Toward a True National Organization...

[First Chairman]

Let us then jump to the conclusion that priority one of the noble quiz bowl types is to wipe the Earth of any quizbowl like this.

...

The problem with this system is that it takes time. It offers no fast solutions, but it can offer an opportunity for state to clean up their acts, and for new states to start on a clean slate.....And rather than blanketing every high school in the nation, you only need to communicate with (at most) 51 high school associations.

As mentioned just previously, my own experience comes from Academic Decathlon, where there is a national organization overseeing 30+ state organizations. Even we have problems blanketing every high school in the nation, and not all high schools participate in AD. This in spite of a "war chest" up in the millions of dollars, corporate sponsorship, media coverage (L.A. Times especially), slick pamphlets, a decent website, and so forth. Illinois actually has one of the better statewide organizations, but I am sure you can tell me how many schools do both, not to mention how many schools LIKE to do both.

In effect, even having a national organization and 50+ state organizations and millions of dollars in an operating budget is NO GUARANTEE that you will promote quiz bowl the way you would like. AD is celebrating its 25th anniversary this year, and we don't have 100% participation from all high schools.

[bigtrain]

Option 1 is to try and slug it out...organize protests, mailings comparing good and bad quizbowl, revival-like meetings to convert the heathen masses, etc. etc. I see this as expensive and non-productive because it is akin to having an argument that starts with "Idiots of the world, I have come to save you from your own stupidity." Even if we assume it is the truth, I would be turned off to anything that came later.

I think a similar, more viable solution would be to contact the administration of each school that participates in NAC and inform them as to what goes on at NAC (plagiarism, favoritism, ex post facto rules), as well as the existance of cheaper and more legitimate (educational) alternatives. Additionally, NAQT could brag about its newly acquired upper hand in the notoriety category over Chip's short television stint, with NAQT's possession of Ken Jennings, Kevin Olmstead and Jeopardy tryouts.

And Ben's ultimate conclusion is correct even if he gets there in a distressing way: Of course it's possible to write good four-quarter rounds. I don't really care whether someone uses vanilla tossup/bonus, four quarter, NAQT-style, VHSL-style, Illinois style, NSC style, whatever. The point is that the questions themselves need to be good.

I agree with that one completely. I also support Mike's assertion that a National Organization needs to come to some sort of consensus as to what kind of quizbowl is the best and will be promoted by said organization.

[First Chairman]

Option 1 is to try and slug it out...organize protests, mailings comparing good and bad quizbowl, revival-like meetings to convert the heathen masses, etc. etc. I see this as expensive and non-productive because it is akin to having an argument that starts with "Idiots of the world, I have come to save you from your own stupidity." Even if we assume it is the truth, I would be turned off to anything that came later.

I think a similar, more viable solution would be to contact the administration of each school that participates in NAC and inform them as to what goes on at NAC (plagiarism, favoritism, ex post facto rules), as well as the existance of cheaper and more legitimate (educational) alternatives. Additionally, NAQT could brag about its newly acquired upper hand in the notoriety category over Chip's short television stint, with NAQT's possession of Ken Jennings, Kevin Olmstead and Jeopardy tryouts.

I'd be careful about that. Chip does have Brad Rutter.

I also am extremely cynical to say that I don't think administration really cares or wants to get involved in those things. Otherwise things would be quite different.

[quizbowllee]

I'm in a bit of a pickle here... Alabama is a bastion of bad quiz bowl. We pretty much either have to play bad quiz bowl, or not play at all...

I'd love to see changes made, but most coaches (especially those with the power) are pretty set in their ways. We actually have pretty decent pyramidal questions this year, but I've heard a lot of the powers that be complaining that the questions are "entirely too long."

I WILL NOT host a bad tournament ever again. However, I caught a good deal of flack from coaches who complained at my tournaments about questions "taking too long." I'm afraid I'm fighting a losing battle. Plenty of teams who came to my tournaments this year got their first taste of good quiz bowl, and didn't care for it. So, this strategy of "choking out" bad quiz bowl might be working in reverse here. I fear that I won't have enough teams next year to fund us. Also, interest in our spring tournament has been almost non-existent. I'm sure I'll have to cancel.

I'll not lie, I do want to form this new organization to promote a personal agenda here in the Heart of Dixie - good quiz bowl. However, I realize that even if we start this organization, coaches in Alabama are so set in their ways that it might still be impossible to change. It seems that most coaches already dislike (or at least distrust) me because of the changes I have proposed in the last few years. I'm sure that will probably only increase if I become part of a National Organization that they will perceive as me "going over their heads."

Any suggestions?

