Seriously...what is all of this "research" hs kids are conducting?

Parents Forum
81

<p>

I don’t see how having too much homework relates to having connections. Many professors are amenable to taking on a high school student, though probably moreso in fields where a high school student would be more likely to contribute (e.g., biology) rather than physics or math. All it takes is for someone to send out emails. In fact, google “high school research” in quotes and you get several hits for programs designed for high school students. No connections needed.</p>

<p>We’re living in the age of google. It takes only a few seconds to find opportunities.</p>

82

<br>

<br>

<p>This should be cleared up if Intel did the RIGHT thing by delaying all semi and finalists announcements until April and thus after the admissions decisions have been made. Competitions such as the Intel that tends to reward the occasional uber-brilliant young true scientists also encourage cynical paint by the numbers projects that are nothing else than adult manipulation. And those latter represent the bulk of that “research”. For instance, the relation between the NY area high schools and SUNY’s Intel factory is highly suspect, but it works in rigging the outcomes. The competition is an insiders’ game much akin to children beauty pageants. </p>

<p>Unfortunately, Intel knows well that delaying the results would simply kill the MAIN attraction to the program. And that is none other than pad the application at the semi finalist level. A fact that this widely known by the perennial resume builders.</p>

83

<br>

<br>

<p>And there comes the biggest difference between high school research and athletic recruiting. One does NOT need to be particularly good or smart to do well in the research boondoggle. There are plenty of crutches money and connections can buy. Athletes cannot buy excellence. </p>

84

<p>That’s BS. What that would do would make it almost irresponsible to spend time doing a research project, since that time
could be spent doing something else that colleges would care about. It effectively <em>disadvantages</em> the student. If you want to eliminate resume’ builders, you’d have to create a system where no extracurricular activity is rewarded; make it a lottery for everyone above certain test scores or something. </p>

<p>And Xiggi, I’ve said this before, but you don’t understand the skill and effort it takes to put together a “paint-by-numbers” research project. Even in research, the “idea” is a very small part of the project. The hard part is doing the experiments, at least from my perspective as a researcher.</p>

85

<p>Yes, it impresses adcoms that you went out and found some opportunity related to your interests. In STEM, no, it doesn’t have to be super substantial work or results because adcoms know these are hs kids. They know their efforts are usually secondary (at best) but appreciate the effort- the vision, energy and commitment that got you out of your chair. You have any idea how many kids say, in effect, I want to study biomed because I liked my hs science classes? Or, Mr Smith rally made that class make sense? Or, “I want to help people.” The logical reply is, and then what? The more competitive colleges are looking for more than “I love” or “I want to be.” </p>

86

<p>No, it is not BS. I understand that a researcher won’t accept the clear evidence of the cynical gamesmanship that permeates the talent competitions. You speak of time and effort to complete paint by the numbers projects. But how is the type of projects promoted and pushed by Stony Brook really representative of the talent of the Long Island high schoolers who exploit the well oiled pipeline? </p>

<p>Regardless of the merits of the program, my point in the context of THIS forum is that the entire raison d’être of the program is quite different from the current perception of participants. Like it or not, the competitions are magnet for the type of applicants who have learned how to rig the system through dubious achievements that are mostly the doing of the parents, their connected friends, and the mercenary mentors. </p>

<p>Again, delay the announcements after admissions are released and you … might end up with the competition you purport exists today. Let the true aspiring scientist show they do it for the love of learning. </p>

<p>In the end, since the people who manage the competition are hopelessly blind to the unintended results, the onus should be on the colleges to stop rewarding the cheats, riggers, and frauds, as well as the pluggers and lab drones. You want more O’ Dorneys and not products of adult manipulation. </p>

<p>Utopia it is. </p>

87

<p>And nobody on a sports team ever cheated, rigged or engaged in fraudulent behavior?</p>

88

<p>Aside from the first paragraph of Poeme’s recent post, Poeme’s remarks are consistent with my earlier posts: For a high-school student who is interested in a field such as theoretical physics, there is no problem with acquiring research experience when one is ready for it. The number of high-school students who have first-author papers in theoretical physics is very close to zero, if not exactly zero.</p>

