<p>
</p>
<p>I meant the discrimination of free/reduced lunch vs. non-free/reduced lunch students. And… what, again? Paternal fee? </p>
<p>The program covers the fees for any student that qualifies for free/reduced lunch. We are full pay; I have no issue with that.</p>
<p>The other (non-application fee) is an administration fee for those kids that accept an internship. That’s a bunch of money and the free/reduced lunch kids don’t pay it. </p>
<p>Keeps the program from being filled with just rich kids.</p>
<p>My high school had a program funded by the synopsys outreach foundation that enabled me to do pretty significant research during high school. The program funded a “advanced science” elective class that was entirely research based. The representative helped us find contacts or get funding for our projects if we were in need. </p>
<p>I spent my junior and senior year researching nanotechnology through this program. I did all of my work in the “advanced science” lab, which we tended to call the mad lab. It was an old classroom just full of equipment that had been donated. </p>
<p>I know a few people who have the connections that some of you speak of, and usually they are looked down upon by judges, since they know it was likely a connection and project merit that got them in to a university or professional lab. </p>
<p>
My kid is very much a kid. Otoh, if he is happy to get up early every summer morning to take a train to the lab, at an internship that he arranged, what should I say? Go play xbox? He knew that it would not necessarily make a difference in his college apps, but our family has always emphasized that what you have learned is yours as long as you live. </p>
<p>Most kids who are applying to elite colleges do something “productive” for at least part of the summer before their senior year. Don’t be melodramatic. </p>
<p>Just about anything can be spun in a way that you could use it on your applications. If you’d rather be wakeboarding, then you could give lessons or tours or something. Actually, they probably would like that better than research anyway unless your project was <em>really</em> impressive. </p>
<p>In 2014, 21 Intel STS semi-finalist projects came out of Simons (Stonybrook). Of these, 10 were done by those hailing from New York state (not sure if they were Long Islanders or not). Not sure how may other non-Simons Long Islanders were represented. And believe it or not, they actually do research in Wyoming and Louisiana–with real equipment and all sorts of sciency stuff and such. Yeesh.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You can only say that is abnormal if you know what percent of the total applicants were from Long Island. If it was 1/5, then 1/6 finalists is an under-representation.</p>
<p>I don’t believe for a minute that the outcomes are “rigged”.</p>
<p>@blossom wrote: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This +11</p>
<p>Amazing that there is so much excitement about the help, support, excitement and fund raising for a mediocre HS sports team (at least in our town), while a SIemens Semifinalist got barely a mention on the school website.</p>
<p>But oh no, there are schools and parents who actually help and encourage kids to find a mentor, work all nighters, and compete at the national level - and that is somehow bad and an indication of “rigging the outcome”.</p>
<p>Sad. Really sad.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The Simmons program at SUNY Stonybrook, has attendees from areas around the country. IIRC they have a second program that targets a specific STEM area (materials?) that also has people attend from around the country.</p>
<p>After linking to an article about the importance of a mentor, you are kidding yourself if you don’t think that O’Dorney had a mentor. The internet, email and skype enable even rural people to work with mentors!</p>
<p>As for your accusation about those Bay Area Intel factories, which “factories” are you referring to? How effective are those “factories”? How many people who went to those factories applied? made semi’s? made finals? got to top 10? </p>
<p>Fluffy, let google be your friend, and try to read the articles with the objectivity of an aspiring researcher. It is not that hard to read a newspaper such as the Mercury News or look for the high school papers at Monta Vista, Harker, Gunn, or Lynbrook.<br>
Aren’t you from that area and know a tad about what Stanford does in the context of the Intel? </p>
<p>Here’s the type of story you should be able to find"</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>When she joined Cai in the lab, his team had identified a gene responsible for making cancer stem cells dormant, but the gene’s mechanism was still unclear. Angela helped the team decode that mechanism. <<<</p>
<p>You might also follow the research of Dr. Shang Cai in the future and read the upcoming papers.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are still missing the point if you cannot see the difference of the role of the mentors that helped O’Dorney and the ones that handle the keys to the advanced research of a team of researchers at a major university and share the results with a high schooler and let them present that work as his or her own. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I meant overrepresentation with respect to the overall population, and not just the population of applicants. Even if more than 1/6 of the total applicants were from Long Island, it’s still really weird that a national competition as prestigious as Intel would have so many applicants and semifinalists from such a small area.</p>
<p>I am in agreement with shravas on this. Apparently, there were 51 semifinalists from Long Island this year (<a href=“http://data.newsday.com/long-island/data/long-island/2014-intel-semifinalists/”>Long Island Maps, Special Projects & Data - Newsday). That is one more than the total number of semifinalists from Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Utah, all combined. I think that the over-representation of New York-ers among the semi-finalists goes back to the days of the Westinghouse Science Talent Search.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So? Sure Gunn and others are very strong high schools.</p>
<p>Where are these Bay Area Intel Factories? </p>
<p>You still haven’t answered the question I asked about those factories.</p>
<p>Yes, I am from the area and I don’t know what Stanford does in the “context of the Intel”. What I do know that it, like many other colleges, provides opportunities for HS students. But that is a far cry from being an “Intel Factory” and certainly a far cry from “rigging the outcomes”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If Long Island were a State, it would be the 13th largest by population.
In addition, they have at least two programs, the Simmons and Garcia programs, that accepts students from around the country including rural areas for summer research. Some of those projects are submitted to these competitions and Stony Brook PR mentions those students too.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is a serious accusation.</p>
<p>The Intel application, all gazillion pages of it, require the student to clearly distinguish what their specific contribution was as well as who else was involved in the work and what previous work they built off of. Same for the recommendations that they get. That is what they are judged on. </p>
<p>I am no expert on Long Island geography, but it looks to me as though the 51 semifinalists listed in the newsday source I mentioned do all come from Long Island, even though more students from other places may have worked at Stony Brook.</p>
<p>Texas is the second state by population, and it had 10 semifinalists, to Long Island’s 51. Pennsylvania is 6th, and had one semifinalist. Ohio is 7th and had 2 semifinalists. Michigan is 9th and had 5 semifinalists. Massachusetts apparently ranks 14th by population (so below Long Island), but it had only 12 semifinalists.</p>
<p>All of the Intel semifinalists I have known personally have been very talented and dedicated. The geographic concentration of the semifinalists should not be used to undermine their qualifications. At the same time, I think there is no point in saying that the geographic concentration does not exist.</p>
<p>@quantmech and @shravas</p>
<p>Agree. There is a geographic concentration, just like one may find with HS football stars, LaCrosse players (IIRC LI is big on that) or music (I would be curious about the concentration of Juilliard admits for instance). I was surprised at how big LI actually is and I would expect there is also a concentration of professionals (commuters to NYC) which could explain the concentration.</p>
<p>I agree also that the Westinghouse legacy probably explains it a bit as well as that once the ball gets rolling (e.g. if they had 5 semifinalists in 1980) then it is easy to get more mentors and students interested the next year…and the next…and so on.</p>
<p>But your first point is the one I agree with the most, because there are programs to support them, is no reason to undermine them or the program.</p>
<p>So, anyone ask him/herself just what the impact of these 300 semi-finalists really is on college admissions? </p>