<p>When I read about winners of science competitions, I am puzzled by how students create projects on topics that they have not had experience in the subject in. </p>
<p>For example, how was Kenneth Brewer able to understand what was going on in an organic chemistry lab a year before he had taken AP chemistry? </p>
<p>How were Scott Molony, Steven Arcangeli, and Scott Horton able to make a sophisticated bioinformatics project when "none of the team members had ever programmed before they began this project?"</p>
<p>Great questions cncbmb, I, too, have been puzzled by such examples since the beginning of freshmen year, it's rather shocking that high school students end up doing so well in advanced science topics with little to no prior knowledge. Personally, I feel that they are normally children (or relatives) of professors or scientists who guide them through most of their initial research...</p>
<p>I've been to quite a few science (all research-related) competitions over the past year, and like data said, many of the students have parents who are scientists (I would have to say over 90%). Some others are just extremely interested in their topics, spend a ton of time reading up on what has been done, and are able to come up with new and unique questions. Once they actually begin their own research, most have a ton of help from the professors that they are working with.
Personally, I do behavioral research, and have not one scientist/doctor/professor in my family/family friends. I am just sincerely interested in my topic and tend to devote most of my time to my research. I hadn't known much before I started, but after reading countless journal articles and familiarizing myself with every bit of info in the field, I was able to conduct my own studies. I do have a mentor, but we've never actually met or anything, she simply answers any questions that I have through email.
If you have a great interest in a field, it becomes a lot easier to do research because you're actually having fun doing it. Some of the kids I've met are pretty amazing, and everyone can go on talking about their research for hours.</p>
<p>Read book,s teach yourself, surf the internet. For ISEF, I did a project on effectively predicting the market fluctuations with chaos theory before I had taken economics. This year for STS I did a project on quantum mechanics before I had taken AP Physics. If you're interested in something, its easy to teach yourself.</p>
<p>you can also find a proj idea that is relatively simple but innovative…like combing technologies or finding a simpler way to do something. the key to good research is VERY THOROUGH, real-life applicaitons, and a GREAT PRESENTATION! The latter being the most important. :)</p>
<p>well a math project won ISEF last year…applications are very important though you have to consider that a lot of math projects are just for the sake of math! applications are necessary for other awards though!</p>
<p>Yea, I actually heard about that. Some Indian girl who did a project on Knot Theory right? Interesting. Cause I’m doing one on the same topic
Though I don’t have many applications.
My professor is strictly a mathematician.
What other awards are out there?</p>
<p>This is why I actually do not like these competitions so much; for Siemens, the team competition, I know of a team that had 3 members, two of which were amazing (one made RSI, the other was a Davidson fellow, like 7 combined Olympiads or so) and the third was mediocre (no awards like the previous two, stats not as good). </p>
<p>Now that’s not a problem if the third person works hard and shows passion for what he is doing (because its not all about stats). But instead, he didn’t do any of that and had his two partners “carry” him to Siemens Regional Finalist (he sat around doing nothing, not even thinking about the topic–its one thing to not make progress but another to not even try —> I heard this from like 10 people but I don’t have any personal direct knowledge). That third person made MIT, and that award was probably a deciding factor. If what those 10 people or so told me is true, then that person should be extremely dissapointed because you can’t do research like that in real life.</p>
<p>EDIT: Because so many people have this perception that these awards will help them get into a top college (and it is a true perception), they are willing to do anything to get those awards…and frankly, some of the time, they do borrow too much data from their professors or get too much help from other people.</p>
<p>Actually, the first person made IChO (in the OP’s example). I think he was just naturally gifted and loved chemistry so he studied a lot before he took AP chem.</p>
<p>people who go to science olym get trained for it.
I did IMO and I didn’t needed AP Calc BC in fact there ain’t any calc(calc might help u with inequalities, but it is easier without), a science olym should not be strictly based on knowledge.</p>
<p>i guess i’m wondering what it takes to win or even make semifinalist for these awards…i’m doing pharmacokinetics research at walter reed right now, but i don’t even know if it’s worth applying for siemens/intel - can anyone help me make a decision? x)</p>
