Anyone medaled at Nats?

[fleet130]

The BIG question is: If you give a state a 3rd team slot, which state are you going to take it away from. There are only soooo many slots available and that number is maxed out, unless you have an extra quarter mil or so in your pocket that you don't need!

[49ers]

well we are not taking it away from any state, and I believe with all the bail-outs the gov. is giving 1/4 mil is not much to them

[fleet130]

well we are not taking it away from any state

I'm afraid there are only a limited number of slots. If you give one state another slot you MUST take one away from another state.

with all the bail-outs the gov. is giving 1/4 mil is not much to them

What does government bail-outs have to do with this. The National Science Olympiad tournment is privately funded. They get NOTHING in the way of government funding!

[49ers]

well ok but hat doesn't make sense that SO is not gov funded but OK
and why not make more slots for nats?

[fmtiger124]

well ok but hat doesn't make sense that SO is not gov funded but OK
and why not make more slots for nats?

BECAUSE 50 TEAMS IS ENOUGH AND IT WOULDN'T BE FAIR TO GIVE 1 STATE 3 SLOTS AND NOT THE OTHER 49!

[49ers]

I never saind not every state was going to get more slots and you dont have to be so rude about it

[fleet130]

The number of teams a venue can support is limited by available facilities, housing, personnel, funding, time constraints and possibly many other reasons. ALL of these problems must be solved BEFORE they could consider adding slots.

Science Olympiad is a private corporation founded for the specific purpose of increasing interest in science & science education. They are not part of the school system or any other government entity. Why would anyone think they would be government funded?

[fmtiger124]

I never saind not every state was going to get more slots and you dont have to be so rude about it

youd been suggesting it by basically only making arguments for ohio, and pensylvainia.
When a bunch of other states could make an argument too--NY, California etc.

[49ers]

because I thought that they were part of the school system
I never said any thing about not arguing for other states as you mentioned

[fmtiger124]

because I thought that they were part of the school system

most are, but SO is funded through a part of the budget that isn't state money, the rules for spending state given money are very specific.

[wlsguy]

First, I completely agree with Fleet130, the number of teams at Nats is limited by the cost of hosting a National Tournement. It is already expensive and will only become more of a burden on the hosting schools in the future.

I also feel, however, that the distribution by number of participating schools is unfair to those states with more competitive programs.

Therefore, I think the 60 team distribution should be:

47 - (i.e. 1 for each State. Each state should be able to send their champion sorry California, you only get one with this method)
1 for the hosting State ( this may encourage State Directors to push their colleges to spend the money and host the tournement)
12- awarded to the top 12 finishing teams from the previous years National tournement. If a State places 2 teams in the top 12, they get to bring 3 the next year)

= 60

This will award the competitive states, give those smaller states a chance of getting additional slots, and provide for an ever changing National representation.

The concern would be if a single state (like OH, PA, NY, MI, etc) were to get 3 teams and all of them placed in the top 12. They would get 4 the next year, could get 5 the next, etc.
While this is highely unlikely, it could happen.

Anyway, while I think this is the best way to distribute the slots, someone would be disappointed....


p.s. since science olympiad is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. they cannot receive any federal money.

[denmarksoccer]

You could just limit the number of teams to 3 per state, so that we don't end up with Ohio sending 6 teams every year.

[nejanimb]

First, I completely agree with Fleet130, the number of teams at Nats is limited by the cost of hosting a National Tournement. It is already expensive and will only become more of a burden on the hosting schools in the future.

I also feel, however, that the distribution by number of participating schools is unfair to those states with more competitive programs.

Therefore, I think the 60 team distribution should be:

47 - (i.e. 1 for each State. Each state should be able to send their champion sorry California, you only get one with this method)
1 for the hosting State ( this may encourage State Directors to push their colleges to spend the money and host the tournement)
12- awarded to the top 12 finishing teams from the previous years National tournement. If a State places 2 teams in the top 12, they get to bring 3 the next year)

= 60

This will award the competitive states, give those smaller states a chance of getting additional slots, and provide for an ever changing National representation.

The concern would be if a single state (like OH, PA, NY, MI, etc) were to get 3 teams and all of them placed in the top 12. They would get 4 the next year, could get 5 the next, etc.
While this is highely unlikely, it could happen.

Anyway, while I think this is the best way to distribute the slots, someone would be disappointed....


p.s. since science olympiad is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. they cannot receive any federal money.

For example, that would mean that next year in C division, PA, OH, and CA could bring 3 teams, and CO would get a second team, while GA, MO, ND, and KS would be stripped of their second team.

[Aia]

Here's an interesting thought on this team arrangement: suppose a state currently has one team participating at the National level, and this team hopes to crack top ten in order to gain a second team for the state. Now, suppose several other teams in the same state also want to qualify for Nationals. Would rival teams try to help the state-winning team between State and Nationals in order to increase their chances of qualifying for Nationals the following year? Theoretically, this team arrangement could foster collaboration within a state. It wouldn't be too difficult for a rival team to share engineering from a gold medal device, or even share resources for academic events.

[scienceolympiadist]

I doubt that would happen, because the team that didn't make it to Nationals wouldn't want to give out all their secrets and doom themselves for the next year.