If doing research in high school is unfair and puts poorer students at a disadvantage, what extracurriculars are fair?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading this thread — and honestly this forum in general — makes me question what the mission and purpose of college really is anymore.

I keep thinking about what kids are being put through from K–12. Are we helping them become competent adults, or just stressed, selfish, and resentful ones? If students are already taking endless AP classes in high school, what exactly are they supposed to learn in college? If a child is doing research and taking Calculus III at an incredibly young age, why is college even necessary? And if someone is already deeply committed to sports or music at a professional level, how much additional value does college really add to their life? Shouldn’t they just focus on becoming professionals in their field instead?

Of course colleges are necessary. Stanford and MIT have put all their classes online, so anyone can learn any topic free of tuition. Obviously you don't just go there to take classes. Kids still go to college for like-minded peers, opportunities provided by top colleges, and a social environment during their formative years. You'd be surprised that these kids are not "stressed, selfish, and resentful", quite the opposite.

This is what I read yesterday from NYTimes about Stanford. If this is the learning you are talking about.

```
Money in Silicon Valley has become a game of almost meaningless numbers bandied about in a breathtakingly casual manner. It contributes to the whirlpool effect students at Stanford have felt around tech and lucre — if your roommate can drop out and start a nine-figure company, why shouldn’t you profit, too? Why put all your energy into being a student when it seems like everyone around you is getting rich? One time during sophomore year, I was working on homework in my dorm common room with an acquaintance when she offhandedly remarked, “I bought a house in Las Vegas last week.” She continued, “It’s good for taxes.” It’s hard to put your earbuds in and get right back to your problem set when someone says something like that.
```

Are they the "stressed, selfish, and resentful" kids you described?

And if you don't like Stanford, what kind of learning environment you would like your kids to have?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading this thread — and honestly this forum in general — makes me question what the mission and purpose of college really is anymore.

I keep thinking about what kids are being put through from K–12. Are we helping them become competent adults, or just stressed, selfish, and resentful ones? If students are already taking endless AP classes in high school, what exactly are they supposed to learn in college? If a child is doing research and taking Calculus III at an incredibly young age, why is college even necessary? And if someone is already deeply committed to sports or music at a professional level, how much additional value does college really add to their life? Shouldn’t they just focus on becoming professionals in their field instead?

Of course colleges are necessary. Stanford and MIT have put all their classes online, so anyone can learn any topic free of tuition. Obviously you don't just go there to take classes. Kids still go to college for like-minded peers, opportunities provided by top colleges, and a social environment during their formative years. You'd be surprised that these kids are not "stressed, selfish, and resentful", quite the opposite.

This is what I read yesterday from NYTimes about Stanford. If this is the learning you are talking about.

```
Money in Silicon Valley has become a game of almost meaningless numbers bandied about in a breathtakingly casual manner. It contributes to the whirlpool effect students at Stanford have felt around tech and lucre — if your roommate can drop out and start a nine-figure company, why shouldn’t you profit, too? Why put all your energy into being a student when it seems like everyone around you is getting rich? One time during sophomore year, I was working on homework in my dorm common room with an acquaintance when she offhandedly remarked, “I bought a house in Las Vegas last week.” She continued, “It’s good for taxes.” It’s hard to put your earbuds in and get right back to your problem set when someone says something like that.
```

Are they the "stressed, selfish, and resentful" kids you described?

And if you don't like Stanford, what kind of learning environment you would like your kids to have?

I am indifferent. Everyone should pursue what they want. As long as it is ethical and legal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about this one?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/14-year-old-scientist-heman-bekele-on-his-quest-to-fight-skin-cancer-with-soap
Fair or unfair? Rich or poor?

Connected. The mentor is: Deborah Isabelle she has an MS in Material Science.

It's not like that kid read into latest cancer fighting drugs, then read about skin cancer, then experimented between the how effective soap is to the skin cancer. That requires patients that have skin cancer and willing to have a 13 year old without a HS degree experiment on them.

This is exactly the fake HS research that the thread is complaining about.

Working with a mentor makes it “fake”?

Then almost all research is “fake”.

You have a very narrow, rigid view of what “research” is that would preclude many people working in research.

