I'd like to point out from the perspective of a physics major that a large part of the physics that comes up is known largely because of the competition. Most physicists don't take a "History of Physics" course and usually never receive a decent and formal education on the people the formed physics. As for relevence, the very existence of questions that ask for names of particles refutes that. From a purely theoretical physics standpoint, names of particles mean nothing, only their physical properties. Anyways, I'm a big advocate of asking questions that a specialist will have learned in their first two years or so of study, maybe three to four for an ACF nationals setting. This makes sure that a team without a physics major can answer physics questions, a team without a literature major can answer literature questions, etc. etc. What some people seem to lose sight of is that a place like, say, Georgia Tech, where I go, doesn't really offer an English program (what we try to pass for one boils down to designing sets for drama and reading science fiction etc. etc.) and does not compare to a place like U Chicago's English program. For a matter of accessibility you simply shouldn't ask questions about graduate level stuff unless it's already firmly established in the canon, or is the third part of a bonus in which the other two parts are fairly easy. Quiz bowl knowledge does not indicate significance historically. We ask plenty of questions that ask about things that generally aren't that significant in the big scheme of things. We also have to remember that this isn't a competition that shows proficiency in a subject. Until quiz bowl becomes writing an essay about the symbolism in "The Lottery" or deriving the Schrodinger Equation or writing a criticism on some work of art, it is all about remembering details about things, hearing keywords, and learning the key facts about it. Almost nobody has read every piece of literature they answer a question about, almost nobody has sat down and derived general relativity, and almost nobody has read books on every single major historical event. Just keep that in mind. Again, I'm all for expanding the canon. It keeps the dinosaurs on their toes and generally makes for a more dynamic playing environment. Just go about it carefully, and keep in mind that nobody likes to play a tournament in which half the questions are unanswerable. It's a fun competition, that's why I do it. That's why I did it for four years in high school (despite the constant background politics and ultra-cut-throat coaches) and plan to continue doing it for a long time. And we all love a good head- scratcher. But we do have to keep those in check in favor of questions that somebody who isn't pursuing a doctorate in Aramaic literature could answer. Just my own disjointed rambling, and again merely speaking for myself and the voices in my head. Stephen Webb
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:46 AM EST EST