Domainkey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;         d=googlegroups.com; 
 s=beta;         h=x-sender:x-apparently-to:received-spf:authentication-results
 :dkim-signature:domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to          
 :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type          
 :content-transfer-encoding:reply-to:sender:precedence:x-google-loop       
 :mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-unsubscribe          
 :x-beenthere-env:x-beenthere;         b=4lqHM//42nvvyKVtIlWeg651ZV8cpVwsWfTG7S1xVL5XfQhJjrVqfeQpv1AiuPG8AL
 o2ivT4xs9CRGhRliq/27f9Lewb4uH61ufz0C0QipuXbiMtIqhsJ6iwNtlQMeCrBCHIBm      
 91szdMVgK2f7iui3YQtXEqlgXH0xcogdyhb5E=
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 
 209.85.211.184 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.211.184;
Domainkey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; 
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to 
 :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=hdvnG3IEc48A1NwGJBz+tqs6rPNZP+8aV6TDUqwIV6xtJtZWO63x0SzgaFB3Mw2URh
 MedZ7dMUHIa+GGxGP9S9hZ+MZMNUGU2vNBksbEUb4rjFBAiPQ2HnVdXMTl8RGIfrSEFL 
 /zCuCXu6c4DIJxJp6MFJqNwd5et5H2GQDhHkE=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <e6663d200909031357s6b151765h453db67eba9296b8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e6663d200909021236h3e524716s47ef3826e2a4f4ba@mail.gmail.com>
 <925d17560909030537u5261074ar2bdd3dd392aaffbb@mail.gmail.com>
 <e6663d200909031007g31628c04k706a0cc090c969c8@mail.gmail.com>
 <925d17560909031101s2c9e6a09y1a874417aedd65e1@mail.gmail.com>
 <e6663d200909031357s6b151765h453db67eba9296b8@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 19:47:13 -0300
Message-ID: <925d17560909031547k4bc76072x1ab4d5df1abae4ad@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: How many levels
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban-lbck@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Reply-To: lojban-lbck@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban-lbck@googlegroups.com
Precedence: bulk
Mailing-List: list lojban-lbck@googlegroups.com; 	contact
 lojban-lbck+owner@googlegroups.com
Content-Length: 2831


On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 5:57 PM, Matt Arnold<matt.mattarn@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> How can we certify advanced Lojbanists on easy material if we
> haven't tested them on easy material? =A0I mean, if you want to have an
> advanced certification but lack an elementary certification, I suppose
> you can, but that never occurred to me.

If you get an advanced certification, the elementary one becomes somewhat m=
oot.

> Are you talking about us
> granting an "honorary" certification of some kind? That's hardly fair.

No, you would only get the certifications for the tests you take, but
the only really relevant one is the most advanced you have taken.

> We should avoid a lot of repetition in the tests. My level one
> thousand certification should not have to repeat level 100 remedial
> material to make sure that I know that range of the vocabulary as
> well.

I agree, you wouldn't be tested on the basic material, it would just
be taken for granted in the test that you already know it. For example
a reading comprehension text for the advanced level will most likely
include many words from the basic level, since they are the most
frequent ones and can hardly be avoided. But the questions won=B4t focus
on understanding those basic words, they will just assume that you do.
If you don't, you won't be able to do well on that test.

> I take the level 100 test first, and that's how we officially
> certify that I know the material. Then I qualify to take the next one,
> then the next. Think of it this way: In other words, it's one long
> test that gets harder and harder until you can't do it any more, then
> you know your level. Just like any game.

Many games allow you to choose your starting difficulty level so that
you don't get bored playing something that is unchallenging for you.

The only reason I can see for forcing people to start at the most
basic level is to collect more money, but maybe that also discourages
some people from taking any test at all if they are too basic for
them, I don't know.

Anyways, personally I am most interested in the development of the
tests themselves and not so much on the policies for how to take them,
so if it's decided that all tests must be taken in order to get to the
most advanced ones that's fine with me.

>> I think we should count cmavo and gismu separately, because of the 100
>> most frequent words only 18 are gismu and the rest are cmavo. I don't
>> think a test based on that makes a lot of sense. Maybe a breakdown
>> like 40 cmavo - 60 gismu would make more sense.
>
> Yeah, I strongly agree. In fact, I'd agree to 30 cmavo - 70 gismu.
> Either way, this formula should gradually invert around the 500th-word
> mark.

I would expect the ratio of cmavo to gismu and other brivla to always
keep decreasing, not inverting at any point.

mu'o mi'e xorxes