They don’t have a narrow or rigid view. They’re just trying to further dumb down the entire population. If I’m too dumb to be ahead, no one else should be ahead. Pretty standard liberal ideology.

Stupid MAGA narrative that has no basis in reality.

MAGAs dumb us down plenty.

GPA inflation and watering down SAT didn't happen in reality? Accusing math being racist didn’t happen? TJ reform trying to make it a lottery process didn’t happen? Which universe are you coming from?

No one is trying to “dumb down the entire population”, FFS.

GPA/SAT inflation and the AP arms race began decades ago and was driven from above by rich parents wanting their kids to get into top schools.

No kid is entitled to TJ; it’s a public school resource that should be accessible to all bright STEM kids in the area, not just the kids from the rich MSs who could afford to play the admissions game.

The only people talking about “math being racist” are the racist RWNJs distorting math reform — which is fundamentally all about having more kids take more math.

So were the SATs dumbed down for the rich parents or was TJ standards loosened to break up the rich kid monopoly on TJ seats?

The SATs were dumbed down because people didn't like the racial profile of the kids getting the best test scores. Sure there were plenty of white kids getting top test scores but not enough. Sure there were some URM getting high test scores but not enough.

Same thing at TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the world does not care about extracurriculars. if you are winning academic olympiads, that's one thing but your passionate interest in the migration patterns of mosquitoes in suburban environments, followed up by research and a published paper in some foreign journal nobody has ever heard of is generally meaningless.

True for the rest of the world, but this is planet USA. And a published paper on the migration patterns of mosquitoes in suburban environments will go pretty darn far. It demonstrates smarts, discipline, passion. Every selective school would be interested in this high school student. High test scores and GPA are a dime a dozen. Every selective university could fill their classes ten times over with kids with perfect stats. But here is someone with a compelling interest in mosquitos in the suburbs and is bringing the chops.

This is why American universities are generally the best universities in the world. They will take the mosquito kid. Whereas the test oriented countries like Korea, China, Japan, the UK and so on won't. That mosquito kid is the separation American universities have from universities elsewhere. And consequentially, nearly all important innovation happens in the US and not elsewhere.

American universities aren't among the best in the world because of the quality of the American students. Are you freaking kidding me? American university dominance is almost entirely about money and the job opportunities available to our graduates.

Are you under the impression that most of the innovation we see in America is coming from the "mosquito kids?" It's mostly coming from high scoring immigrants or the children of immigrants.

[Anonymous]

The fact that we still lay off Americans and increase h1b or outsource.

[Anonymous]

These days, many startup founders aren’t even American or trained at American universities. I mean what stop them from starting their own business w AI tools.

[Anonymous]

Not to mention whatever is taught here can be found on internet. Just today I was reading papers from both ZTH and Cornell. Knowledge is quite commoditized.

[Anonymous]

Shagging.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw this Reddit comment about research in high school (https://old.reddit.com/r/AskProfessors/comments/1tg9z5l/high_schooler_interning_at_a_toptier_research/omfaesb/):

“Sigh. High school students shouldn't be doing this.

Maybe just enjoy what's left of your childhood?

And don't participate in things that pad your college applications in a way that's totally unfair to other students who aren't connected to/don't live near/can't afford/don't know about intern opportunities at research universities.
But really this is on the professor who's supporting this nonsense.”

So if students shouldn’t be doing this, what extracurriculars should they do? Even things like sports or robotics favor the privilege

What’s left of your childhood?

100 years ago these kids would be working in factories and on farms. Some would be married with families.This notion of some mythical, sacrosanct “childhood” is a modern invention.

+1000

Life is unfair and apparently DCUM just now realized it.

Being born American is an unfair advantage over the vast majority of the world population.

Being born to rich parents is an unfair advantage.

Being born to a two parent household is an unfair advantage.

Being born to a household with a stay at home parent is an unfair advantage.

Being born to a parent who is dedicated to education is an unfair advantage.

Being in a good neighborhood with lots of educated families is an unfair advantage.

A child who has none of these is at a huge disadvantage to one who has several or all of these.