[Matthew D]

Lee part of the problem with the spring tournament is the time of year. I don't think that it would the question length would be an issue if it were earlier in the year. My bunch actually prefer the NAQT length question over the shorter "buzzer slapper" type questions. As for the changes that we have talked about in Bama, it might be like theories in science.. you have to wait 'em out... they have to retire sooner or later.. but I am going to be on the side of the changes due to the fact that the pyramidal style question promote a better understanding of all subject areas and challege the player to learn more in the long run..
As for suggestions.. I don't think we are going to be able to change the minds of some of the coaches... two come to mind right off the bat, which would fit this profile. But, some of the newer coaches like Oxford and some in my area, we should be able to get on board..

[David Riley]

Lee--I think you once said you don't have much of a travel budget; but could you travel to nearby states? Some good tournaments there--Vanderbilt for example, Dr. Rummage's tournament at Ezell-Harding, Mr. Barry's at Brookwood.

Then, I would try to find other coaches in Alabama who want change. They must be there, but just not public about it. What about the Baldwin-Mobile and Birmingham areas? If you found six or seven, you could host a round-robin tournament. Or for a large tournament, ease it in gradually by havinig quick recall for the morning rounds and pyramids for the playoffs.

Just some suggestions.

David Riley
Scholastic Bowl Coach
Wilmette, Illinois

[quizbowllee]

Lee--I think you once said you don't have much of a travel budget; but could you travel to nearby states? Some good tournaments there--Vanderbilt for example, Dr. Rummage's tournament at Ezell-Harding, Mr. Barry's at Brookwood.

Then, I would try to find other coaches in Alabama who want change. They must be there, but just not public about it. What about the Baldwin-Mobile and Birmingham areas? If you found six or seven, you could host a round-robin tournament. Or for a large tournament, ease it in gradually by havinig quick recall for the morning rounds and pyramids for the playoffs.

Just some suggestions.

David Riley
Scholastic Bowl Coach
Wilmette, Illinois

I'd say that those two areas are probably the ones with the worst quiz bowl situation... Coaches in the Mobile area still swear by Patrick's Press Questions. Most B'ham teams still think hoses are acceptable - or just can't recognize what constitutes a hose.

We don't have a huge budget, but we have travelled out-of-state several times. It seems, though, that timing is the main thing that keeps us from going to some of the big out-of-state tournaments. There always seems to be a big conflict on those dates.

I've got Matt on my side, and we'll keep fighting the good fight.

[Tegan]

I'd love to see changes made, but most coaches (especially those with the power) are pretty set in their ways. We actually have pretty decent pyramidal questions this year, but I've heard a lot of the powers that be complaining that the questions are "entirely too long."

QB Lee, out of ignorance: is Alabama quizbowl run by a State High School Association, or is it run by a group of coaches?

If it is run by coaches, I can see your point...you are fighting as much an uphill battle as we in Illinois. I sympathise.

If it is run by your State High School Association, that might work in your favor. If the State Association would sign on to a National Federation, the coaches would not be in as much of a position to fight.

Also, interest in our spring tournament has been almost non-existent. I'm sure I'll have to cancel.

That's a damn shame! I write a tournament (not without its own little editing difficulties) that are pyramid questions, and pretty tough. The first year I sent them to southern Illinois, they howled about rounds taking too long, kids being unable to remember information from the start of the question, etc, etc, etc....so I wrote a set for northern Illinois (generally favorable reviews), and a condensed set for southern Illinois. I STILL get complaints the questions are too long! This year (year three), I condensed my frosh-soph questions, and sent them down as the varsity set. You'd a thunk I was asking questions like "What is the meaning of life?" I'm tempted to stop writing for any group south of Springfield for next year.

[quizbowllee]

ASCA (Alabama Scholastic Competition Association) is a group of coaches that run things in Alabama. The AHSAA (Alabama High School Athletic Association) has no say at all in academic competitions. Personally, I would prefer to keep the AHSAA and their laundry list of ridiculous rules out of quiz bowl in Alabama. However, I've been very vocal (and unpopular) in my stance that ASCA needs a HUGE overhaul.

[Tegan]

ASCA (Alabama Scholastic Competition Association) is a group of coaches that run things in Alabama. The AHSAA (Alabama High School Athletic Association) has no say at all in academic competitions. Personally, I would prefer to keep the AHSAA and their laundry list of ridiculous rules out of quiz bowl in Alabama. However, I've been very vocal (and unpopular) in my stance that ASCA needs a HUGE overhaul.

It is a darned if you do, darned if you don't kind of thing. Let the coaches run things, its great if you have good coaches.

Can you get on the Board? How does that work? Is there oversight by any administrative agency other than these coaches?

Yo had asked for suggestions.....try and see if you can gather some allies together....perhaps even a principal or two. Can you use their own rules against them? Would it help for out of state people to come in and say (politely)...this is whacked...try <this>??

[First Chairman]

I won't presume much on teachers' attitudes about the classroom being parlayed into the quiz bowl world, but you need to ask them if they prefer true/false questions as a measure of academic success in their classes. It might surprise you that some teachers like a more expeditious way to conduct classes or direct events. I will admit it takes less effort, and no one wants to put in a ton of effort that they deem unnecessary.

