Siemens-Westinghouse and Intel STS

Chance Me / Match Me!
21

<p>tennisjump, its easy to give a presentation about something. All you have to do is memorize some details and spit them back out verbatim like your mentor said. </p>

<p>mmata1089, this is in no way an indictment of your research, but don't you think the contest is a little convaluted if the only way to succeed, and who's to say you will succeed at intel, is if you have access to a cooperate research institution and a Ph.D. mentor. That is like if a baseball player starts using steroids and does really well. Everyone sees his great performance and celebrates his accomplishments, when in reality he wasn't responsible for them. He then recieves better endorsements and player contracts because of his fraudulent sucess.</p>

22

<p>ok yea i suppose its true that having access to high profile research institutions gives some people the edge over others... o well i guess im 1 of the lucky 1s =D</p>

23

<p>mmata1089, I don't think that research is a bad idea. I did it this summer and would not have been able to do what I did without having acess to the Cleveland Clinic, a multi billion dollar hospital (ranked 3rd by US News!!!). Anyway, I just think its wrong to show case students and give them top dollar when less fortunate students can't even have a chance.</p>

24

<p>Your mentor is required to report on how much originality, creativity, bursts or genius, etc. you have put into your research project.</p>

<p>Coming from the area where NIH, NIST, and the high school from which the most Intel semifinalists hail nationally are all located, I know from experience what kind of people make it to that level of receiving national acclaim.</p>

<p>No one with a "slave position" does well.</p>

<p>There is definitely a element of luck in getting that position at a research institute that allows you to do individual research. For the most part however, people who make it the farthest in these competitions make these oppurtunities for themselves. NIH, being what it is, will assume most regularly admitted (through connections and not brilliant scientific performance) high school interns haven't the faintest in what they do, and thus give them those menial "lab equipment work" jobs.</p>

<p>These are the people who cannot distinguish between those brain-boggling acronyms: LDL/SDS-PAGE/FBS/pLHCX/YOU-NAME-IT. And I can guarentee students won't be able to just "steal" Ph.D. work and pass it off as their own; no self-respecting scientist who has worked for his/her title/job will allow that simply out of a sense for honesty.</p>

<p>Siemens is purely research, looking only at the paper you present. But they are surely not without their methods to root out people who know what they're talking about from people who don't, especially by the time they have determined Finalist standings.</p>

<p>Intel even looks at your performance as a science scholar as legitimate backing against the fact of whether you do or do not have the ability to write top-rate articles on your research.</p>

<p>And I will gladly reiterate that both competitions require your mentor to report your activities. No one likes a plagiarist.</p>

25

<p>what is NIH and NIST?</p>

26

<p>kryptonsa36- What you are implying is what is supposed to happen. There are plenty of mentors that wouldn't think twice about helping a student a little too much.</p>

27

<p>i agree, as an NIH student researcher myself that this is a problem. my question for you: how would someone who has done legititmate, novel, independent work portray this in a college application? how should I distinguish my work from the (sometimes more impressive) work of others that has been 'borrowed?' I really would appreciate any suggestions, thanks!</p>

28

<p>If you haven't created your own study, it is a little more difficult. I did pretty much everything myself (aside from getting access to the files due to HIPPAA and stuff). If your mentor was heavily involved, you really should state that. You could say: "I assisted in this report." Infact, if I were an adcom, I would think that brutal honesty would be a desirable quality.</p>

29

<p>If it's any consolation, as evidenced by CC itself, doing well in these competitions isn't going to guarantee you anything in the college admissions process.</p>

<p>Semifinalist status - sure, a student could manage to take a PhD's work. But first she'll have to put in extra effort to meet page-length requirements, try to decide what's important, switch formats to meet demands layed out by Intel or Siemens.</p>

<p>All for something that colleges won't put so much consideration into unless you have the scientific gung-ho and know-how in other ECs to prove that you deserved it.</p>

<p>As for a Finalist spot, again, easy to borrow professional work. But by this point, you will have to make a presentation. You will be bombarded with questions from experts of your field to test the depth of your knowledge.</p>

