Difference between revisions of "Frequency list"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Jacob Reed (talk | contribs) |
Jacob Reed (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
*the lists may represent recent (and thereby important-to-learn) trends in the [[canon]] as having the same frequency as older works that are rarely asked anymore | *the lists may represent recent (and thereby important-to-learn) trends in the [[canon]] as having the same frequency as older works that are rarely asked anymore | ||
*inclusion of seemingly non-academic material, such as children's literature on the literature list | *inclusion of seemingly non-academic material, such as children's literature on the literature list | ||
| − | *non-inclusion of important and frequently-asked about works | + | *non-inclusion of important and frequently-asked about works due to inconsistencies in NAQT's topic tagging system |
[[Category:Quizbowl improvement methods]] | [[Category:Quizbowl improvement methods]] | ||
Revision as of 13:41, 16 July 2013
NAQT publishes frequency lists for purchase in the categories of Literature, Non-Fiction, music, and Art (all visual).
These lists also provide an advantage over regular list studying in that the frequencies give teams a better idea of how important it is to learn each item on the list, and perhaps how Important the given works are generally.
Disadvantages of frequency lists include:
- the easy potential for the lists to go out of date (NAQT also lets teams purchase updates to the list for a lower price than the initial list)
- the lists may represent recent (and thereby important-to-learn) trends in the canon as having the same frequency as older works that are rarely asked anymore
- inclusion of seemingly non-academic material, such as children's literature on the literature list
- non-inclusion of important and frequently-asked about works due to inconsistencies in NAQT's topic tagging system