<p>lookingforward, I am interested in your take on Poeme’s comment about the quantity of homework that students have, making it difficult for them to participate in research, even though an opportunity was available geographically. Locally, the high-school students had what seemed to me to be an excessive amount of homework. However, by staying up to midnight or 1 am on a consistent basis, it was possible for them to participate in a relatively demanding EC, in terms of time. So that EC could have been “research,” for those who were interested.</p>

<p>However, from articles in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, it has seemed to me that students in a couple of locales–e.g. Newton (North?) in Massachusetts and New Trier in Illinois–have such a heavy load of school work that it would be really hard to add a time-intensive EC on top of the regular load, unless a student didn’t mind winding up in the top 15% or top 20% rather than the top 5%. Do you think that such a student could have reasonable odds of admission at a “top” place? </p>

<p>I mention New Trier, because it was publicized by the Wall Street Journal as the school where students skip lunch (or eat it during a class) in order to fit an extra AP into their schedule, to raise their rank.</p>

89

<p>What do you have against student research? A boondoggle? A crutch money can buy? Good Grief!</p>

<p>Intel ISEF-sponsored science fairs begin in 6th grade. Intel STS is for seniors only and holistically is looking for future leaders in science (based on a student’s body of work, test scores (SAT/ACT and GPA) and multiple in-person interviews). So, are are you arguing that “athletes are gifted” or that they work harder for their excellence than student researchers? Do they not pay for coaching, leagues and travel? Mentors at ISEF-associated fairs and STS are forbidden to receive any compensation from mentees. Finally, I think these young adults are good and smart…and not on crutches.</p>

<p><a href=“- YouTube”>- YouTube;

90

<p>Anyway, the principle of getting off your duff is broader than sports or Intel, math competitions or how one got a “research” opportunity or some vol work in a hospital setting, etc. Or whether one did find some genetic marker or author a paper or win an award or discover something in his garage or study a topic extensively on her own. It’s all about what sort of kid does- or doesn’t- do more than what is laid out in front of her. Not all colleges care. presumably, this is about those that do.</p>

91

<br>

<br>

<p>Is reading comprehension a tad challenging? I have nothing against student research as long as it remains at a level appropriate to the age and capabilities of … students. </p>

<p>Competitions do indeed start at an early age, and so does the adult manipulations. Ever seen primary and middle schoolers showing up with science projects and posters that make the parents proud of their OWN efforts. Ever seen the differences between true children efforts and the over the top ones at the KIDS competitions? </p>

<p>Again, read the annual press releases of Stony Brook with a modicum of objectivity, and you might understand why some look at the so-called student research with skepticism. </p>

92

<p>blossom wrote :
And nobody on a sports team ever cheated, rigged or engaged in fraudulent behavior?</p>

<p>Sure, but are there parallels? How about parental and mentor/coaches involvement. The difference is that it is quite hard to fake athletic excellence. There is substance abuse. There is corruption in judging at the Olympics. But you cannot take an untalented kid to the pinnacle of a sport. </p>

93

<p>The only research “program” I know of in our area is strictly for minorities. Other than that, I do know a few students who did some more serious research, but those students had parents working in the same fields. It really depends on what the research is - equipment isn’t available to all.</p>

94

<p>And how does the Intel STS help college apps at many of the most competitive schools when semifinalist status comes out after apps are due? And pray, tell us how to “rig” the system…with dubious achievements…</p>

95

<p>The student interview process is huge at STS, and at ISEF in terms of presenting your project to judges knowledgeable in your field. Hard to fake…</p>

96

<p>I don’t have anything against high school students doing research. I did research in high school myself, in microbiology, with a fairly minor variation on an article that I had read in Scientific American.</p>

<p>I just wanted to reassure students who are interested in some of the more background-extensive fields that they are not “behind” if they don’t do research as high-schoolers.</p>

