> The first group would have the entirety of their grade based on the creativity of a single piece they submit. The second group was graded on only the total number of pounds of clay they threw.
I feel like that works partly because an important part of practice the feedback loop between continually practicing and having a sense of whether you did well or not.
Your strategy of not evaluating your own work sounds a bit like mushing clay into shapes with a blindfold on and then tossing it in kiln before you even check whether or not it's shaped like a pot. The users can sort through them later!
If the end goal is just ending up with a volume of work that's been culled down to the better ones, I guess you still get that. But it's inherently different from the Thinking Fast and Slow example where they're in a class and the goal is to learn and get better, rather than see who's made the nicest pot by the end of the semester.
I get the same effect using bandits. I practice my craft by spewing out volume rather than focusing on quality. The penalty I pay for the bad content is negligible because the bayesian bandits cull them very quickly. I am learning and getting better, but it is because I am not paralyzed by perfectionism.
I feel like that works partly because an important part of practice the feedback loop between continually practicing and having a sense of whether you did well or not.
Your strategy of not evaluating your own work sounds a bit like mushing clay into shapes with a blindfold on and then tossing it in kiln before you even check whether or not it's shaped like a pot. The users can sort through them later!
If the end goal is just ending up with a volume of work that's been culled down to the better ones, I guess you still get that. But it's inherently different from the Thinking Fast and Slow example where they're in a class and the goal is to learn and get better, rather than see who's made the nicest pot by the end of the semester.