<p>Our middle school routinely contributed about fifty percent of the science fair projects that advanced from regional to state level competition despite representing something like six percent of the pool of students. We had a science teacher who really understood the process, made a big deal of science fair and required participation of all 8th graders, and a parent body with lots of connections to university and research lab scientists who provided feedback and some planning support, though not the kind of mentoring you see with most of the Intel kids. </p>
<p>Not at all random. On the other hand, the soccer team was nothing to write home about.</p>
<p>Sorry its not really fishy. Are there just a greater amount of Asian or Indian applicants. I’m just looking at the list and i see a lot of them…</p>
<p>I’m not trying to take anything away from this girl’s accomplishments, but the headlines make it appear as though she had to overcome homelessness while researching and preparing her intel project. Truth is, she’s been homeless for a few days. Once again, the headlines do not tell the whole story.</p>
<p>You are right, nysmile, the headlines could be more accurate, but she spent the last several months worried about losing her home and still did her project. That is admirable and what the headlines should describe.</p>
<p>MomofNEA, trust me–the girl in our town who is on the semi-finalist list this year has had to deal with a lot more than worrying about finances. I don’t want to go into details (the internet can be a very small place), but let’s just say–she’s had a lot more than a few months of worry on her shoulders.</p>
<p>Nysmile, I believe it, which is why I think it’s unkind when people diminish these kids’ accomplishments by obsessing about the mentoring they receive. They worked hard and against odds that were made public, like the Brentwood girl, or not, like the girl in your town. Either way, they don’t need adults whining about unfair advantages, as some posters above did.</p>
<p>momofNEA - The kids deserve everything they get.</p>
<p>The competition on the other hand is totally flawed and seems to totally depend on having access to major labs and fulltime professors. It depends on major research faculty spending all their time advising high school kids. </p>
<p>It has never been the intent of science fair projects to take on pieces of university MS/PhD level projects and work on them as if they are meant for high school kids. Where is the creativity being fostered? In the minds of 40-50 year olds who are advising them?</p>
<p>As I noted above, you are wrong. While it is certainly true that some students do receive professional support for their projects, not all do - and the opportunity to independently conduct research keeps people (like me) from dying of boredom in regular high school classes.</p>
<p>Are there flaws in the system? Yes. But science fairs remain some of the best competitions ever devised.</p>
<p>The only mentor our local girl had was our high school teacher. She didn’t have any financial backing or big time Stony Brook professors helping. All she had was our local HS lab (not much to write home about, a school that averages about 60-70 students in the graduating class), her ambition, and good high school science teacher. She did it all while also playing varsity sports, other EC’s, working, taking care of her little sister, and overcoming a lot more than being homeless for a few days. </p>
<p>In short, adding “homeless” to the headline sells papers. I agree with you MomofNEA–focus on the work these students put into their project rather than the drama behind the scenes.</p>
<p>In the past 6 years, our small town public HS has produced 5 semi-finalists and 1 finalist. One HS teacher mentored each of these students. His philosophy is that it’s the process of doing the project without big time professors assisting that allows the student to “own” his/her research. We have a rinky dink little school in a little town where most students juggle sports, academics, and part time jobs.</p>
<p>Texaspg, I don’t think the graduate faculty are spending ‘all of their time’ mentoring high school students. From what I have heard, it’s very difficult to get a mentor bc they don’t want the responsibility of a HS student, and they are very selective. I am sure there are times when the creativity comes from the adult mentor, but I am also sure that much of the work comes from the kids. What is in it for the mentor? If it is truly his or her creativity, why share the glory with a 17-year-old? And why would anyone say that kids shouldn’t be mentored by creative scientific minds? Isn’t that what we look for in any educational situation? As for the kids who do it without those supports, more power to them.</p>
<p>With all due respect, that is why I started my post with “That is a heart-warming story.” Every year, the Intel competition recognizes and rewards students who engaged in novel research in an environment that is not one of mega-laboratories. </p>
<p>If you are interested in balance, you ought to have little problem acknowledging that the stories of massive adult contribution, if not straight deceit, have been a problem with scientific competition. What starts in the kiddies’ fair simply compounds over the years. Doesn’t anyone remember the dads (or moms) who walked in with amazing posters at the 2nd grade fair while their kid was bored to death?</p>
<p>If people expect observers to lighten up and stop pointing fingers at the organized cheating that gives a black eye to many of HS EC activities, the best response is to … stop pretending everything is above board. </p>
<p>The losers are the kids who do not have a reasonable chance because adults now routinely ruin the competition by elevating the bar well beyond the level of a teenager, regardless how gifted he or she might be.</p>
<p>snioersas and momofNEA - So why does stonybrook list 26 semi finalists and their advisors (some projects with two of them)? Are you suggesting that they are just sitting around in their offices claiming to have advised these kids?</p>
<p>Snipersas - are you one of the 26 listed by Stonybrook?</p>
<p>Xiggi, just like every other aspect of college admissions or any other competitive pursuit, there are sure to be imbalances and deceits in the Intel competition. But it doesn’t mean we should dismiss the hard work that – in my opinion – the majority of these kids do. It’s like saying all baseball is a sham bc some people take steroids (I’m on really shaky ground with that metaphor bc I know next to nothing about baseball, but you get my point). And texaspg, I didn’t say they weren’t getting advised. I said the college advisors weren’t spending ‘all of their time’ with them, and then I said that being mentored by a PhD level scientist is a good thing. The college may do it for the free labor, as part of a community interaction deal, or because profs may be parents. I just don’t see what you are upset about. </p>
<p>I understand about the bar being raised too high, but isnt that they case with the whole college admissions game right now?</p>
<p>she doesn’t look like any homeless person I have ever seen… and I’ve seen a fair amount, in DC, Boston, Rome, Paris, NYC, (etc) and in the aftermath of Katrina.</p>
<p>snipersas - congratulations. Seriously, what you said you did was the goal of the original competition. </p>
<p>If kids are doing two years of research under well known researchers, that is really a master’s thesis and should not be part of these competitions. Most of the semi-finalist papers that came out of texas were from 11th and 12th graders who are part of a residential program under a real university while there have been 3 papers in a major city like Houston which has 2 medical schools, one top 20 university, one major university with a campus next to NASA. I guess none of those universities think they need to foster high school kids for Intel awards.</p>