Science Fair - Mentored vs Indivdual

[Anonymous]

No sour grapes - walked around and found a good number of projects that looked very advanced and ones that looked like what you'd expect from a HS student. I later found out that the advanced ones were mentored or the kid was part of a research team.

The thought I'm having is - should we split the two? Individual vs Mentored. I get kids soak info faster than we do and those mentored can showcase how far they've come. But I also saw a few kids build XYZ that looked awesome but didn't get anywhere.

Judges supposedly take this into their scoring but I don't think they do.

I'm probably missing something - so let me ask the crowd.

[Anonymous]

Not familiar with your particular science fair but is it "officially" mentored? Or are you just talking about parents doing the work for the kid? Tale as old as time and you would be hard pressed to get parents to 'fess up.

[Anonymous]

I'm sure some were officially mentored - they had university on the poster. Yep Individual = Individual + Parent. Even with the Parent's help - a full research team is far stronger.

[Anonymous]

I was one of the judges who selected the kids for regeneron in my (non Va) district. I **absolutely** agree they should be broken into two divisions.
The reality is the kids going onto Nationals are going to be from the mentored category - they just won't have the resources to have a good experience at nationals if they aren't working with professors or industry mentors.

But I SO wish we could have honored some of the kids who clearly did the work themselves!
I judged one kid who was absolutely enthusiastic, passionate, and knowledgable. If we were purely judging the kids on the work they did themselves, he should have won.
I gave him glowing remarks and high scores. But the way the rubric was set up, he just couldn't compete (literally) with the kids curing cancer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No sour grapes - walked around and found a good number of projects that looked very advanced and ones that looked like what you'd expect from a HS student. I later found out that the advanced ones were mentored or the kid was part of a research team.

The thought I'm having is - should we split the two? Individual vs Mentored. I get kids soak info faster than we do and those mentored can showcase how far they've come. But I also saw a few kids build XYZ that looked awesome but didn't get anywhere.

Judges supposedly take this into their scoring but I don't think they do.

I'm probably missing something - so let me ask the crowd.

How did you find this out about all[b] that moved on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No sour grapes - walked around and found a good number of projects that looked very advanced and ones that looked like what you'd expect from a HS student. I later found out that the advanced ones were mentored or the kid was part of a research team.

The thought I'm having is - should we split the two? Individual vs Mentored. I get kids soak info faster than we do and those mentored can showcase how far they've come. But I also saw a few kids build XYZ that looked awesome but didn't get anywhere.

Judges supposedly take this into their scoring but I don't think they do.

I'm probably missing something - so let me ask the crowd.

How did you find this out about all[b] that moved on?

I'm a bit confused by what you are really asking? I spoke to a parent while waiting for the awards and I checked with ChatGPT which confirmed it. And TBH was still on the fence but then the PP judge also confirmed it.

[Anonymous]

Nobody cares, OP.

I helped my kids with their science fair projects. I'm a scientist, and crafty, but I always half-assed it. Result: better than the average kid of their age could do, but not hyper polished or anything. I just don't care that much - my goal was simply to spark some love of science in my kids.

I also volunteered every year for the school science events, and there was a majority of parent-helped projects, who all probably had the same intent in mind.

[Anonymous]

My kid doesn’t have a mentor and is afraid judges think he isn’t being honest about it. So there’s always something to worry about. We also joke about how high school kids are perpetually curing cancer and Alzheimer’s.

It does seem unfair that some projects are clearly assisted. Or some schools have built-in programs where the kids work on their science projects with guidance from teachers. And then you have the projects where the parents have a very heavy hand. All that said, for all these amazing kids who themselves work hard on projects they are genuinely interested in, it’s inspiring and I applaud them. And their high schools should recognize those efforts the same way they do sports.

Time to rewatch the documentary “Science Fair”!

[Anonymous]

This is why we won’t even bother participating in the farce that is the science fair. It’s completely unfair.

[Anonymous]

This is the PP who was a judge again.

I don't think you guys understand what the OP means by mentored.
These aren't projects where you think "huh, seems like an adult helped"

These are projects where the university or industry lab is listed on the presentation. Where the kid literally talks about working in Dr so and so's lab. Where they use tools and materials only available in university or industry. Where the university seal is on every graph. They aren't pretending they did it themselves - they are basically sharing the results of their lab-based internship. It's amazing work that some of these kids are doing (like I said - literally working on curing cancer!) but it's not something that can be done by a child working at home or at school, no matter how much "help" mom and dad provide.

They should definitely be different categories.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is the PP who was a judge again.

I don't think you guys understand what the OP means by mentored.
These aren't projects where you think "huh, seems like an adult helped"

These are projects where the university or industry lab is listed on the presentation. Where the kid literally talks about working in Dr so and so's lab. Where they use tools and materials only available in university or industry. Where the university seal is on every graph. They aren't pretending they did it themselves - they are basically sharing the results of their lab-based internship. It's amazing work that some of these kids are doing (like I said - literally working on curing cancer!) but it's not something that can be done by a child working at home or at school, no matter how much "help" mom and dad provide.

They should definitely be different categories.

Right. And you think a kid is just given free access to Dr. so and so’s lab and is told to have fun with it and receives no assistance while in that lab? You’re delusional.

[Anonymous]

There is no way to enforce these divisions. Arms Race is the only thing practical.

The only way to improve is to aggressively disrespect these fraudulent contests, and lower the status of "elite" colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is why we won’t even bother participating in the farce that is the science fair. It’s completely unfair.

The issue is that the "judging" needs to stop. All it does is feed into fraud like claiming these kids are actually curing cancer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the PP who was a judge again.

I don't think you guys understand what the OP means by mentored.
These aren't projects where you think "huh, seems like an adult helped"

These are projects where the university or industry lab is listed on the presentation. Where the kid literally talks about working in Dr so and so's lab. Where they use tools and materials only available in university or industry. Where the university seal is on every graph. They aren't pretending they did it themselves - they are basically sharing the results of their lab-based internship. It's amazing work that some of these kids are doing (like I said - literally working on curing cancer!) but it's not something that can be done by a child working at home or at school, no matter how much "help" mom and dad provide.

They should definitely be different categories.

Right. And you think a kid is just given free access to Dr. so and so’s lab and is told to have fun with it and receives no assistance while in that lab? You’re delusional.

DP. I think the issue is - they receive an unfair assistance from the lab. How they got into the lab is irrelevant - competition, pay to play, or connection. If they learned so much - they should do an independent project - using the knowledge they gained from the lab. Right now - you have to figure out where the lab ends and the kid begins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the PP who was a judge again.

I don't think you guys understand what the OP means by mentored.
These aren't projects where you think "huh, seems like an adult helped"

These are projects where the university or industry lab is listed on the presentation. Where the kid literally talks about working in Dr so and so's lab. Where they use tools and materials only available in university or industry. Where the university seal is on every graph. They aren't pretending they did it themselves - they are basically sharing the results of their lab-based internship. It's amazing work that some of these kids are doing (like I said - literally working on curing cancer!) but it's not something that can be done by a child working at home or at school, no matter how much "help" mom and dad provide.

They should definitely be different categories.

Right. And you think a kid is just given free access to Dr. so and so’s lab and is told to have fun with it and receives no assistance while in that lab? You’re delusional.

What are you talking about? That's EXACTLY why it should be separate categories. Because some kids are reporting on work they are doing as lab assistance (clearly with Dr so and so's help, or more likely Dr so and so's undergrads' help) and some kids are reporting on work they did in the basement or the garage, with or without mom and dads help. The adult assistance could be there in both cases, but the official mentorship and access to resources that some of these kids have should put them in an entirely different category.