An honest look at how Intel Finalists get there

Parents Forum
421

<p>
[quote]
That is, it hoped that by whetting students appetite for doing science, it was training a new generation of scientists rather than contributing to science more directly through the competition.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>marite, that may be their true goal, but I can't think of a worse way to prepare future scientists. Long, arduous effort is what scientists will face in their careers. (What did Edison say? 1% inspiration, 99% perspiration.) Same for musicians, athletes, any number of professions. I think the local science fair is the place to whet the appetite (with Bill Nye Science Guy level projects, not post-grad level stuff.) Kids who move to the Intel level should have developed a fascination with those experiments and taken a series of "next steps." The ideas and hypothesis should be their own. With plenty of guidance from nurturing mentors.</p>

422

<p>Marite, I think the answer to that depends on you think what Intel was designed to be. If it's to motivate high schoolers to get a taste of science, then it's certainly doing the job by the enticing offers of money and accolades. Short-term projects are a great way to avoid frustrating high schoolers and turning them off to science (although if kids know as early as high school that they want to spend their summer in a lab rather than hanging out, maybe they are more mature than to become discouraged easily if their projects don't pan out anyway).</p>

<p>But Intel is also a competition that is supposed to reward creativity, effort, and downright intelligence of its participants. And shorter projects serve to undermine this goal. It's nearly impossible to get adjusted to a lab setting in a few weeks, much less design a hypothesis/experiment. Even worse, eight weeks only gives you one shot. If your experiment fails, there's little time to troubleshoot and devise a new way of carrying it out, and this is an area where intelligence/creativity would otherwise shine. (Ironically, the Intel form actually has an essay question asking how you handled unexpected problems.) </p>

<p>With only eight short weeks in which to run, if a project is not designed to succeed from the get-go, it is useless by Stony Brook standards for Intel purposes. At this point, yes, it could become a competition among mentors rather than students. It's not as though the students aren't intelligent and motivated enough to come up with creative twists on the original hypothesis..it's just that there's a time crunch, so it becomes very very difficult to add your own "flavor" to a pre-designed experiment. </p>

<p>Additionally, Aditi told me that the reason she had to pull all-nighters is that there wasn't enough time during the day for all the kids to get to use the equipment. Between the equipment crunch and the ticking clock, there is no room for mistakes, and the professors make sure that the student indeed does not make any.</p>

<p>So the Stony Brook program is all well and good if it's about getting kids motivated about science, but in the end, Intel is a competition that attempts to distinguish between the good and the outstanding. And unlike in the real scientific world, there is just not enough time in eight weeks for a student to turn a good project into an outstanding one. It's a matter of the luck of the draw..i.e., what project the student gets handed from the beginning, rather than his contributions to it, that wins the big money.</p>

<p>(Not sure how many Intel finalists go on to research in college, but I bet a good number do. As I suggested before, I don't believe the desire to enter Intel in the first place is fueled by money/fame, but actually to gain experience in a laboratory setting and win some resume boosts along the way. It's an overall good experience, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's right or fair in a competition sense.)</p>

423

<p>Thanks again, Luckystar. </p>

<p>One more question. Do most Intel projects last only 8 weeks or do students work on them during the school year then over the summer as well?</p>

<p>I have a kid who's never been interested in competitions; I see the value of decoupling exposure to science from the competitive aspect. This is America, however, and competing is part of the culture, from competitive consumption, to competitive sports, to spelling bees and academic competitions. There's even competitive parenting! Anyway, maybe Intel needs new guidelines. </p>

<p>Oh, and about Aditi's pulling all-nighters, my H and his sister were experimental scientists in different fields. They pulled all-nighters as a matter of course, often because the experiment's timeline did not take into account people's need to sleep but at other times, because access to the equipment was easier late at night.</p>

424

<p>Marite</p>

<p>My answer is based on only the "Stony Brook" experience, which some people in my high school have done:</p>

<p>Students apply for the program in the spring of their junior year. Not sure, but I think they write what area they're interested in and hope that the project they are given reflects that. The student gets accepted, then does the requisite background reading for the project.</p>