<p>lookingforward, would you be willing to address my question, about the really homework-intensive high schools? The local school was nothing like Newton (North?) based on the article I read a few years ago in the New York Times. That article mentioned students routinely staying up until 2 or 3 am to cope with the homework load. I think they were “off their duffs,” even if they were literally on them, if they were fulfilling the requirements of the assignments. I have to wonder what the teachers at schools like that are thinking.</p>

97

<p>I have answered you extensively, in the past, QM.<br>
In order to be one of those brightest kids in the college classroom, earn your way to some future position of greatness, first you need to be admitted to that college. The more competitive the college is for admissions, the more they can pick what they see as holistically the best, for not just classrooms, but also that college’s community. </p>

<p>As a scientist, you should know better than to go on some media article. I said that before, too- solid inquiry is at the root of successful science, no? The best and the brightest “US” kids you so ardently want in your college’s classrooms, are not falling apart from homework demands.</p>

98

<p>So your advice to a student at Newton (North, I think) would basically be: Move to a different high school?</p>

99

<p>There is a contingent of students that are awesome and do work independently and love love love science. In my country, these are usually the students that excel in many areas- think debate, student voice movements etc. (I am not American). This is partially because there is not as big of a rat race as there is in america with regards to universities. </p>

<p>I can personally say that research is the greatest thing that I’ve ever done. I’ve worked in various places and finally am someplace where I have quite a bit of autonomy and responsibility. It’s hard, but I love it. It’s taught me what science is really like and I’ve learned so much from the amazingly talented adults around me. I’m not around kids goofing off - I have to grow up and learn to deal with all kinds of issues. I mean, people are definitely more chill with me but I can’t act like an immature idiot - I need to mature. It’s also shaped my future career path - I am quite sure I wish to be a clinician scientist. </p>

<p>Anyway, science Fair has been a great way for me to meet students like myself. For one competition, I met a girl that I’ve become quite close to and we’re collaborating on a bunch of things. I definitely build my ‘network’ through it - FB is my linkedin (I have both). </p>

<p>I also have had absolutely no connections. My parents are educated but not well established. I wrote emails and talked to lots of people and got some nice responses :slight_smile: </p>

<p>Now, before, I used to get really, really offended by these threads but my experience has taught me that cheating definitely goes on in science fair. There is a lot of unnecessary pressure on students in America to get into particular universities and I think that definitely comes out with kids being pushed into research/science fair. </p>

<p>People sometimes manipulate results to do well. The other side is when students present other peoples’ work as their own. Honestly, even at ISEF (where I have been), it’s very easy to get away with. I mean, you can ask questions all you like, but science is extremely specialized and the judges are not always the best. I personally know 2 students who have admitted to ‘fooling the system’ - you can definitely go over and practise presentations. </p>

<p>I cannot attest to any of the US programmes. However, I don’t think that doing a prepared project with a grad student tailing you all the time is really ‘independent research’. (Been there, done that) It’s still a really valuable learning experience, because it gets you used to the setting and whatnot, but current me would laugh at old me quite a bit. </p>

<p>That is not to say that I am either the: a) expert on scientific research (I am quite conscious of my idiocy) or b) hate science fair or high school research - I have gained a lot from both and I think they are excellent things. However, science competitions are iffy and I would hope that US colleges are conscious of this fact.</p>

<p>In my country, volunteering is prized greatly and people are pretty aware of the various inequities that exist (and grades also matter the most), so it’s not a big deal. </p>

100

<p>My advice would be rise to the challenges or be perceived as not. Aim for less competitive college, if the high school work load cripples you. </p>

<p>I also advise kids to stop viewing the hs context as the be all and end all. The most competitives don;t fool themselves that they are 13th grade. When they want a kid with vision or creativity or the resilience needed to tackle bigger challenges…they look for those who show these signs. If they want one who can think past the work put in front of him, they go for the kids who seemingly do. If they value kids who can do the work and still partake in the “community,” that’s going to be more than digging into some high level physics concepts on your own time. </p>

<p>But yes, my view is “most competitive” schools. </p>