How can teenagers create such science projects?

[Anonymous]

Our high school allows students to take scientific research for credit—partnered up w/ local college faculty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. The science fair kids always have mentors. Usually they are paid and do most of the work while explaining to the kids what’s going on. I learned this when someone my DD looked up to placed in a science fair.

Now I know another kid who placed in last year’s state science fair who did not have a mentor. Or so he says. Dad is in tech. Son is really not that intellectual and cannot tell how why he started the project or what he did. I suspect dad (works at Microsoft) did it.

People that work at Microsoft are allowed to have kids and they're allowed to teach their kids about data and data collection and how to clean up data and how to manipulate data and how to analyze data. Presumably someone taught the person working at Microsoft those skills and they are allowed to teach them to someone else.

Pretty sure Venus Williams is allowed to teach her kid how to play tennis and Taylor Swift is allowed to teach her kid how to compose a song and Stephen King is allowed to teach his kid how to write a story.

But Venus Williams would not be allowed to go play a game for her kid so kid can win a medal, right? There’s no equivalence here!

That and Venus Williams started training at the age of 4 and played in her first official pro tournament was at 14. It took her 10 years to train to that level and I’m sure it was 40 hours a week or more.

Are you telling me your kid started data science, IoT, web technologies and environmental science in elementary school and got to professional level at the age of 14?

Spare me from this BS. I know how long it takes.

The level of time required to become world class in one of the most popular activities in the world is very different from the level of time required to be able to do research that wins a competition for high school students

No. Research is serious business that takes years to learn the trade. From acquiring basic competence in the subject, to being able to even read conference/journal papers to understand what has been done, that typically requires at least a few graduate-level classes. The individual then needs to come up with ideas that can potentially advance the state of the art, realize those ideas by designing/performing experiments or developing a theory, and turn the results obtained into publishable papers that can fend off criticisms from reviewers. That's a long journey filled with blood, sweat, and frustration dotted with occasional Eureka moments. Can a high schooler do it in an independent fashion? Sure, there are Bill Gates, Terrence Tao, and the likes among us, but they are 1 in 100,000. Not 1000 in 100,000 who apply to top schools each year and claim to have done published research.

You need to relax. There are over 3 and 1/2 million kids that come out of high school every year and a very small percentage of them are interested in science research at all. Of the very small number some do poor quality projects, some do average quality and some do high quality projects. You've got yourself in a snit over a tiny amount of high school kids.

It's not the number of kids involved, nor the quality of the research produced, that's the issue. It's ethic and honesty. Are you okay with kids unethically claiming they have published research papers when in reality all they did was the equivalent to washing test tubes? They barely knew the subject, did not contribute a single ounce of thought, did not write a single sentence for the papers, and yet are dishonestly listed as co-authors because their parents pay for the opportunities or hook them up with friends/colleagues willing to look the other way?

Can you please Google order of authorship on scientific papers. There are hundreds of different scientific publications and they all have different guidelines and rules, but in general someone that makes a small contribution comes at the end of the list. No one with any knowledge would be confusing that person with any kind of lead researcher.

In fact, it could likely include somewhere in the publication that this person is affiliated with a high school. They would not obscure or hide or try to embellish that this person was not a high school student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. The science fair kids always have mentors. Usually they are paid and do most of the work while explaining to the kids what’s going on. I learned this when someone my DD looked up to placed in a science fair.

Now I know another kid who placed in last year’s state science fair who did not have a mentor. Or so he says. Dad is in tech. Son is really not that intellectual and cannot tell how why he started the project or what he did. I suspect dad (works at Microsoft) did it.

People that work at Microsoft are allowed to have kids and they're allowed to teach their kids about data and data collection and how to clean up data and how to manipulate data and how to analyze data. Presumably someone taught the person working at Microsoft those skills and they are allowed to teach them to someone else.

Pretty sure Venus Williams is allowed to teach her kid how to play tennis and Taylor Swift is allowed to teach her kid how to compose a song and Stephen King is allowed to teach his kid how to write a story.

But Venus Williams would not be allowed to go play a game for her kid so kid can win a medal, right? There’s no equivalence here!

That and Venus Williams started training at the age of 4 and played in her first official pro tournament was at 14. It took her 10 years to train to that level and I’m sure it was 40 hours a week or more.

Are you telling me your kid started data science, IoT, web technologies and environmental science in elementary school and got to professional level at the age of 14?

Spare me from this BS. I know how long it takes.