I can go with more about working with "politics" (since I am working on a workshop on that subject for another organization), but that I'll have to leave for another discussion.

[Matthew D]

Lee and I have been trying to think of a way to get either of us on the board but right now we are not seeing much of a way UNLESS we can get some of the coaches that play in ASCA but don't attend the regular meetings to come and voice their opinions. As for outside influences, I don't know if that would backfire on us or not. I do know that there are at least a few that would see this as unwarranted interference
Dr Chuck, I won't mind hearing your thoughts on the poltical side of this or at least you can plug your up coming workshop..

[Stained Diviner]

I just heard from Dr. Hentzel, and we are going to hold this meeting on the Friday night before NAQT, while the exhibition matches are going on. It will be announced in several ways by NAQT, including an article that I am going to write for their newsletter.

As of right now, I plan on running the meeting. The reason I feel comfortable taking a leadership role without any following is that I know that I will not be a leader of any organization that might come out of this. I don't ever leave Chicago, so I am not a candidate to lead a national organization. If there is to be a leadership, it will come from the people who make something out of this opportunity.

As I think about all of this, I think that we may be looking more for an alliance than an organization. We've all learned lessons from our successes and failures in our own states, and we all have skills to offer beyond the area we typically travel in. That is probably what people should think about first--if somebody from outside your state was going to help you, what kind of help would you want? If you were going to offer help to another state, what kind of help would you be willing to give?

It is possible that a document describing the purpose of quiz bowl and the qualities of good quiz bowl which was endorsed by hundreds of coaches from a double-digit number of states would be helpful to some people. It seems to me that at this point something of that nature would be easy to arrange.

It seems like NAQT and PACE are more than willing to work with us, and the biggest obstacle to our receiving serious help is our inability so far to define our needs.

I will make sure that Dr. Chuck learns about what goes on at the meeting if he is not there in person. I leave it to him to set up a meeting the following weekend at PACE (or delegate that job).

[First Chairman]

Lee and I have been trying to think of a way to get either of us on the board but right now we are not seeing much of a way UNLESS we can get some of the coaches that play in ASCA but don't attend the regular meetings to come and voice their opinions. As for outside influences, I don't know if that would backfire on us or not. I do know that there are at least a few that would see this as unwarranted interference.

Dr Chuck, I won't mind hearing your thoughts on the poltical side of this or at least you can plug your up coming workshop..

Well, my specific workshop isn't really going to help too much as it is geared towards graduate and postdoctoral advocacy in academic institutions (my other activity). Maybe at the coaches and students leadership workshop that I, Eric Huff, and (pending) Shawn Pickrell hope to organize, I can adapt the workshop for you then.

Until then, I strongly suggest you look through the by-laws for ASCA. There is a nomination procedure to be elected to the Board in which you need to ask to be considered between 60 and 90 days before the annual meeting. Assuming that this procedure is actually being followed, that gives you a timeline for action for you both.

Again, to harp on my experience with Decathlon, no state organization likes to yield some of its autonomy to a national federation or organization. It's not impossible, but I would need to talk with Lynn Huett and other ASCA board members when the opportunity presents itself. But I would need to know what to talk to them about. First things first, and that is an invitation to the ASCA annual meeting (assuming I can make the trip).

If that doesn't work out or if you also want, I have other opportunities within PACE, and I'm sure all of us would welcome your participation and enthusiasm. (And Mr. Reinstein's and any other interested parties too.)

I will concede that any "declaration" is going to be taken either as completely needed and welcome or as unwarranted interference. ASCA has its own procedures of the standards they desire for any of their competitions (July 8, 2003 memo to "professional businesses providing tournament questions for academic competition") including the specific game format of four-quarters with a worksheet.

[Matthew D]

Actually I am now very interested in your workshop since that is the future plans to finish up my EdS sometime in the next 3 years then move on to my PhD

But we will both look through the bylaws and see if we can find something that might help up out

[jrbarry]

Lee:

e-mail me concerning the folks who actually run ASCA and Alabama quiz bowl. Our situation in Georgia is so different from your's as our coaches association (which began within months of ASCA back in the 1980s) has promoted what most here would call "good quiz bowl" from day one.

We formed our association (GATA), in part, to make sure it was high school people who planned the direction of high school quiz bowl in Georgia. Pre-GATA in Georgia, it was a diverse myriad of people who ran tournaments in this state. Most of those tournaments were poor in some aspect of their facilitation. GATA encouraged high school people to sponsor tournaments and we have several quality ones that emerged by the early 1990s and continue on to this day.

