 Contests & Activities: August 21, 2019 Issue [#9712] |
This week: Prize, or Price? The Downside of Winning Edited by: THANKFUL SONALI Library Class!  
More Newsletters By This Editor 
 
1. About this Newsletter
2. A Word from our Sponsor
3. Letter from the Editor
4. Editor's Picks
5. A Word from Writing.Com
6. Ask & Answer
7. Removal instructions
I tried an innovative quiz recently, and got a mixed response.
In fact, most of the participants said they'd have preferred a regular format.
When I thought about it -- people were enjoying themselves until it came to the point where there was 'scoring' and 'winning' (or losing).
Trying to analyse what happened. |
| ASIN: B01CJ2TNQI |
Product Type: Kindle Store
|
Amazon's Price: $ 5.99
|
|
Dear Reader,
Recently, I tried a quiz with a difference.
In my earlier quizzes, it has gone like this:
I have a written round, in which people answer questions in writing, individually, to start with. Then, those papers are corrected, the top scorers are grouped into teams of two or three (depending on how many have reached the cut-off score), and there are questions asked orally, which pass till a team gets the correct answer.
What I tried for the first time a few weeks ago was this.
Participants entered the quiz as teams of two. They were given a written question paper. It was an open-book, open resource quiz -- that is, the seven books the questions came from were available to them, and they could 'search' answers on the smartphone if they so wished.
Questions were multiple choice, all headed 'spot the odd one out'.
Now, this meant the possibility of more-than-one correct answer, depending on the logic you apply to arrive at 'similar' and 'odd one'.
To give a simple example:
Spot the odd one out:
a. Cat
b. Dog
c. Bird
d. Fish
The answer could be 'bird' (the only one that can fly) or 'fish' (the only one that lives in water) or anything else by any other logic.
Now, my quiz was, of course, for hard-core Harry Potter fans (I held off saying this for as long as I could, so as not to put non-Potterheads off! This is about quizzing, it just happens to have been a Potter quiz!) and so the questions required a lot more thought, and the possibilities for the final 'odd one' were limited.
For the first hour, each team of two tackled the eighteen questions given, using all available resources, in writing. They were asked to have up to three answers per question, with the logic behind each explained.
During the second hour, each team picked, by draw of lots, which question they would answer, of the eighteen they had already worked on in writing. They then gave their three answers, with the explanations. If any of their answers tallied with the quiz-master's (my) answer, which was kept in a sealed envelope, they got points, else the question passed to the next team.
Now, in all the publicity materials and in the rules they had been handed along with the written paper, it had been emphasized that the quiz involved an element of luck. They not only had to get the answer correct, but it had to tally with mine, too.
At the end of the round of eighteen teams answering eighteen questions, the final score threw up a clear first place by a mile, and a second and a third place which were clear, but close. There were no ties -- we had a first, second and third place.
But people weren't happy.
Some felt they had got the correct answer and not received points. Others felt that since all eighteen teams had answered all eighteen questions, everyone should've been asked all the questions, not just the ones that came directly to them or got passed on.
To start with, I was a bit disappointed. It had taken a lot of hard work, and a dry-run with my core team, to come up with this, and the preparation time had been far more than the preparation time for a conventional quiz with just a 'correct' or 'incorrect' answer. I wanted unanimous approval and applause, and the lukewarm response came as a blow.
However -- immediately, a few of the teams, the winners among them, stayed on to lunch at the cafe the quiz was at. And I joined one of the tables, and they talked about how much fun it had been, and tried to make their own questions using the format. Someone suggested we now use the questions as points for discussion during one of my monthly Harry Potter meetings.
On returning home, I looked at the pictures my team had taken. People were definitely completely engrossed, and looked interested and happy doing the written round.
What, then, had gone wrong?
The competitive element, that's what. This is what led to the element of chance. Since I couldn't possibly verify every permutation-combination within a reasonable time (and keep a quiz interesting for participants and spectators) i had to introduce the 'match my answer' concept, and the scoring reflected that.
Had this been a 'discussion' to begin with, as later suggested, people would probably have been happy throughout. They would've had to think about their favourite series in ways they hadn't before, and, as happened with my core team, lively debates would've ensued, and hopefully, some insights gained. Instead, it became about who won and who lost.
The thing is -- I've had plenty of Potter and non-Potter events in my time, and I find the ones that draw the most crowd are the ones which involve prizes. It seems to be ingrained in to people that if they put in effort they have to 'win' something tangible, not just be enriched or gain new insights. When I'd had an event based on Roald Dahl once, with people of all ages creating candy recipes and writing news reports about Charlie winning the factory, the owner of the bookshop it was at insisted on inviting judges and giving out prizes because she had run a survey and said people wanted it to be competitive.
There is an upside to winning. You get recognition, you get something tangible. Sometimes, it's the thought of the 'prize' that gives that extra momentum, helps put in that extra effort.
But there's a downside, too.
You lose out on putting in effort for the joy of it, you lose out on appreciating others' perspectives, you lose out on gaining new insights.
Prize -- or price? Think about it!
Thanks for listening!
|
By our authors!
All-time favourites!
|
Have an opinion on what you've read here today? Then send the Editor feedback! Find an item that you think would be perfect for showcasing here? Submit it for consideration in the newsletter!
https://www.Writing.Com/go/nl_form
Don't forget to support our sponsor!
| ASIN: 1945043032 |
|
Amazon's Price: $ 13.94
|
|
My last Contests & Activities Newsletter was a year ago! 
There was just one response and it was topical to a contest happening then, so instead of showcasing that, I'll just ask you to share something.
What do you think about 'winning' and 'losing'?
When is it necessary to have a competitive element, and when not?
Look forward to reading your replies! Thanks!  |
| ASIN: B07YJZZGW4 |
|
Amazon's Price: Price N/A
Not currently available. |
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, click here for your newsletter subscription list. Simply uncheck the box next to any newsletter(s) you wish to cancel and then click to "Submit Changes". You can edit your subscriptions at any time.
|
This printed copy is for your personal use only. Reproduction
of this work in any other form is not allowed and does violate its copyright. |
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