<p>Summer comes, and the hands-on part of the project commences. Eight weeks and you're done.</p>

<p>In the fall, you write up your results (20-page paper) and fill out the long Intel application. I think most students stay in touch with their mentors during this point for some guidance on writing the paper or if they have any additional questions. Also, the mentor needs to fill out a form asking how well/independently the student performed in the lab. "Project science teachers" in the high school also may help with the writing process, some having a heavier hand in the process than others.</p>

<p>Deadline for Intel was November 17 in 2004 (I love how the date is still burned in my brain). Semifinalists come out mid-January. Finalists come out a week or two later.</p>

<p>Most students do not work during the school year because of time constraints. If they don't have the time to get to the lab, they have no project they can carry out. Also, the project is designed to only take eight weeks and not much longer.</p>

<p>P.S. I will NOT edit this post :)</p>

425

<p>Luckystar:</p>

<p>Again, thanks so much. You put the Intel projects in great perspectives. I wonder how many Intel applicants apply EA/ED. </p>

<p>Comments have been made about how important Intel is to college admissions, but if students apply EA/ED, decisions would have been made by mid-December. </p>

<p>At any rate, you are giving me a good idea of the limitations of the Intel projects, Thanks again.</p>

426

<p>OK, I'll try once more. The problem I'm trying to raise is not Intel specific, it's just that reading about 16 year olds beating out PhD's to medical discoveries got me thinking. It's about a high pressure culture where the bar of academic excellence is continually being raised higher and higher and higher. Frankly, I wouldn't be too surprised if Nobel Prize winners ARE among the next generation of Ivy admits because this is the direction of the trend. What I'm attempting to address is the flip side, which you may not be seeing because your kids (like my oldest) and their friends are brilliant enough to survive and thrive in this environment. I am not suggesting that we need to eliminate Intel and other competitions to protect the ordinary child from becoming discouraged. Clearly that wouldn't be the answer and would harm your children and mine. But I am saying we need to keep some perspective and take care how we view and use the results of these contests and how we, as parents, teachers and members of society, guide our children and portray the world of science.</p>

<p>As someone suggested, maybe my town is excessive and I should move. Is is really just my town? Have you all looked around the forum lately? Have you read the threads from the poor kids dying inside because their grades and achievements aren't good enough for their parents? Have you seen the thousands upons thousands of "chances" thread where kids are submitting their lives reduced to numbers and letters for strangers to judge? The problem is not, and will not be, the true prodigies who should be working on genome projects. They will be happy, and succeed. The problem are those in the tier immediately below, who are very bright but have somehow been deemed lacking. What I'm seeing in my corner of the world is that the mere smart and average kids (as opposed to the brilliant) are feeling that science education is beyond their reach, that science is the domain of just the geniuses. Why do you think we continue to need to import foreign scientists? I'm not sure, but it's not a population size problem. Remember my story about Back to School night? What do you think happened when the parents of kids in that class and the kids themselves heard the science teacher rave about the handful of students doing DNA research? I'll tell you. Kids dropped the class. What of those who stayed? Well, next came the various science Olympiads. I don't know how other schools handle this, but at our high school which is probably medium-sized, only those children ranked in the top 5 spots in the particular science class (based on test grades) were allowed to be on the team. The result? More bright kids concluded they weren't very good in science. I noticed that very few of the kids at our high school seem to be heading for careers in science. </p>

<p>And then there are those very hardworking kids who aren't as brilliant as kids like donemom's son, but feel the every-increasing societal and parental pressure to perform at the same level as them. These are the kids, I think, who are becoming social misfits because they're aspiring to an inappopriate goal for them. What donemom's son can accomplish in two hours would take them 5 hours. So they skip sleep, meals, social interaction and other health activities and the lifestyle takes its toll on them. </p>

<p>I recently had a parent cry on my shoulder that she was so worried for her daughter. "There's no place for average kids anymore," she said. The push is all for honors classes and AP classes, and taking classes at college while still in high school. While the rush for children to attain adult achievement may help our top kids, I submit that it is hurting many.</p>