[email protected]

[First Chairman]

As I think about all of this, I think that we may be looking more for an alliance than an organization. We've all learned lessons from our successes and failures in our own states, and we all have skills to offer beyond the area we typically travel in. That is probably what people should think about first--if somebody from outside your state was going to help you, what kind of help would you want? If you were going to offer help to another state, what kind of help would you be willing to give?

It is possible that a document describing the purpose of quiz bowl and the qualities of good quiz bowl which was endorsed by hundreds of coaches from a double-digit number of states would be helpful to some people. It seems to me that at this point something of that nature would be easy to arrange.

It seems like NAQT and PACE are more than willing to work with us, and the biggest obstacle to our receiving serious help is our inability so far to define our needs.

I will make sure that Dr. Chuck learns about what goes on at the meeting if he is not there in person. I leave it to him to set up a meeting the following weekend at PACE (or delegate that job).

I'd rather delegate it to a willing coordinator. I will be extremely distracted as PACE NSC host.

Again, I know from experience (this time NOT Decathlon) that building opportunities to network is extremely important as a first step. As for "leadership," that is a longer-term goal should that be deemed necessary. Ideally a national organization should be organically formed from the state organizations themselves if each org sees the need to standardize or consolidate efforts for qb. As it appears to me, each state org seems to be very happy ruling its own fief.

[Stained Diviner]

The meeting will be Saturday, June 3, 2006, from 7:00 to 8:30 in the O'Hare 1 ballroom.
It will take place after the preliminary rounds.

[Romero]

ReinsteinD,

Since you are heading this meeting, I want to ask you.

What do you believe is a "good" question? What is a "bad" question?

What is a "good" tournament?

Romero

[First Chairman]

I'm repeating what I mentioned in the PACE NSC info thread.

I have not yet been contacted to organize a similar meeting at PACE. I will state that due to meetings scheduled with NCSSM, I need to know no later than this Friday (April 28) if such a meeting needs to be accommodated.

As you note from the dates of this thread, the hand has been extended for a while, but the door is closing fast.

[Stained Diviner]

Romero--Those questions were dealt with to some extent in another thread.

To give my own brief answer, I would say that a good question is one that differentiates knowledge on an important subject (though I'm OK with trivia making up about 5% of a match because I think that popular culture is a subject worth knowing). I would add that variety is important--though a particular history question is usually stuck on a particular period and place, packets should hit a variety of concepts, times, and places.

Communication is important for a good tournament--teams should know to a large extent what they are walking into when they arrive. There has to be a tight organization so that people know where to go when and can spend the bulk of their time playing matches rather than waiting around or trying to figure out where to go next. The organization must be centered around producing fair and meaningful results--that is, teams should end up near the top of the field due to beating quality teams rather than lucky placements, poor moderating, poor questions, etc.

I'm aware of the fact that what I just said is very boring and obvious, but it needs to be said because these very basic guidelines often are not followed. I also realize that this could be the subject of a very long thread--there are hundreds of things I have left out, and different people have different priorities. Additionally, different people have different opinions as to whether these criteria are satisfied by particular questions/tournaments.

[Stained Diviner]

In response to Dr. Chuck--
I won't be at PACE, but I will be happy to pass along my notes/impressions to anybody who will be.

[Romero]

The linked forum considers a general notion of quizbowl, mainly distribution (e.g. Is 40% math and science too much, Is trash acceptable). I would claim there are a number of acceptable distributions, each of which could be adapted to by teams. For me the essence of good quizbowl is inherent in the tossup question. Ironically that other thread does not specifically mention the nature of the tossup.

I have been asked whether I would attend your session in Chicago; my answer was I am not sure. I am not sure I have confidence in your ability to lead such an organization.

From your website, I find the following tossup:

What bandleader’s career was cut short when his plane disappeared over the English Channel in 1944? His band’s best-known songs were Tuxedo Junction, In the Mood, and Moonlight Serenade.

Did you write this tossup? Does this question "differentiate knowledge on an important subject"?

Romero

[Tegan]

I have been asked whether I would attend your session in Chicago; my answer was I am not sure. I am not sure I have confidence in your ability to lead such an organization.

Romero, if you read up this thread a bit, you will find the following quote from Dr. Reinstein:

As of right now, I plan on running the meeting. The reason I feel comfortable taking a leadership role without any following is that I know that I will not be a leader of any organization that might come out of this.

That alone makes me want to think that there may be something to at least listen to. I'm with you: anyone offering something for free....generally is trying to sell you something that you don't want. I think we all agree that we are not walking out of this meeting with an organization in a box, and there will be no annointings, crownings, coronations or otherwise.

And BTW.....I wouldn't hold a single toss-up up to anyone as proof that there is bad question writing afoot. There are some instances when shorter questions are used, and some of those questions are older. Question writers evlove over time. I have seen even a few NAQT questions which opened with giveaway clues that challenged no one...I would be wrong to hold just one up as a bad example. That question may have been used for an adult tournament where pyramidality was not a goal.

