[quote]
As China and India churn out scientists, Americans are getting worried. Last year, in his State of the Union speech, President Bush promised $5.9 billion this year for an American Competitiveness Initiative addressing, among other issues, the lack of trained scientists and researchers. Science fairs offer a rare flash of American technical brilliance. What can these kids, and the research programs that produce them, tell us about how to save American science? Perhaps if more teens could do their own scientific research, more would get interested in science and we might not lose our innovation edge.
<p>Heh, very interesting. God knows there are plenty Harvard hopefuls doing research to beef up their resumes. And we all know how much research experience can boost your chances. If this sort of thing were to become more common--teens researching, that is--how much would it help resumes in the future? Perhaps it'd be as common as, say, volunteering? Doubted, but possible, I suppose.</p>
<p>I agree. In another 5-10 years, research will be as common as volunteering, as the college app competition gets more cutthroat and people will do everything possible to ensure themselves a chance.</p>
<p>With fewer students applying, I think the admissions craze may begin to cool down a bit. Remember, not everyone has access to these expensive lab spaces. The craze is in full swing now... I don't think we'll see much of a change other than maybe a few more applying in the next ~3-5 years...</p>
<p>
[quote]
In another 5-10 years, research will be as common as volunteering, as the college app competition gets more cutthroat and people will do everything possible to ensure themselves a chance.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Will research ever lose it's value in admissions? After all, these students [or mentors] are making good progress in many areas of science and are coming up with new innovations in technology [a previous Siemens or Intel Winner who did research in the field of nuclear physics especially comes to mind; I believe she was able to create a complex mechanism for a few hundred dollars]. Such progress can not be devalued. The article states that a large amount of students who do research in high school continue on to careers in science, which implies that research in high school may not have been done for the lone sake of admission.</p>
<p>Not sayin I agree with that thread, but in general it seems that the media doesn't really understand what's going on in the world of science and is poised to do more harm than good.</p>
<p>THE KID ON THE MAIN PAGE IS GEORGE HOTZ from my school.
incidently the kid is a genius---- but not going to College. He got rejected by MIT, Caltech and just about everywhere and had one of the lowest GPA's in my school. But the kid is a genius--- just doesnt care about school.</p>
<p>I saw he's a genius because he won ISEF every year since a freshman and has been featured on over 11 shows including Lou Dobbs on CNN and Katie Couric. His website is <a href="http://www.lpahome.com%5B/url%5D">www.lpahome.com</a> if you wanna check it out.</p>
<p>It is possible for research to become as common as volunteering. It will not be as cutthroat as you think. However, society is actually making it easier to enter colleges as the years progress. Soon, there will be no affirmative action and most likely there will be race-blind admissions. Also, many predict that the testing system such as the ACT and SAT will be obsolete in the years to come. In fact, the GPA system will be the sole academic factor.</p>
<p>LOL the GPA system being the sole academic factor isn't very useful either...</p>
<p>Also, there are millions of other kids other than those who win in ISEF, STS, and Siemens that will go on to change the world. A lot of kids who do win ISEF, STS, etc. go onto become math professors.....on the other hand, a normal guy who becomes the doctor could probably change the world more. So, it's not just the winners of elite science competitions that you should look at.</p>
<p>This pathetic nonsense makes me laugh in general. The US produces less engineers per capita than other major developed countries. Science fairs are not going to correct that. Math & science literacy beginning at a very young age and the realization that good jobs are not just going to appear on trees for people is what is going to reverse this trend. </p>
<p>Of course, the quickest way to cure this is to drastically reduce the cost of going to school for engineering relative to other majors. Financial incentives are a great draw and a 10000K/year scholarship for everyone who scores above a 650 math score and majors in engineering would be a huge boost in enrollment.</p>
<p>I agree with what Mr Payne said. However, such a financial incentive would obviously push many people who aren't actually passionate about engineering into the field because of the scholarship that you propose. After all, most people can score > 650 in math, even many history majors.</p>
<p>
[quote]
However, such a financial incentive would obviously push many people who aren't actually passionate about engineering into the field because of the scholarship that you propose.
[/quote]
Well yeah - virtually any policy which increases engineering enrollment beyond it's current natural level is having people do something that they wanted less. Is that a bad thing though? Many people do jobs they don't want. However, doing a job you don't want but allows you to make a good living is hardly a bad life. I know many people that would likely do college over again (choosing engineering) solely because of it's income generation abilities. High school students lack future time orientation and do not understand the big picture.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the positive externalities of having more & brighter people going into engineering and science are massive though - the generation of wealth is very positively correlated with technology generation. This benefits all of society and non-engineering positions to have higher incomes as well.</p>
<p>PS: Most people can not score above 650. That's about 1.5 standard deviations above the white mean.</p>