<p>I don't know what the solution is.</p>

427

<p>TheGFG:</p>

<p>Maybe you should move. We live in the shadow of MIT,and Harvard and no parents of my acquaintance talked that way. In fact, the k-8 school my Ss attended made a point to discourage competition, the high school did not enter kids into many competitions they could have participated in, and no one announced that such and such kid got into xyz. In fact, it is impossible to find out how many kids got into which college.</p>

428

<p>The final edition of the student newspaper publishes a list of seniors and where they're attending.</p>

429

<p>Not ours.:) At some point a list of all colleges students will be attending is published, but no numbers or names are attached. And definitely no scattergram, either.</p>

430

<p>marite:
I don't want to start a racial/ethnic argument here, but what is the social composition of your area? I think our area has been affected by the influx of a large number of Indians and Chinese who are used to a social system where if you aren't the very best in school and gain admission to the very best university, your career and employment opportunities will be severely limited.</p>

<p>The kid ranked 25 in his class here would probably have no problem being valedictorian elsewhere.</p>

431

<p>I'll admit that I have not read this entire long thread but I have read the last six pages or so. I truly identify very much with posts by Donemom and Marite. I feel I could have written them, except they are far more articulate than I am. </p>

<p>There is this perception, and I also run into it off this forum, that kids who are intensely engaged in pursuits and passions, busy every minute, etc. etc. are being pushed. The pushing is assumed to be by parents, though in some cases, by a competitive atmosphere. I have come to understand that there ARE communities or families where it is very competitive and kids feel pressured to do X, Y, and Z to get into college, etc. But that experience is just so foreign from my own family, or truly my community. </p>

<p>Like Donemom and Marite have expressed, we don't push our kids to do this or that activity or pursuit and couldn't if we wanted to. But some kids are deeply passionate about something, and in fact, like Donemom, I have one child passionate about several things, and it is more like the child is pushing us. They would never consider slowing down or quitting. This isn't because they are in some big competition but because of an inner drive or passion. I see no difference between a passion in music, science, math, sports, theater, etc. A kid who is driven loves what they are doing. It is not work to them. They can't imagine not doing it. They would not be HAPPY not doing it. A kid who loves math or science should not be assumed to be some misfit or nerd. They do what they love. Many who have these passions are also very sociable kids. They don't WANT to "hang out". They'd be bored. I even have my own mother constantly questioning and criticizing, "why do the kids HAVE to do X or Y activity?" They don't have to. They would die if they couldn't do it. It may not seem like a necessity to her or someone else, but it is a necessity to these kids as it is their life. It is not about competing with someone else. It is about following their own desires. </p>

<p>They haven't given up a childhood. Who is to say what is a normal childhood? Some may be content to play video games, hang out at the mall, lie on the beach, whatever. Some who are engaged in particular pursuits find those pursuits to be THEIR FUN! I can't understand the criticism (and I even get it from family, not just read it here) of kids who are doing GOOD things. Would people be happier if they had no direction and just hung around? I couldn't stop my kids, not that I would want to. But I didn't make them do anything. They do not feel pressured to do what they do. The assumption that kids who do certain things are being pushed to do so, has always bothered me. I don't doubt that such scenarios exist. And I can tell from reading GFG's posts that perhaps there is a certain mentality of competitiveness in her community that results in these situations. We just don't have that here. </p>

<p>The other issue I am reading is that some think it is more impressive or more of value if someone achieves something by "tinkering" on their own with no mentorship or help. Yes, great ideas come from tinkering and independent work. But in many fields, that alone will not truly lead to great achievements in a field. I can't imagine someone just tinkering with an instrument, or learning to sing by herself, or learning a sport all alone would be able to achieve as highly as someone who has some training, coaching, teaching, mentorships, what have you. I know the areas in which my kids achieve and while they do some things independently (and happen to be great independent learners), they have benefitted from coaching and so on. So, I don't find it to be a more valued experience if someone does X or Y ONLY on their own with no help or mentoring along the way.</p>