Go check out the Stanford Archives for New Trier's December 2005 tournament....I think you will like those better!

[Romero]

>>2005 New Trier students vs. faculty

Is this the set I should focus on? Or is it another?

I want to be fair in my assessment.

Romero

[dtaylor4]

No. The New Trier Varsity Tournament, which I believe was house-written. On top of that, also check out the old New Trier Scobol Solo questions. If you can't find them in the archive, check out New Trier's Scobol page.

[Stained Diviner]

If you want to critique my questions, I would suggest that you focus on 2002 onward. I even started a new thread for you. I have written over 2000 questions that are posted on the internet, so I have no doubt that you will find some bad ones. I would probably enjoy and learn from the discussion even if we did focus on my bad questions. However, I don't think the ensuing discussion would be particularly relevant to this thread. I can promise you that the point of a national organization would not be to spread Reinstein throughout the country. At this point, I have doubts as to whether a new organization will be formed in the near future, and my main goal is to talk to people outside my own state (which I never leave these day due to the presence of my three young children) who have an interest in the high school game to see if there are some projects we could work on that would be mutually beneficial.

Edit: To clarify, I wrote all Scobol Solo and Student vs. Faculty questions, so those are fair game. I was one of a few editors (but not a writer) for the New Trier Varsity Tournament, so that would not be fair game for this discussion. The round Romero picked is fine. I will also point out that Illinois rules call for 20% each of literature/language arts, social studies, math, and science and 10% each of fine arts and miscellaneous.

[rdunlap]

4) By the same token, we need to respect the national tournaments that are already there; yes, including NAC. Whatever people's feelings about Chip, he does attract a large contingent from Texas and New York that I don't think we can ignore.

Sorry to dig far back into the conversation; as a point of information in a similar vein, there is also a rather sizable contingent in upstate New York that plays HSB through the Masterminds program. There's no associated national tournament to step on, but it's a sizable regional program over a decade old that y'all probably don't want to ignore, either. See http://www.nymasterminds.com for more information.

[Matt Weiner]

Sorry to dig far back into the conversation; as a point of information in a similar vein, there is also a rather sizable contingent in upstate New York that plays HSB through the Masterminds program. There's no associated national tournament to step on, but it's a sizable regional program over a decade old that y'all probably don't want to ignore, either. See http://www.nymasterminds.com for more information.

Your hilariously archaic and irrelevant apologism for College Bowl is only more proof that approving of all formats is a terrible idea.

[Tegan]

Your hilariously archaic and irrelevant apologism for College Bowl is only more proof that approving of all formats is a terrible idea.

There may be a misconcepton here about "approving" and "not going after it with a machette".

I think just about anyone here would agree that a goal of any national organization would be to look at a way to change "bad quizbowl" into "good quizbowl". One of the core reasons I would want to see such an organization in existence is to apply pressure to my own state association to make the most critical changes needed toward becoming really good quizbowl.

The problem is, if such an organization makes priority one the hunting down and slaying of bad quizbowl, demanding uncnditional and immediate surrender, there will be a backlash, and likely a lot of people will ignore us instead of listen to us.

I think that this can be done over time (being a decade or so), because trying to do it immediately will have no tangible effect.

[Stained Diviner]

Improving question quality is an objective that will have to be worked on through several different fronts. The people who write decent questions need some good feedback and editing (which is hard to find, especially when the writers don't make enough money to share). The people who run tournaments with bad questions need criticism given in an effective form and an easy way to find good questions. The coaches who attend tournaments with bad questions need to be shown how and why quiz bowl can be improved and access to tournaments with good questions.

One of the reasons NAQT is thought of so highly by many high schoolers on this forum is that their questions are significantly better than most high school questions out there, and they write enough questions to fill more than one tournament each year. They don't solve all of our problems because they write a limited number of questions, their format doesn't satisfy everybody, a lot of hosts are happy letting coaches read for their own teams, and their existence has not caused bad question writers to disappear or even improve. NAQT has made the high school game better, but we still have significant problems that are probably best solved by coaches communicating with each other.

[Romero]

Quote Egan:
"One of the core reasons I would want to see such an organization in existence is to apply pressure to my own state association to make the most critical changes needed toward becoming really good quizbowl."

I have two issues with this statement. First, I don't think your idea of "good" quizbowl is in fact good. Second, your outside-in approach is just wrong.

It is asinine to try to solve a local issue by forming a national board. Do you honestly think that your association will just fold in the face of your new national group? It just seems to me that your impetus for forming this group is selfish, misguided, and destined to fail.

Here is my suggestion for how to open your meeting, "We are impotent in Illinois. Perhaps you fine folks from Texas, Virginia, Georgia, and California would back us up. If we can find power nationally maybe our state people will listen to us."