So no children should get an education because some children are denied in education? That makes zero sense. More support and opportunities need to be offered to disadvantage families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about this one?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/14-year-old-scientist-heman-bekele-on-his-quest-to-fight-skin-cancer-with-soap
Fair or unfair? Rich or poor?

Connected. The mentor is: Deborah Isabelle she has an MS in Material Science.

It's not like that kid read into latest cancer fighting drugs, then read about skin cancer, then experimented between the how effective soap is to the skin cancer. That requires patients that have skin cancer and willing to have a 13 year old without a HS degree experiment on them.

This is exactly the fake HS research that the thread is complaining about.

Working with a mentor makes it “fake”?

Then almost all research is “fake”.

You have a very narrow, rigid view of what “research” is that would preclude many people working in research.

I said "Connected" - how did they get the mentors as a HS student?

The kid won a science competition.

So is your gripe on how students are connected with mentors?

Yes and half the people replying on the thread. Connected - this isn't open to all kids. The Connected mentor makes a huge difference in the final outcome and execution. Independent HS researchers can't compete against Adult full-time pros. You either have competitions for those with mentors and those without or don't allow the deck to stack towards mentored projects.

Not sure why this is controversial.

The kid won the competition on their own - the prize was the mentor.

While I agree that there is a lot that is unfair in college admissions I don’t agree that this research is “fake”.

The kid use an active ingredient already topical and available in cream form; he took the active ingredient and said why not soap? There are no trials or proof or experimentation that the idea is more effective than the current cream. I don't think he even made soap. It's been 2 years and still no work to move the soap idea forward. Except for the prize nothing else came out of his effort. Go to a science fair - you'll see mentorless kids that did more and won nothing. HS research is rewarded by presentation of the material and the preparation of the student, it's like a cake that looks good and tastes like paper. The mentor is the one that makes the presentation professional.

If you think the research has merit than after two years post one citation or any work that built on top of his. Or even any effort on his part to move the needle forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about this one?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/14-year-old-scientist-heman-bekele-on-his-quest-to-fight-skin-cancer-with-soap
Fair or unfair? Rich or poor?

Connected. The mentor is: Deborah Isabelle she has an MS in Material Science.

It's not like that kid read into latest cancer fighting drugs, then read about skin cancer, then experimented between the how effective soap is to the skin cancer. That requires patients that have skin cancer and willing to have a 13 year old without a HS degree experiment on them.

This is exactly the fake HS research that the thread is complaining about.

Working with a mentor makes it “fake”?

Then almost all research is “fake”.

You have a very narrow, rigid view of what “research” is that would preclude many people working in research.

I said "Connected" - how did they get the mentors as a HS student?

The kid won a science competition.

So is your gripe on how students are connected with mentors?

Yes and half the people replying on the thread. Connected - this isn't open to all kids. The Connected mentor makes a huge difference in the final outcome and execution. Independent HS researchers can't compete against Adult full-time pros. You either have competitions for those with mentors and those without or don't allow the deck to stack towards mentored projects.

Not sure why this is controversial.

The kid won the competition on their own - the prize was the mentor.

While I agree that there is a lot that is unfair in college admissions I don’t agree that this research is “fake”.

The kid use an active ingredient already topical and available in cream form; he took the active ingredient and said why not soap? There are no trials or proof or experimentation that the idea is more effective than the current cream. I don't think he even made soap. It's been 2 years and still no work to move the soap idea forward. Except for the prize nothing else came out of his effort. Go to a science fair - you'll see mentorless kids that did more and won nothing. HS research is rewarded by presentation of the material and the preparation of the student, it's like a cake that looks good and tastes like paper. The mentor is the one that makes the presentation professional.

If you think the research has merit than after two years post one citation or any work that built on top of his. Or even any effort on his part to move the needle forward.

It's high school level science research. What is your problem? These are bright kids that are interested in exploring and learning about science research. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. They're not claiming to be phds and they are not.

In spite of this country's smack down of science research, it's still interests some students. Why don't you find something better to do with your time then complain about kids that like science research.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about this one?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/14-year-old-scientist-heman-bekele-on-his-quest-to-fight-skin-cancer-with-soap
Fair or unfair? Rich or poor?

Connected. The mentor is: Deborah Isabelle she has an MS in Material Science.