432

<p>GFG, I truly appreciate that where you live, the competitive atmosphere exists. I have read about such stories from other people who live in certain communities with a certain type of mentality about these things and the pressure to compete, etc. </p>

<p>While my community differs a lot from Marite's...I have even lived while in college and grad school in her city and know it and now live in a rural area (I also grew up in suburbia for contrast)....one thing we do have in common with Marite...our school doesn't list who got into which colleges and we don't have scattergrams. Her area is far more ethnically diverse than my area. Hers is way bigger by far too. Her area definitely has an Asian population, as well as African American, and other minorities and we don't. But I think her area and mine have one thing in common, as we do not have this competitive air about these things with our youth so much. The people I talk to who live in wealthy suburbs talk far more about what they have to do to get into college. I also read so many kids' posts on CC of this sort, and talk of prestige and so on, that is just so foreign from my own kids' way of thinking as well as their experiences, even though both my kids are high achievers and did well in the college admissions process. I thank my lucky stars every day that they grew up far from that sort of atmosphere that I have come to learn exists in certain enclaves and certainly amongst many students who post on CC. We may not have the "best" schools here and many who post on CC likely would not choose to live where I do and some here even seek out the best private high schools, etc. (not knocking it, just observing it) but I must say, it is so much less pressured and competitive where I sit. I just know that each thing my kids have done academically and in their richly varied extracurricular pursuits has been due to an inner drive and out of interest because they love doing it, not to keep up with the Joneses. I'm not saying this is "better" but simply different from what you describe where you live.</p>

433

<p>Marite,
I'm through with you too because you simply make things up. I never once suggested anyone was maladjusted or freakish. You, my dear, really just do protest too much...and, really, why are you so threatened by considering childhood? Also, as I review your previous posts, I might suggest that you READ MORE CAREFULLY and do not infer what cannot be inferred. You jump to conclusions that exist only in your mind.
Please just think about this post, but don't bother replying because I'm through discussing things with you too...it's quite pointless.</p>

434

<p>The GFG:</p>

<p>I was going to post something before seeing your post. So let me post what I was going to write first and address your question later.</p>

<p>I should not have treated your thoughtful post in such a flippant manner.
I do not want to make light of the real problem of hypercompetitive parents and students. It exists; but it is also rampant only in some communities. I expect that the parents who compete over admissions for their kids into kindergarten in NYC are going to stay competitive all the way to college. In fact, I was going to mention the review of a book by Alexandra Robbins, The Overachievers, which is reviewed in the Sunday NYT Book Review section. It follows some students from Whitman High in Bethesda, MD, which is one of the top high schools, and seems to do for prospective college applicants what Jacques Steinberg did for college admissions committees in The Gatekeepers (Robbins is a graduate of Whitman).</p>

<p>As for our high school, it is bimodal insofar as it has good proportion of children of professionals including children of profs from area universities and colleges, but also a high proportion of low-income ESL students. The proportion of students on F/R lunch is over 40%. I haven't got the figures re: ethnicity in front of me, but I remember reading that Asians constituted 9%. </p>

<p>I remember in k-8, every year there would be discussions in the School Council about abolishing prizes so that "children's feelings would not be hurt." When my S were there, the school did not abolish prizes, it just created more so that more students had a chance to receive one. The teachers did nothing to enter students into competitions such as Intel, or very little for NHD (It was introduced only when S2 was in 9th grade without much fanfare and no help whatsoever to the students). The competitions students were encouraged to take part in were team competitions such as Science Bowl. </p>

<p>It would take a huge demographic change in the area to effect a change of ethos in the teaching staff. And, some of the most passionate opponents of prizes are some of the most accomplished professionals. I remember listening to a nationally famous scientist recall how hurt she had been as a teenager when her SAT scores were not as high as those of her sister. She is in her late 40s. She used this past sense of hurt to argue against prizes and other ways of recognizing high achievers. But her D is at Yale. :)</p>

<p>Edit: I should have mentioned that the D's mom told me that she needed to put brakes on her D as the D is a perfectionist (S confirmed this and said she used to get annoyed when other advanced kids who were allowed to sit in one corner and work on their more advanced materials would get into frivolous conversations. This was back in k-8)</p>