I have no desire to rip apart, in a public forum, your badly written questions or flawed idea of what is "good" quizbowl. But yet I feel compelled to do, because of your posturing.

I believe Matt Weiner is a good example of what any aspiring quizbowl organizer should do. To my knowledge, he has not called any national meetings to spread his gospel. What he has done is consistently make efforts to provide service to the community: this message board, his work with PACE, etc.

Here is a tip. Why don't you two work together in Illinois to turn the tide. Work together to add a new tournament or two. Increase your marketing efforts. It may take years, but with hard work you can affect some change towards higher quality of quizbowl LOCALLY. Once you do that, then perhaps you can work up to a bigger setting.

If you are unable to affect a quality product locally, how the hell are you going to do it nationally. Eight years ago, it would have been nice if I was able to call a national meeting to decree that Texas move to "good" quizbowl. I couldn't do that. What we did is start with 1 tournament, expanded to 2, then 3, then 4, then 6, now 8. Slowly "bad" quizbowl has been marginalized locally. Maybe you should try this approach.

Romero

[Stained Diviner]

Romero--
What you describe is in fact what we in Illinois are doing.

I began posting my Student vs. Faculty matches on the internet many years ago because there were no other questions other than one free sample round many companies offer which, I can promise you, are generally significantly worse than my questions.

One of my goals when I started Scobol Solo in 2001 was to provide a good experience for students who are as obsessed with Scholastic Bowl as I am. Because it is 1-on-1 and because the topics are more academic than what students here are used to, I have to write what by many standards are easy questions for the tournament. I also realize that the questions are shorter than NAQT and PACE, but the noncomputational questions are still pyramidal. (You can find exceptions, but the exceptions will likely prove the rule in this case.) The questions may not seem very academic to people from some areas, but I can promise you that they are very academic by our standards.

This year, two of my students told me that they wanted to add to the pool by writing their own quality questions for a new tournament, and that is exactly what happened. Those students have joined forces with some other students from Illinois, and they are writing questions for several tournaments in Illinois next year, including a series of four tournaments statewide that typically attracts over 100 schools.

Tom Egan edited the questions for our state tournament for two years, and they were the best two years we had for those questions. He gave up the gig so that he could return to coaching. He now writes questions for a couple of tournaments, and they are good questions. They are not posted on the internet, but he might be able to send you a round or two if you are interested. (Do not judge his questions based on one bad question he used to open a thread a few months ago--his questions overall are significantly better than that example.)

A national organization, if it exists, will not solve all of our problems. Nobody is pretending that it will. This is a battle we are fighting every way we can, and if this gives us one more arrow in our quiver (or whatever the expression is), then it will be a good thing.

We in Illinois do not pretend to have solved all of our problems and that everybody should just follow us. The idea is that a lot of states have a lot of problems, and in many cases they have the same problems, so we might be able to accomplish more working together than ignoring each other.

I am unaware of the successes in Texas other than the strength of St. John's at national tournaments. You probably have something to teach us. There may be problems in Texas that people in other states have made progress on. That's the idea. We're going to sit down for at least an hour and a half to talk seriously about quiz bowl, learn from each other, and find out if investing more of our time together would be worthwhile.

[First Chairman]

In response to Dr. Chuck--
I won't be at PACE, but I will be happy to pass along my notes/impressions to anybody who will be.

Boy, this thread has gone in an odd direction. I'm talking about this topic on the PACE NSC info thread... Hopefully the moderator will switch that block over... maybe to a new discussion here. (I caveat everything I've written for the last few days that I'm just speaking my own mind but with the advantage of retrospection with PACE.)

At any rate, no problem about notes and impressions. It's possible there will also be PACE folks at that meeting who would be interested in how such a national organization can help or hurt our causes. But I appreciate any and all sets of notes. The bad thing is that I really won't be in the mindset to tackle these issues as we get closer to the NSC date (and I approach my pending move date to DC). Of course, I'm in the mindset "now" before the major planning begins in early May.

Of course, I'm going to agree with one thing Romero stated: actions to make changes make a difference. There are a lot of people who are making those changes in our states, even if those are incremental. The people who have won the Benjamin Cooper Award are examples of people who volunteered their time and efforts to improving the circuit in their own way, and they have some proof of success or possible success that others really appreciate (locally or nationally).

So if there is any need for a national organization, it is really a means for many of these crusaders to meet and share ideas. This is why Samer and I formed PACE back in the day. We want to find those people and support them to expand quiz bowl and "quality" competition. This is what makes PACE the group it is, and we always want to identify more people who share our passion and vision to achieve these goals. Not everyone joins who we hope should, but those that do want to see our visions (individual and collective) realized.

