Weirsdo On National History Day
Someone--I think it was Karen--wanted to know about National History Day.
Overall, I think it is a great competition. Kids from 6th-8th grades (Junior division) and 9th-12th grades (Senior division) research topics on a yearly theme such as this past year's "Diplomacy and Debate: Successes, Failures, Consequences," or this coming year's "Revolution, Reaction, and Reform." They then present their work as a paper, exhibit, documentary, website, or performance, either individually or in a group. They must complete a process paper and an annotated bibliography regardless of what format they choose, and use of primary sources is encouraged.
Each state has its own organization, so I'm not sure how competition works on the level of individual schools. In Alabama, there is usually a regional competition, though ours was canceled due to the administrator's illness, and then a state competition (everyone from our region went straight to state). Two or three judges evaluate entries and ask competitors questions. The top two individual and group winners from each category go to nationals at the University of Maryland, with 3rd place winners being alternates. (There are also a few special prizes at Alabama's state competition, with small cash awards.) Projects may be revised between state and nationals.
At nationals, projects are grouped by numbers or by room (for performances), and the top two chosen from each group in each category become finalists. From the finalists, the top three are awarded gold, silver, and bronze medals (with cash awards), and some others are awarded special prizes (with cash awards) in individual areas sponsored by specific organizations.
I really appreciate this competition, and the kids I saw were enthusiastic about it. I also saw a lot of impressive projects. Most importantly to me personally, it was a great opportunity for Toyplayer to develop his talents and be rewarded for them.
Of course, nothing is perfect. I do not want to criticize most kids' efforts at all, so I am not going into all of my objections to individual judging. I certainly did not think that Toyplayer was cheated in any way; we went in not knowing what to expect and were gratified that he did as well as he did. However, I think it is important to note that we saw two exhibits that suggested the Nazis were treated inhumanely after World War II. One was from Arizona; I can't remember what state the other was from. I did not look at these that closely because I just wanted to get away from them--especially the one that compared the claims of a Holocaust survivor to those of an ex-S. S. member! It seems to me that judges, if not teachers, could be trained to give better guidance and not allow such projects to reach nationals. (There were, of course, many projects deploring the Holocaust.) There is also an inherent problem with having judges not see every entry: if a project is in a weak group it may reach finals even if it is not that strong; conversely, strong projects in a strong group may not make finals.
And of course I did not agree with all the judges' decisions. I think there is a tendency to reward show over substance, partly because judges may not always know that much about what they are evaluating. To use only Toyplayers' judges' comments, one judge wrote that she "learned a lot!"--which is nice, but not entirely reassuring; another praised Toyplayer's portrayal of "Andy Johnson," who only appeared in the title. I also thought it odd that a judge's comments queried the source of some of Toyplayer's lines, even though the source was clearly given in his bibliography. (Incidentally, the chief executive of the contest wrote in its brochure that her home state, Ohio, produced three presidents. It's five.)
So, great program, but I think that if contestants make finals and perform strongly they should be proud. Not to take away from anyone's project, but finals, special prizes, and medals are a bit of a crapshoot.
Overall, I think it is a great competition. Kids from 6th-8th grades (Junior division) and 9th-12th grades (Senior division) research topics on a yearly theme such as this past year's "Diplomacy and Debate: Successes, Failures, Consequences," or this coming year's "Revolution, Reaction, and Reform." They then present their work as a paper, exhibit, documentary, website, or performance, either individually or in a group. They must complete a process paper and an annotated bibliography regardless of what format they choose, and use of primary sources is encouraged.
Each state has its own organization, so I'm not sure how competition works on the level of individual schools. In Alabama, there is usually a regional competition, though ours was canceled due to the administrator's illness, and then a state competition (everyone from our region went straight to state). Two or three judges evaluate entries and ask competitors questions. The top two individual and group winners from each category go to nationals at the University of Maryland, with 3rd place winners being alternates. (There are also a few special prizes at Alabama's state competition, with small cash awards.) Projects may be revised between state and nationals.
At nationals, projects are grouped by numbers or by room (for performances), and the top two chosen from each group in each category become finalists. From the finalists, the top three are awarded gold, silver, and bronze medals (with cash awards), and some others are awarded special prizes (with cash awards) in individual areas sponsored by specific organizations.
I really appreciate this competition, and the kids I saw were enthusiastic about it. I also saw a lot of impressive projects. Most importantly to me personally, it was a great opportunity for Toyplayer to develop his talents and be rewarded for them.
Of course, nothing is perfect. I do not want to criticize most kids' efforts at all, so I am not going into all of my objections to individual judging. I certainly did not think that Toyplayer was cheated in any way; we went in not knowing what to expect and were gratified that he did as well as he did. However, I think it is important to note that we saw two exhibits that suggested the Nazis were treated inhumanely after World War II. One was from Arizona; I can't remember what state the other was from. I did not look at these that closely because I just wanted to get away from them--especially the one that compared the claims of a Holocaust survivor to those of an ex-S. S. member! It seems to me that judges, if not teachers, could be trained to give better guidance and not allow such projects to reach nationals. (There were, of course, many projects deploring the Holocaust.) There is also an inherent problem with having judges not see every entry: if a project is in a weak group it may reach finals even if it is not that strong; conversely, strong projects in a strong group may not make finals.
And of course I did not agree with all the judges' decisions. I think there is a tendency to reward show over substance, partly because judges may not always know that much about what they are evaluating. To use only Toyplayers' judges' comments, one judge wrote that she "learned a lot!"--which is nice, but not entirely reassuring; another praised Toyplayer's portrayal of "Andy Johnson," who only appeared in the title. I also thought it odd that a judge's comments queried the source of some of Toyplayer's lines, even though the source was clearly given in his bibliography. (Incidentally, the chief executive of the contest wrote in its brochure that her home state, Ohio, produced three presidents. It's five.)
So, great program, but I think that if contestants make finals and perform strongly they should be proud. Not to take away from anyone's project, but finals, special prizes, and medals are a bit of a crapshoot.
Labels: education, Karen, Mrs. Weirsdo, Toyplayer
posted by Hobbes at 8:52 PM
4 comments