435

<p>sooz, what I tried to say in previous posts is that I do understand kids like yours. I do know they aren't being pushed or forced by anyone or anything. Children like yours aren't the issue I was addressing, but rather how society over-glorifies high-achieving kids like yours and what happens when it does. (Btw, does the current abundance of competition-oriented reality shows reflect this societal tendency?) My own son is similar so I too have had to put up with accusations that I forced him to do things or did his work for him. Ughh! So yes, the pursuit of excellence and achievement is wonderful so long as we focus on the true abilities and interests a child has when determining what is good and appropriate for him or her to do or to strive for.</p>

<p>But, did you ever wonder why you, and donemom, and I have experienced so many accusations and stereotypical, negative assumptions about our bright kids? Why should anyone care what our kids do or how they spend their time? I'll tell you. It's because in our hyper-competitive culture, if a kid isn't award-winning and super high-achieving, then s/he is valued less. The result? Parents and kids are living under undue pressure, and thus become filled with envy and jealousy when they see that our child has what they want for themselves. They look to point the finger and find something wrong or weird about your daughter and my son. Otherwise, they'd have to accept that the "fault" lies somewhere within them or their child.</p>

<p>Therein lies the problem I'm addressing. As I society we've lost sight of the fact that geniuses and superchildren are very rare. It's usually not a parent or kid's fault if the child is just average. Nowadays everyone wants to have superchild, hence the big mess of over-scheduling and force-feeding. We are undervaluing all the less stellar paths which are better-suited to most children.</p>

<p>Believe me, I'm not a touch-feely mother. Actually, people where I live would laugh at that since they think I'm extremely competitive because of what my children have accomplished. But I am beginning to see lots of hurt, pain, and unfortunate fall-out from the excessive push to achieve.</p>

<p>Edit: posted this before seeing the last few above.</p>

436

<p>SymphonyMom, your post is rather harsh and directed at Marite as a person. I think you can explain your thoughts and opinions without going after her or accusing her. I don't know how long you have been reading or participating on CC, but Marite has been here about as long as I have been reading, four years. You may not agree with her opinons and that is truly fine, but she doesn't make things up. People may misunderstand others on the internet as it is hard to discern sometimes what they really mean. But I have met Marite in person and I know what she does for a career and she has achieved in education and think her work and posts speak for themselves. I have also learned a lot from her because she is well versed in bringing up a gifted child and I respect her infinite wisdom in many areas, but particularly in education. I also don't think it is right to attack Marite in a public post and then tell her to not bother to reply to it. I think there are more courteous ways to disagree or to correct any misconceptions which you perceive. I value Marite's contributions to these discussions and I also welcome newer posters like yourself who have much to contribute! </p>

<p>GFC, I truly do understand and appreciate the atmosphere you see around you in your community and yes, it can be troubling. The aim to have a super child, as you say, can be disturbing. I once read The Nanny Diaries and my eyes were really opened. What a contrast to where we have brought up our kids. All I could think of, was...phew, glad I am not living there! People in such communities likely say they are glad they are not living HERE or sending their kids to our unknown rural public schools where not every child even goes to college, let alone strives for the Ivies. But hey, different strokes for different folks. My kids ended up side by side with their kids in college but just from very different backgrounds and communities. Thankfully, for my sake and theirs, there wasn't a pressure cooker to get there. Ivies and the like were not even the goal, so to speak, even if they ended up there.</p>

<p>It is just that so many assume that any kids who achieve or who are heavily engaged in either academic or extracurricular pursuits, or yes, BOTH, are being pushed to excel or to compete or to give up childhood. As you recognize, I think, not all who do these things, do so with someone pushing them or do so because they feel they must, etc. I would say that supportive parents (and drivers!) helps but kids who spend hours and days on pursuits, even in summer, etc. would not do so if it only came from outside themselves. Just too much time, effort and work is involved to stick with it unless someone is VERY into it. </p>

