<p>How big of a hook is winning NHD? National History Day (NHD), for the uninformed, is the history subject's Intel competition, except it's much, much younger and newer than Intel. You win counties, advance to states, and if you win states, you advance to nationals.</p>
<p>Obviously, winning nationals is big, but how big is it if you simply win counties and states? Isn't winning NHD a hook? Intel's a big hit, I know. NHD should be too.</p>
<p>I guess it could help, but not many people have heard of it.</p>
<p>It is good, I think...but the thing with that though is that Intel/Science Fair is actually coming up with something novel, and something like history where it's just research from past events and trends.</p>
<p>Around here, NHD has notoriously bad judging (bribes).</p>
<p>A lot of schools do it and choose to make it part of their curriculum (although usually in lower grades), and then make their teachers the judges (because they have oh so much experience and are oh so qualified) and then their students win regionals and state.</p>
<p>Their rules are sometimes enforced sometimes not enforced, especially regarding time limits. One girl messed up, burst out crying, was allowed to restart, and got 3rd or something. Another guy did pretty well and he went way overtime.</p>
<p>And the topics don't help either. When it was Rights and Responsibilities, so many people did women's rights and civil rights. When it was Exploration, Encounter, Exchange...a ton of people in my state did Lewis/Clark, many did space exploration...and every year there are tons of topics on different secret codes.
Just like the person above said, Intel=new things and you have to think outside of the box. </p>
<p>I've seen **** entries that have won regionals, amazing entries that have won regionals. **** that have won state, amazing entries that have won state. A lot of it depends.</p>
<p>I would consider it much like your regional math and state math competitions. Good, but not great unless you do well nationally.</p>
<p><quote>I would consider it much like your regional math and state math competitions. Good, but not great unless you do well nationally.</quote></p>
<p>That is what I was trying to say</p>
<p>True, true. NHD is still in its childhood, zygote stage, if you will, and like you said, a lot of people of all different levels have taken advantage of it in order to gain its glories (national titles, regionals, states).</p>
<p>I must agree. I've seen absolute CRAP at nationals (how did it EVER pass states?! are the judges blind??), but yet again, AMAZING displays of works of art (esp. individual and group exhibits).</p>
<p>Oh well. It wouldn't hurt to win regionals and states, though. </p>
<p>My state doesn't incorporate it into its curriculum, and it's much much harder to win state competitions in some states than others, like California.</p>
<p>What would "winning nationals" constitute--getting 1st or like top 5 or top 10?</p>
<p>I object to the "non-originality" of history research. To really rock at NHD nationals you need to do original research--going through newspapers, interviewing people, reading original stuff, not just parroting what people before you have said. At early stages, history research may be about as non-original as you can get, but if you're good at it and work hard at it, it can be as original as some of that scientific research you were talking about.</p>
<p>And with the "bad topics" NHD puts out for you? I don't agree with that statement, either. They are so vague and broad, that if you put a little work into finding a more obscure or more original topic, then it's super easy to make the peg fit the hole, so to speak (dirty!). Sure, for the Rights and Responsibilities year there were a lot of entries on women's rights and all that, but if you look at who REALLY did well at nationals, you'd see that it's often the more original topics or new spin on old topics that do better--it offers better chances for analysis, not to mention judges like to learn new stuff, too (and if your judges don't know crap about your topic, they are less likely to correct you if you make a minor slip up in an interview).</p>
<p>It could be a hook, I guess....but it is nothing like Intel in terms of prestige and like hooks.</p>
<p>Definitely not the "history subject's Intel competition." Or a hook. I know many people who went to nationals (and got like 3rd place) who did not feel like it helped them that much at all. Though it depends on the college of course...</p>
<p>Definitely not the "history subject's Intel competition." </p>
<p>I disagree with that statement. Although NHD is definitely not on par with Intel, it IS the Intel of the subject of history. There is no greater [national] competition you can do for history than NHD, regardless of its questionable merit if one wins.</p>
