Lakeway Activity Center
Spelling Bee Snafu
RECEIVED Wed., May 23, 2012
Dear Editor,
Just a few notes about The Austin Chronicle Adult Spelling Bee, held Thursday, May 17, at Threadgill's. After the first round weed-out 20-word test, which involved circling words the contestants felt were misspelled, the names of 53 folks who would be moving on to the next round – another weeding-out l9-word test – were read. The contestants who were moving on included those who had missed three words, two words, one, and none missed. The words on that first test didn't seem terribly difficult, and after the list was read out, several contestants asked the folks in charge to recheck their test papers. Many people, however, had left after learning that they hadn't moved on.
As it turned out, several of those who requested a "recount" had in fact been scored as missing words that they had not, and were sent on to the next round after all. My husband asked to see both of our tests, and I had missed three of the words on the first test, not seven as my test had been marked. My husband had missed four or five, not eight as his own test had been marked. I was sent on to the next round but eliminated there. But at least two of the people who had been incorrectly eliminated on the first round, however, went on to pass the second test and on to the final round. One woman who challenged the scoring was told that her test had been "lost" but eventually it was located and she went on to the final round after passing the second.
It seems probable that some of the people who left after the first round indicated they'd been eliminated but who hadn't challenged their scores may well have actually scored better than they thought and therefore might have moved on in the competition, with perhaps an entirely different outcome in the bee in the end. Geoff Thevenot, the winner of the bee, is a fantastic speller but he might have faced other opponents in the final round than he did, had the scoring in the first test been properly done for everyone.
Apparently some odd system was used to score the written tests, as explained to my husband by one of the persons in charge of the bee. (Who, interestingly, explained to my husband that "All of the mistakes were made by one grader"!) Perhaps next year a simpler sort of scoring system, such as a template, might produce more accurate results, with everyone scoring the tests completely understanding how the test-scoring should be done.
Messy, Chronicle!
Just a few notes about The Austin Chronicle Adult Spelling Bee, held Thursday, May 17, at Threadgill's. After the first round weed-out 20-word test, which involved circling words the contestants felt were misspelled, the names of 53 folks who would be moving on to the next round – another weeding-out l9-word test – were read. The contestants who were moving on included those who had missed three words, two words, one, and none missed. The words on that first test didn't seem terribly difficult, and after the list was read out, several contestants asked the folks in charge to recheck their test papers. Many people, however, had left after learning that they hadn't moved on.
As it turned out, several of those who requested a "recount" had in fact been scored as missing words that they had not, and were sent on to the next round after all. My husband asked to see both of our tests, and I had missed three of the words on the first test, not seven as my test had been marked. My husband had missed four or five, not eight as his own test had been marked. I was sent on to the next round but eliminated there. But at least two of the people who had been incorrectly eliminated on the first round, however, went on to pass the second test and on to the final round. One woman who challenged the scoring was told that her test had been "lost" but eventually it was located and she went on to the final round after passing the second.
It seems probable that some of the people who left after the first round indicated they'd been eliminated but who hadn't challenged their scores may well have actually scored better than they thought and therefore might have moved on in the competition, with perhaps an entirely different outcome in the bee in the end. Geoff Thevenot, the winner of the bee, is a fantastic speller but he might have faced other opponents in the final round than he did, had the scoring in the first test been properly done for everyone.
Apparently some odd system was used to score the written tests, as explained to my husband by one of the persons in charge of the bee. (Who, interestingly, explained to my husband that "All of the mistakes were made by one grader"!) Perhaps next year a simpler sort of scoring system, such as a template, might produce more accurate results, with everyone scoring the tests completely understanding how the test-scoring should be done.
Messy, Chronicle!
Judy Leibovich
[Editor's note: That first written test was messy indeed and we apologize for the confusion. We did have a grading snafu and were very relieved when participants came up and asked us to regrade their exams. Two of the participants that got their tests regraded went on to the finals and made the top three. Our bad. Every year we do our best and certainly learn a few things along the way, even after doing the spelling bee for 10 years. Next year we will do better and more importantly, hopefully raise even more money for the Austin Public Library. In the meantime, keep on spelling.]
