Quizzes and more…

....................................................................................................................................................................

I know quite a few people who have the knack of solving questions correctly in academic quizzes and competitions. Personally, I have never done too well in such quizzes at an individual level; probably because it requires much more than just academic knowledge.

Two weeks ago, our paediatrics department had organised elimination rounds for selecting a team that would represent our college at the Indian Academy of Paediatrics (IAP) Students’ Quiz. The team consists of two members and accordingly, the department wanted the best of the lot to go to the IAP. Elimination rounds were organised in such a way that they judged the students’ individual capability. As expected, I didn’t fair too well.

But this quiz was a learning lesson, thanks to Niranjan. Now, the format of this quiz included negative marking for wrong answers. There were 20 questions, 2 points for a correct answer and minus 1 for a wrong response. I answered very few, selected questions fearing that I’ll miss out on a good score because of the concept of negative marking. This strategy of mine was a failure; had I attempted a few more questions, I would have got a much better score. I was reasonably sure about their answers; I didn’t want to take any chances and therefore, ended up being overcautious.

A talk with Niranjan was very informative (he topped the quiz, by the way). According to him, unless you have no clue about the answer, you should try and solve the question. By not answering a question, you miss out on an opportunity to score. Risk versus benefit ratio here is definitely very low.

Last week, surgery department conducted a quiz, as an elimination before the State-level round. This State-level quiz requires a team of three students. The surgery department made a clever decision – they decided to test students as a team and gave us the choice to form our own team. This was a very good move because eventually, the students have to perform together as a unit. Students who excel as individuals may not necessarily excel as a team. Plus, they should be able to get well along with each other.

Teams were formed – one included Debanjan, Niranjan and me. We had participated together in the radiology quiz too, last year – but didn’t fare too well. It wasn’t a team event anyway. However, this year, surgery was much better. I thoroughly enjoyed participating in the quiz. Both, Debanjan and Niranjan have a very unique way of answering questions – quite different from my conventional methodology. But the most important part was that we jelled together very well. We logically sought answers for each question and agreed to the fact that we would have made at least 2-3 avoidable mistakes had we solved the paper individually.

The results will be out soon and we hope that the department keeps up its promise of selecting a team rather than individuals. If it does the later, we have mutually decided to boycott the State-level round in case only one/two amongst the three of us gets selected. Selecting best individuals would again be self-defeating; it’s always the case with other events such as Bombay Medical Congress, etc. Obviously, we are looking forward to participating in the next round together.

Some people believe that working alone gives them a greater share of the booty, little realising that a team can reap tonnes of reward, wherever eligible/possible. In this place where I have spent 4 years of my life, I have observed that most ‘teams’ perform very inefficiently, be it Aavishkaar (annual college fest), Gymkhana, various Symposia, sports, et al.

Thankfully, I had a very good team as the Chief Editor of Gosumag 2007.