Let it be also known, we don't always agree with our individual visions and beliefs for what constitutes good or quality quiz bowl. I value this diversity of opinion and background, and as long as we know that I want to keep the discussion to the point and not get too personal, we do pretty well seeing all sides of an issue. I personally am interested in innovations to the game that can draw teams to "higher quality" experiences in quiz bowl, and I have formulated many different game formats to test my own intuition about the game (to my surprise they have been successful). But I think this diversity of opinion and experience is what makes PACE the group that it is, and we seek further diversity and experience if we are to do more for the circuit.

[rdunlap]

Your hilariously archaic and irrelevant apologism for College Bowl is only more proof that approving of all formats is a terrible idea.

There may be a misconcepton here about "approving" and "not going after it with a machette".

Exactly. Matt makes the mistake of assuming my defense of College Bowl's history and my choice to try to work for improvements in that format from within translates to HSB; in fact, because HSB lacks CB's historical context, I see NAQT or some other format as the future of the high school circuit. The point of the information was, there's a thriving QB circuit that's not Chip in that area -- and that's something y'all probably want to build on.

<chuckle> And having dropped that seed of information, this native Georgian who, by freak of nature, is a fast moderator and therefore out of place in the Georgia high school circuit will drop back out of the HS discussions. :-)

[Stained Diviner]

I have posted a draft of the handout for the meeting here. I would love to get as much free advice as possible. I plan on printing and copying one week from today.

I apologize for the format--it's designed for paper rather than the web, and it's just a draft.

[Zip Zap Rap Pants]

I took a cursory look at the handout, and it looks good to me except for one thing that I don't think a lot of people have mentioned. Under the existing organizations listed, PAC (Panasonic) is not there. I think there ought to be a standardized method of selection for the PAC all-star teams, because it's not really fair if one state gets an all-star team and another state sends the winner of some tournament. Also, sometimes one school/organization which is the sole group that has the will and the means to send a team and a coach almost arbitrarily picks the all-stars. I know this is a pretty long-term goal as a lot of state organizations would be involved here, but still I think it's important that we have a fair all-star national tournament; whether it's through PAC or perhaps a new tournament the USQBA will run itself (which may be easier), the selection criteria for all-star teams ought to be more uniform, preferably with a try-out series before the actual selection.

I might not be able to attend the meeting at NAQT anyway because of Jeopardy (if I have any luck in it), so I figured I'd raise this point now.

[Stained Diviner]

I agree that it would be better if more teams at PAC were true All-Star Teams, with students from all teams having a chance to try out.

Like many issues that have come up before, this is one where it might not be wise for outsiders to tell states the right way to do things. However, if there was more communication between states, this would be one issue where the good states showing off (describing how they do it rather than telling other states what they should do) would be a good thing.

[jrbarry]

I like your idea for more communication between states. And I appreciate your work to put together that agenda.

It will be hard to influence what state organizations do in many things. This is especially true in terms of rules and procudures and question formulae.

Three things, Dan.

1. I plan on being at the meeting in Chicago. I will do whatever you feel would be helpful to you.

2. ACE is run by TWO people (Carlotta Wright and J.R. Barry)

3. Georgia's (GATA) question formula is as follows:

5 social studies tossups and bonuses per match (preferred alotment of 1 US hist, 1 world Hist, 1 geog, 1 US OR Wd Hist, and 1 from among Eco, Govt, Philo, Psych)

5 literature tossups and bonuses per match (2 Am LIt, 1 Breit Lit, 1 Wd Lit, 1 myth of Bible)

5 science tossups and bonuses per match (2 Bio, 1 chem, 1 physics, 1 astro OR geology)

2-3 mathematics tossups and bonuses per match

2-3 fine arts tossups and bonuses per match.

(These 2-3 alternate from round to round)

Tossups and bonuses are paired by BROAD subject category but not by sub-category.

No trash, current events, or foreign language questions permitted!

[solonqb]

Q. Promote participation by women and people of color

Frankly, I have no idea how to do this. Hopefully, somebody could help in this area.

Well, we could always ask CBI. According to Tom Michael, they were at the forefront of the quizbowl civil rights struggle.

[Stained Diviner]

Thanks, Rick. The document is a work in progress, and I just made two additions thanks to you. Leaving out Carlotta's name just goes to prove how little I know about promoting women!

Your support is great because you are one of a very small number of coaches known and respected in more than just your own state. Based on the statement on the NAQT website, I have been contacted by coaches from Texas, Kentucky, and Oklahoma who are not members of this board but have said that they are willing to help. (The Oklahoma coach won't be in Chicago, but the others will be at the meeting.)

It's a little odd going into a meeting not know whether 5 or 200 people will show up and not knowing what direction it will go in. If the worst thing that can happen is that people argue a little bit about what we like and dislike about Quiz Bowl before going our separate ways, then it still will be better than not having the meeting at all. However, I am optimistic that some real good will come from this even though I'm not sure what it is.

Also, my name is David, not Dan. Don't worry--I've been called worse.

