search

gryphonshafer / Quizzing-Rule-Book

Bible Quizzing Rule Book
Other
10 stars 5 forks source link

Phonetically Unique Words/Phrases #35

Open ZacharyTinker opened 3 years ago

ZacharyTinker commented 3 years ago

When considering question writing, questions writers should be aware that quizzers cannot see the words as written in the question and only hear the words. For questions that need have a unique phrase in the first five words, these should not just be as written, but also has heard.

Example: Q: The sun what? A: Stopped shining. R: Luke 24:45 Example: Q: The Son what? A: Can do nothing by Himself, He can do only what He sees His Father doing. R: John 5:19

I know these are in different books, but I have seen questions written this way.

Weigh/Way Son/Sun etc

scottpeterson commented 3 years ago

homonyms are only relevant when comparing two questions of the exact same type with the exact same audible question content. SO in the examples above "the sun stopped what?" would be valid, as would "The Son can do nothing how?"

Often times homonyms exist, but additional words make the phrase unique.

An example of what should be considered Invalid because it's "tricky" is: CR, Hebrews 11, Passed what? "Past what?

ZacharyTinker commented 3 years ago

I get that, and yes that would be a better example. I was struggling to remember some of the ones I've seen in the past. Every year there are a handful that I remove from our sets. Basically this would be for question writing to prevent writers from writing both the valid version and invalid version. I've often seen the exact same question (same reference) as an INT with only one word added each time.

scottpeterson commented 3 years ago

I don't think there's currently a problem considering these invalid because they're "tricky." Meaning, people consider these invalid when encountered.

That said, I do think some objective guidelines could be written to make it more clear.

In my hebrews 11 example, if one of those was from a different chapter, then BOTH become valid. It's the Type + Ref + Question pairing that makes it invalid.

kclimenhaga commented 2 years ago

I agree that this should be best practice for question writers. In terms of how to incorporate this into the rule book, should we add an example under invalid questions? As well, what do we do about cases like "What route" from Matthew 2? I would normally pronounce that the same way as "What root" from Matthew 3, but I know most Americans would make route rhyme with out instead. Is this something we need to clarify in the rule book? Is that the only example?

scottpeterson commented 2 years ago

This feels more like a Question Writing Best Practice, than something we need to add to the rule book. It sounds like the rule book already has the necessary language to rule these as invalid when encountered.

jswingle commented 2 years ago

Agreed that the rulebook already covers this with "tricky or misleading." I'd also add that it's unreasonable and difficult for a question writer to find every possible instance of homonyms. I would normally never say this, but these rare situations are probably best left for the quizzers to identify and challenge whenever they find a question to be confusing.

Obviously, if they ARE discovered in the question writing/editing process, they should be changed or deleted.

jswingle commented 2 years ago

Proposal for a question writing best practice on this issue:

Question writers should be aware of homonyms when writing questions. For example, "son/sun", "weigh/way", "passed/past." An otherwise valid question which sounds identical in every way to another question, should be deemed invalid because it is "tricky and misleading."

scottpeterson commented 2 years ago

Key wording being "in every way" :-)

Point of jump is not a factor. Just the question as written.

jswingle commented 2 years ago

Right.

"According to John chapter 1, what son?" "According to John chapter 2, what sun?"

are not identical "in every way".

scottpeterson commented 2 years ago

"According to John 1:1, what sun?" "According to John 1:2, what Son of God?"

also not identical. Could be based off jump point, but that isn't a factor.

jttower commented 2 years ago

The Rules Committee discussed this issue on 9/11/22 and would like to add an example under 2.2.3. Invalid Questions regarding homophones falling under "ambiguous, tricky, or misleading". I suggest that we change the order so that we can add the example under that bullet point.
Current: 2.2.3. Invalid Questions Questions must be declared invalid by the quizmaster or answer judge(s) if:

When a question is deemed invalid and thrown out, it must be replaced with the exact same type of question. For example, a CVRMA must be replaced with an CVRMA, not any multiple-answer reference question.

jswingle commented 2 years ago

I think having an "Examples" section under "Invalid Questions" is probably the best way to format it. We already have a format for this throughout the rest of the rulebook. But yeah, I like @jttower 's examples.

--

[section number, whatever it ends up being] Examples

As an example of a question being "ambiguous," consider the two questions "Mary's what?" from Luke 1:41 and "Marries whom?" from Luke 16:18. The quizzer should not be expected to distinguish between these two homophones based solely on the interrogative word chosen by the question writer.

As another example, consider the two questions "What route?" from Matthew 2:12 and "What root?" from Matthew 3:10. Depending on pronunciation, these two questions could be impossible for the quizzer to distinguish from one another.

Only the full question is considered when determining whether a question is ambiguous or not. A quizzer who pre-jumps on the phrase "the sun" may think the question is starting with "the Son," but this does not make the question ambiguous.

jswingle commented 2 years ago

While we're at it, we should remove the bullet point from this section concerning "multiple-choice." There's no possible way to write a question as a multiple-choice anyways, so this is a pointless thing to keep in the rulebook.

I also think we should remove the word "tricky" from the bullet point, because it's (ironically) an ambiguous word. It should be considered normal for some questions to be "tough" or "hard," but some people might think "tough/hard" = "tricky." I think the two adjectives "ambiguous or misleading" cover the intent well enough on their own.