<p>And as is evident in people who do steal work, you'll never get a complete understanding of what you do unless you get full-blown experience in either doing the research or discussing the details with your mentor (the latter of which should compel you to participate fully in working on the project anyways.)</p>

<p>Memorization is not easy for such in-depth things like these. As if recalling a perfect answer like "This response is markedly attenuated by coexpression with the Bax antagonist antiapoptotic protein Bcl2, confirming proteolytic activation of caspase-3 in these cells." to a question is possible when you have no idea what it means.</p>

<p>And in these competitions, who knows if they won't decide to humiliate you on a national level for cheating your way to the top?!</p>

<p>Anyways, what I'm saying is that of course there can be people who get on by for a time relying on non-original material, but you shouldn't assume the entire competition is crap because of the -possibility- of people doing this. If you look even only at Finalists and not even at Winners, they all have incredible credentials and put in time-consuming (original!) research, and, in the end, that's why they've been rewarded top prizes.</p>

<p>P.S. NIH = National Istitutes of Health, NIST = National Institutes of Standards & Technology</p>

30

<p>speaking of cheating your way to the top... somebody in my school was a siemens westinghouse semifinalist but cheated to get there. he lost the title of valedictorian, was kicked out of nhs and our skool's science research program, and didnt get into his dream school, harvard. hes still going to an amazing skool (columbia), but yea just felt like mentioning this story</p>

31

<p>Just last year a guy from my school (class of '06) got 2nd place in the Intel STS. I think he went to RSI and worked with a PhD guy there on something insane math related project. During the ceremony type thing where he recieved the giant $1000 check for being a finalist or whatever he explained his project and no one had a damn clue what the hell he was talking about. Still, I think he probably had a lot to do with the project because he is one of those ultra insane uber geniuses thats gonna invent time travel or something.</p>

32

<p>I'm just saying the real test of understanding your own work is being able to explain it plainly to someone who knows nothing of the subject. If he couldn't reduce the jargon enough, thats a problem. BTW, I think it is easier to do the math part because there is less lab work, which we as students aren't familiar with. I'm not saying the math is easy, I'm saying it is EASIER.</p>

33

<p>Yi Sun is uber-amazing.</p>

<p>Plus, that check was for $5000.</p>

<p>I think it's arguable both ways for math or lab work as the more difficult. One involves relentless investigation of a single, near-impossible problem, while the other involves relentess observation of what goes on in your meticulous experiments.</p>

<p>And even if you can explain something as simply as is allowed without overgeneralizing your subject, that's no guarentee that the average layman will understand it. Even learn/do-it-yourself books -- which try to make already relatively not difficult subjects relatively much easier -- end up not being a successful read for all.</p>

<p>So if understanding by the average person really was key, the competitions would revolve around that. But they don't; students are giving their presentations to people already experienced in the same field as their research, people who can more easily grasp what you're saying, provided that you know what you're talking about in the first place.</p>

34

<p>But then doesn't that get back to the point that since they are defending infront of an experienced panel, all they need to do is spit back out verbatim, whatever their mentor told them.</p>

35

<p>What makes you think that's easy to do without knowing your stuff?</p>

<p>These are extended projects people are working on. Not something that can be summarized in a couple of pages, no less maybe even at 10 pages or so.</p>

<p>And in a rigorous project like that, professionals will expect you to professionally know every last detail involved in what you did, and even some things that may not be directly part of your research but closely related to.</p>

<p>Plus, in being so verbose, you can unwittingly spit back something incorrectly with just a few replaced words, and the meaning will be changed entirely. You won't catch that if you don't know your own project, but the professionals will.</p>

36

<p>I think you mean, the contestant needs to understand the "mentor's research " and explain it professionally.</p>

37

<p>I wouldn't have a chance in hell if I was to give a presentation on research my mentor previously did.</p>

<p>And I consider myself a memorization person.</p>

<p>Can you show me someone who did pull it off?</p>