. One issue is that one's coursework will almost never span the curriculum of a major, but the more pressing one is that the canon is (and must be) much larger than just the set of all facts in all curricula. This means that it is always the case that anyone who wants to know a large fraction of the quiz bowl canon (i.e. become good) will have to do so entirely outside the classroom (i.e. study for quiz bowl).
 Despite this general rule of thumb, the actual relationship between a subject and its corresponding curriculum varies from major to major. STEM majors, zspecially physics and math, tend to have much more ability to buzz on their classwork, while literature and history majors fare the worst in this metric. The most extreme outliers are med students, who spend all their time reviewing flashcards on atomic facts that also happen to make up ~0.4/0.4 of every packet.