<p>And yes, some who criticize make asumptions and some just may be jealous, for all I know. They just do not fully understand that a child WANTS to do whatever it is....math problems all day, sports practice at 6 AM, a summer internship that involves all day and night seven days per week and so forth. And I am not talking super geniuses (I don't think my kids are that) but just achievers and highly motivated types and driven people. This is more minor but criticism can be over things like my brother asked my 19 year old who got a job in France this summer (her strong desire), "couldn't you get a job closer to home?" I could give countless examples of people and family asking why the kids are doing X or Y as if they were made to do it or felt that they had to. I get tired of explaining that they LOVE what they are doing, they are happy, they can't be stopped. Why would anyone want to stop them? Like Marite says, they haven't lost their childhood...their childhood is exactly what they wanted it to be! Frankly, there is oodles of criticisms regarding top students or achievers in various activities and it seems misguided. I would rather see a kid who ois engaged in something, than someone who is just hanging around with no direction or motivation and just does school because they "have to." Likewise, I do feel sorry for kids who feel pressure to compete or to go to an elite college or else they are a "failure." </p>

<p>Oops, my kid is on the phone from France. Bye!</p>

437

<p>Oh and I want to defend citygirlsmom a bit. She may not have fully grasped the way science is conducted in the 21st century, but there was no need to so harshly mock her garage comments. I think what she was getting at is actually closely related to luckstar's post in which he says this:</p>

<p>"And unlike in the real scientific world, there is just not enough time in eight weeks for a student to turn a good project into an outstanding one. It's a matter of the luck of the draw..i.e., what project the student gets handed from the beginning, rather than his contributions to it, that wins the big money."</p>

<p>When I read the Intel bios, I couldn't help but feel much warmer toward that kid who was a photographer than to some of the others. He decided that there had to be a way to make a better video camera and set out to do it. In the end, despite what access he had to mentors or equipment, he identified a problem on his own that was within his realm of experience, and then went beyond his experience to learn more and solve the problem (in his basement, if I recall correctly). The project was truly his own. (or at least I'd like to believe that it was.) No one HANDED it to him.</p>

438

<p>Soozie:</p>

<p>Thanks for your kind words, but I did post something first, so perhaps symphonymom and I are quits.</p>

<p>The GFG:</p>

<p>You are right about Asians thinking that having high academic achievements will get you into top colleges, although most societies, in fact, share that attitude. There are no ECs, no community service, no concern about what a student will bring to the college community, no attempt to balance demographics, etc... </p>

<p>There was a revealing study about attitudes toward high achievement. American parents and students were more inclined to think that high achievement was the result of innate ability and Asian parents were more inclined to think it was the result of hard work. So the logical response to reading about very high achieving kids is to tell your kid to work harder. </p>

<p>I do know that when S1 applied to college, things did not seem so competitive as they do now. Perhaps it's because there was no baby boomlet; perhaps it's because there was no CC. But competitive consumption is at an all-time high, and competition over college admissions is just part of the overall phenomenon. I agree it's sad.</p>

439

<p>
[quote]
In the end, despite what access he had to mentors or equipment, he identified a problem on his own that was within his realm of experience, and then went beyond his experience to learn more and solve the problem (in his basement, if I recall correctly). The project was truly his own. (or at least I'd like to believe that it was.) No one HANDED it to him.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This scenario perfectly describes the spirit of Intel, GFG. </p>

<p>So I guess working in the BASEMENT is O.K., but not the garage???? (ha-ha) I think some of you would be surprised to know that some orthopaedic implants in use today were developed in my basement, right between the bench grinder & the drill press.</p>

440

<p>Stickershock:</p>

<p>I looked up the Intel site and quote an excerpt below:</p>

<p>
[quote]
The projects are a result of inquiry-based learning methods designed to nurture critical reasoning skills, to experience science through the use of the scientific method, and to demonstrate how math and science skills are crucial to making sense of today's technological world and making the best decisions for tomorrow.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Would the orthopaedic implants you developed qualify under these guidelines or would they be considered too "engineering"? It seems to me, from the quidelines, that students are being steered toward more pure science but I could be wrong.</p>