<p>I know many people who went to nationals (and got like 3rd place) who did not feel like it helped them that much at all.</p>
<p>^ Yeah, like I said, NHD is still in its baby stage. Much, much younger and newer than Intel and thus hasn't roughened up into a REAL competition (none of this sissy wimpy stuff coming in that won states and regionals). Thus, given the circumstances, winning regionals in your state wouldn't really amount to much at all, for instance. You could whip together an "award-winning" project if not a lot of people in your county participate (b/c then projects would be junk and crap), in probably a night or two. </p>
<p>But that isn't always the case. </p>
<p>And NHD, in the fullest ideal sense, is a hard project to complete. Judges especially like PRIMARY SOURCES, which compel a participant to research, research, and research...basically requiring a LOT of time. Do not completely undermine the effort taken to win NHD, particularly nationals. I cannot say the same for projects that win regionals and states, however. There is crap winning and there is genuine museum-caliber projects winning at the same time.</p>
<p>I'm not sure where I got this from, but teachers at my school tend to regard papers and documentaries (in that order) as the most difficult and most prestigious of the NHD topics. Even though an exhibit and a paper may have equal amounts of research, a paper exhibits mastery of more skills that colleges look for.</p>
<p>Conceivably. I would imagine papers and INDIVIDUAL exhibits the most competitive though; I'm not too sure about documentaries. You could also enter your NHD paper into other competitions, like The Concord Review and such as well.</p>
<p>Maybe it's just me, but I'd imagine another reason papers are the most competitive of all is because the possibility of having a LOT of help in writing them - comparable to writing essays for college applications. Lots of businesses exist to assist you in writing that -perfect- essay, if you know what I mean.</p>
<p>I did NHD once and so am familiar with the procedure and I'm from CA so my state is fairly competitive.</p>
<p>You can make the parallel by arguing that NHD is the most prestigious history competition and Intel the most prestigious science one but that doesn't make up for the prestige/quality/importance gap and really doesn't matter. You can argue that NHD is a huge hook in college admissions all day, but at the end of the day that's just your opinion, and you just have to see what happens. I reamin unconvinced because, in my experience, it is pretty weak</p>
<p>I believe you posted this thread asking for opinions, so it's strange that you're attempting to argue w/ people's opinions in order to procure a more favorable response.</p>
<p>I'm trying to see it in an objective point of view. You seem really adamantly against it.</p>
<p>I never said NHD is a "huge hook in college admissions" - I clearly asked if it was a hook in my original post. Huge hook? No. Opinions? Yes. I even said that NHD isn't that great anyway, because of the large disparities of quality projects that win. Please indicate to me where I explicitly said NHD is a "huge hook in college admissions." I said it was kind of half and half, not really helping but it wouldn't hurt either.</p>
<p>Clearly you had a bad experience with it.</p>
<p>Like I said, I'm trying to get more opinions in to get an OBJECTIVE point of view of NHD and its role in the bigger picture.</p>
<p>If you think I'm trying to convince you in any shape or form, I apologize, that was not my intent and I am sorry you feel that I am trying to be that way. You can remain unconvinced all you want because I'm not trying to prove anything or convince you of anything. </p>
<p>Maybe you think I'm trying to argue with you because you are viewing NHD as a pretty negative experience (because of your own reasons and experience, I know), but that isn't always the case for everyone. I'm looking for positive and negative aspects of it, too, you know. Your opinion doesn't cover everything.</p>
<p>Essentially, NHD is pretty biased. It depends on what state you’re from. I’m from Washington, and people are pretty liberal around here. My friends was something on war, and was REALLY good, but the judges picked another girl’s performance on Shakespeare instead because it wasn’t so controversial and they assumed that my friend was advocating for war…But yeah, the judges as really the thing that decide how far you get…one girls judges were all female and super-nice. That, and women’s suffrage as her topic got her to 4th at state. This other girl did a documentary, had super-grouchy, old judges, and didn’t even make it into finals at state. And the reason why some were so bad at Nationals is because some states only have like 50 kids participating. And most of them are states like Hawaii and Kansas. And you can tell which states are usually the ones that do well at Nationals.</p>