[First Chairman]

On the issue of joint ownership, I would prefer that on the initial pages that both my name and David Bykowski's be listed. We are both executive officers for PACE.

On the issue of finding out how many people are attending, I'd suggest creating an evite.

[Stained Diviner]

Mr. Bykowski is now properly listed. The evite is a good idea, but by the time I got all the email adresses, via NAQT or a lot of web research, it would be very late. I would be sure to get lots of nonresponses. I also think that for many students, their decision to attend the meeting will be based on whether their Jeopardy dreams are still alive, which is fine.

Thanks to a suggestion from Rob Grierson, I have added some goals on the first page of the document.

[Trevkeeper]

So how'd the meeting go?

[David Riley]

Very positive....We had reps from Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, , Ohio, Maryland, Illinois (of course!), Georgia, Ohio, Tennessee,
Virginia, Nissouri, New York, and Canada (anyone I left out?? And Robert Hentzel and Dwight Kidder from NAQT. I'll leave the details to Matt Laird (who was taking better notes than I was) and Mr. Reinstein.

[Stained Diviner]

It was positive--there were a lot of great people there.

The general consensus was to focus on growing the activity rather than focus on defining what is good and what is bad.

The four areas people wanted to work on were increasing the number of tournaments and teams, increasing the amount of communication, getting more publicity, and providing some support services to make life easier for coaches (such as new coaches, coaches trying to gain publicity, tournament directors, etc.) These obviously are not revolutionary ideas, and that probably is the point--we share a lot of goals, so we should be working together or at least swapping stories.

We are not incorporating now. Hopefully, a year from now we will be in a position to decide whether or not that's something we want to do. A lot of what we want to get started on can be done by a few of us putting things on this site, working with PACE, and a few of us taking some initiative to spread the word.

[Kechara]

Speaking of this site, one thing that I am curious about, as PACE takes over ownership and support of this message board, is what y'all want to see on it.

As part of addressing some of the issues already raised, I am interested in creating a coaches' section of the board with resources for coaches, discussions on topics such as running practices, and a forum for people looking to mirror tournaments. This can also include a forum for coaches' opinions on different tournaments and/or questions suppliers. We will also be updating the tournament database, as discussed.

What else do y'all want to see?

[First Chairman]

It was positive--there were a lot of great people there.

The general consensus was to focus on growing the activity rather than focus on defining what is good and what is bad.

The four areas people wanted to work on were increasing the number of tournaments and teams, increasing the amount of communication, getting more publicity, and providing some support services to make life easier for coaches (such as new coaches, coaches trying to gain publicity, tournament directors, etc.) These obviously are not revolutionary ideas, and that probably is the point--we share a lot of goals, so we should be working together or at least swapping stories.

We are not incorporating now. Hopefully, a year from now we will be in a position to decide whether or not that's something we want to do. A lot of what we want to get started on can be done by a few of us putting things on this site, working with PACE, and a few of us taking some initiative to spread the word.

Flashing my "non-profit management certification badge", I guess I want an idea of what you consider successful progress in your points. What was the consensus on measurable outcomes, and what was suggested as a means to achieve those goals?

For North Carolina (speaking as Executive Director for NCATA), these goals that you list are part of our short-term agenda for the next year. It is made more difficult by the fact I will leave the area in two weeks, but regardless I am sure we would do our best to increase and promote our network among the schools that are involved. Interestingly enough, Cary Academy (which competed at HSCT) has not yet contacted me about their interest in NCATA. Regardless, even if I live a state diameter away, I intend to provide as much help as I can as an advisor to NCATA as we also do what we can to expand the game in our state.

I don't mind swapping stories, but I am more interested in best practices as they could be applied and the conditions for success in addressing the issues you seemed to have discussed.

As for the forums and the hsqb website (now speaking as PACE representative), I share Jessie's call for feedback. We want this site to work better for everyone involved. I have ideas of my own (based on what my non-profit network folks have suggested) that I would like to implement if we only had people interested in the plan.

But I also want to state that the website only improves if there are people interested in making it better and making each others' lives easier. Progress is seldom made in silence.

[First Chairman]

DRiley and MLaird:
When it is convenient, I would really appreciate a transcript of the discussion. I also want to be sure that I am included in future discussions (see previous note).

[Kechara]

Flashing my "non-profit management certification badge", I guess I want an idea of what you consider successful progress in your points. What was the consensus on measurable outcomes, and what was suggested as a means to achieve those goals?

If there had been talk of incorporating immediately, I was going to show that I learned something in 2 years of social work school besides how to do crossword puzzles and ask about vision statement, mission statement, goals, and objectives. However, as the discussion progressed and it started to become clear that a new organization would not be formed that night, I shifted my focus to what PACE could do to meet the needs that had been expressed. If anyone wants to propose some objectives by which to measure what progress PACE makes in the next year, we would be open to hearing them.