Week 4 EOC: Death-Race Jeopardy

300 Words.

 This variant of Jeopardy was one of the most enjoyable test periods of my education here at AiLV; highly dynamic and engaging - this is definitely one of the strategies many others could build on for study sessions outside of class. In hindsight, this game has both increased flexibility and also a distinguished amount of unpredictability. 

 My teacher for this class is hitting the ground running with his methods, the curriculum is guided and the games are more than worth the effort expended.

 Personally, I need to increase my study efforts; at this point on five point scale, I feel roughly about a two point five and work on my weak areas include general recall of the knowledge. Specifically, I need to associate the Patent terms with administration process (paper work) involved and understand the "why's" behind real-life cases.

Personal Note: In what other ways, could this game be adapted to make studying more dynamic; in the case of only five individuals or less, equal ground? Ah! Perhaps, I could organize the terms and forms by hierarchy and subcategories? Or would it be better to organize them in some other form?

  The structure of the game is as follows:

(1) Jeopardy; to a maximum of seven headings, each person must choose any subject and in order from $100 to $500, Final Jeopardy being absolute last –   no exceptions. 

The cost of final jeopardy can be less than – or equal to – an entity’s current total.

(2) The Death Race portion; When a wrong or right answer is written down, no points are lost. Only when no answer is given are points subtracted. If a right answer is given by any entity, then that entity receives a number of points equal to the selected target in the chosen category.

           
(2a) Assuming no tie in points, the person or group with the highest Jeopardy points receives a multiplier equal to the total number of entities involved and each subsequent entity receiving a multiplier equal to one less than the previous higher point-winning entity.

 (2b) For example: 4 groups; G1 = 1200pts = 4(x), G2 = 900pts = 3(x), G3 = 600pts = 2(x), G4 = 300pts = 1(x).

(2c) Then once the multipliers have been established from the ranking order of Jeopardy points; immediately afterwards the Jeopardy points themselves are entirely disregarded for purposes of the final outcome.

(2c1) X = the number of stickers each group wagers into a collective pot. Then every person within that group receives a number of points equal to “X” times their group-ranking multiplier.

(2c1-i) For example: Six stickers placed into a collective pot times the G1 multiplier of “4”; the result is 24 common points, as one total undivided, given to each person in that one group.

(2c1-ii) The group with the highest common total is the winner of all groups playing.

(2c2) The score of the individual person is the result of adding the common-point total “X” of his or her group “A” to the total number of remaining stickers personally withheld “B”. 

(2c2-i) So G1 earned 24 points (4x, x=6) being “A”, one member personally withheld “B” 6 stickers; that one member would receive (A=24pts) + (B=6pts) = (C=30) personal points.

 (2c2-ii) The result of “A+B” would be used, by the teacher, as a buffer of “Test Score (0 to 100) points + C ≤ 100 points – the final test score will not exceed 100 points, regardless if “C” would cause the final test score to be greater than 100 points.

(3) Overall: A person receives two stickers for each instance of being the    game host, one sticker for being a score writer and each person of the winning team receives one sticker.

(3a) To maintain equal participation, no person can be the host and/or  score writer more than once in a class day. A person can each be a host and score writer – not as a dual role - no more than one time in each class day. It is also likely for a person to only be a score and not a host, and vice versa; being one or the other does not always guarantee a chance of being the host or score writer.