It's not like that kid read into latest cancer fighting drugs, then read about skin cancer, then experimented between the how effective soap is to the skin cancer. That requires patients that have skin cancer and willing to have a 13 year old without a HS degree experiment on them.

This is exactly the fake HS research that the thread is complaining about.

Working with a mentor makes it “fake”?

Then almost all research is “fake”.

You have a very narrow, rigid view of what “research” is that would preclude many people working in research.

They don’t have a narrow or rigid view. They’re just trying to further dumb down the entire population. If I’m too dumb to be ahead, no one else should be ahead. Pretty standard liberal ideology.

Stupid MAGA narrative that has no basis in reality.

MAGAs dumb us down plenty.

GPA inflation and watering down SAT didn't happen in reality? Accusing math being racist didn’t happen? TJ reform trying to make it a lottery process didn’t happen? Which universe are you coming from?

No one is trying to “dumb down the entire population”, FFS.

GPA/SAT inflation and the AP arms race began decades ago and was driven from above by rich parents wanting their kids to get into top schools.

No kid is entitled to TJ; it’s a public school resource that should be accessible to all bright STEM kids in the area, not just the kids from the rich MSs who could afford to play the admissions game.

The only people talking about “math being racist” are the racist RWNJs distorting math reform — which is fundamentally all about having more kids take more math.

SATs were dumbed down for DEI reasons
TJ admissions were loosened for DEI reasons
The "math is racist trope" literally came from the DEI crowd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not to mention whatever is taught here can be found on internet. Just today I was reading papers from both ZTH and Cornell. Knowledge is quite commoditized.

Even before the internet era, anyone can read papers from ZTH, Cornell and for that matter any other institution. Just go to academic libraries that subscribe to the journals, just like accessing it electronically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about this one?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/14-year-old-scientist-heman-bekele-on-his-quest-to-fight-skin-cancer-with-soap
Fair or unfair? Rich or poor?

Connected. The mentor is: Deborah Isabelle she has an MS in Material Science.

It's not like that kid read into latest cancer fighting drugs, then read about skin cancer, then experimented between the how effective soap is to the skin cancer. That requires patients that have skin cancer and willing to have a 13 year old without a HS degree experiment on them.

This is exactly the fake HS research that the thread is complaining about.

Working with a mentor makes it “fake”?

Then almost all research is “fake”.

You have a very narrow, rigid view of what “research” is that would preclude many people working in research.

They don’t have a narrow or rigid view. They’re just trying to further dumb down the entire population. If I’m too dumb to be ahead, no one else should be ahead. Pretty standard liberal ideology.

Stupid MAGA narrative that has no basis in reality.

MAGAs dumb us down plenty.

GPA inflation and watering down SAT didn't happen in reality? Accusing math being racist didn’t happen? TJ reform trying to make it a lottery process didn’t happen? Which universe are you coming from?

No one is trying to “dumb down the entire population”, FFS.

GPA/SAT inflation and the AP arms race began decades ago and was driven from above by rich parents wanting their kids to get into top schools.

No kid is entitled to TJ; it’s a public school resource that should be accessible to all bright STEM kids in the area, not just the kids from the rich MSs who could afford to play the admissions game.

The only people talking about “math being racist” are the racist RWNJs distorting math reform — which is fundamentally all about having more kids take more math.

SATs were dumbed down for DEI reasons
TJ admissions were loosened for DEI reasons
The "math is racist trope" literally came from the DEI crowd.

And it’s mostly running through majority white and Asian districts, not black ones. May need to update who’s causing all these issues

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not to mention whatever is taught here can be found on internet. Just today I was reading papers from both ZTH and Cornell. Knowledge is quite commoditized.

Even before the internet era, anyone can read papers from ZTH, Cornell and for that matter any other institution. Just go to academic libraries that subscribe to the journals, just like accessing it electronically.

Most don’t work this way anymore and require an institutional affiliation to do such. They’re paying hundreds of thousands of dollars every year to get access to these journals. It wouldn’t make sense to give it to the public.

Access to scientific information is actually getting worse over time due to the academic publishing industry. Arxiv is one of the few organizations fighting this mess.