The level of time required to become world class in one of the most popular activities in the world is very different from the level of time required to be able to do research that wins a competition for high school students

No. Research is serious business that takes years to learn the trade. From acquiring basic competence in the subject, to being able to even read conference/journal papers to understand what has been done, that typically requires at least a few graduate-level classes. The individual then needs to come up with ideas that can potentially advance the state of the art, realize those ideas by designing/performing experiments or developing a theory, and turn the results obtained into publishable papers that can fend off criticisms from reviewers. That's a long journey filled with blood, sweat, and frustration dotted with occasional Eureka moments. Can a high schooler do it in an independent fashion? Sure, there are Bill Gates, Terrence Tao, and the likes among us, but they are 1 in 100,000. Not 1000 in 100,000 who apply to top schools each year and claim to have done published research.

You need to relax. There are over 3 and 1/2 million kids that come out of high school every year and a very small percentage of them are interested in science research at all. Of the very small number some do poor quality projects, some do average quality and some do high quality projects. You've got yourself in a snit over a tiny amount of high school kids.

It's not the number of kids involved, nor the quality of the research produced, that's the issue. It's ethic and honesty. Are you okay with kids unethically claiming they have published research papers when in reality all they did was the equivalent to washing test tubes? They barely knew the subject, did not contribute a single ounce of thought, did not write a single sentence for the papers, and yet are dishonestly listed as co-authors because their parents pay for the opportunities or hook them up with friends/colleagues willing to look the other way?

Can you please Google order of authorship on scientific papers. There are hundreds of different scientific publications and they all have different guidelines and rules, but in general someone that makes a small contribution comes at the end of the list. No one with any knowledge would be confusing that person with any kind of lead researcher.

Order of authorship depends on scientific areas. Some do alphabetical, some put corresponding author at the very end, some order based on decreasing contributions. The problem is not the ordering. It's the fact that being co-authors makes kids seem more impressive than they really are. Wow, this 16-year-old published a paper in journal of XYZ! When in reality they were merely cleaning data or doing other mindless, mundane work. Work that could have been done by any kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. The science fair kids always have mentors. Usually they are paid and do most of the work while explaining to the kids what’s going on. I learned this when someone my DD looked up to placed in a science fair.

Now I know another kid who placed in last year’s state science fair who did not have a mentor. Or so he says. Dad is in tech. Son is really not that intellectual and cannot tell how why he started the project or what he did. I suspect dad (works at Microsoft) did it.

People that work at Microsoft are allowed to have kids and they're allowed to teach their kids about data and data collection and how to clean up data and how to manipulate data and how to analyze data. Presumably someone taught the person working at Microsoft those skills and they are allowed to teach them to someone else.

Pretty sure Venus Williams is allowed to teach her kid how to play tennis and Taylor Swift is allowed to teach her kid how to compose a song and Stephen King is allowed to teach his kid how to write a story.

But Venus Williams would not be allowed to go play a game for her kid so kid can win a medal, right? There’s no equivalence here!

That and Venus Williams started training at the age of 4 and played in her first official pro tournament was at 14. It took her 10 years to train to that level and I’m sure it was 40 hours a week or more.

Are you telling me your kid started data science, IoT, web technologies and environmental science in elementary school and got to professional level at the age of 14?

Spare me from this BS. I know how long it takes.

The level of time required to become world class in one of the most popular activities in the world is very different from the level of time required to be able to do research that wins a competition for high school students

No. Research is serious business that takes years to learn the trade. From acquiring basic competence in the subject, to being able to even read conference/journal papers to understand what has been done, that typically requires at least a few graduate-level classes. The individual then needs to come up with ideas that can potentially advance the state of the art, realize those ideas by designing/performing experiments or developing a theory, and turn the results obtained into publishable papers that can fend off criticisms from reviewers. That's a long journey filled with blood, sweat, and frustration dotted with occasional Eureka moments. Can a high schooler do it in an independent fashion? Sure, there are Bill Gates, Terrence Tao, and the likes among us, but they are 1 in 100,000. Not 1000 in 100,000 who apply to top schools each year and claim to have done published research.

You need to relax. There are over 3 and 1/2 million kids that come out of high school every year and a very small percentage of them are interested in science research at all. Of the very small number some do poor quality projects, some do average quality and some do high quality projects. You've got yourself in a snit over a tiny amount of high school kids.

It's not the number of kids involved, nor the quality of the research produced, that's the issue. It's ethic and honesty. Are you okay with kids unethically claiming they have published research papers when in reality all they did was the equivalent to washing test tubes? They barely knew the subject, did not contribute a single ounce of thought, did not write a single sentence for the papers, and yet are dishonestly listed as co-authors because their parents pay for the opportunities or hook them up with friends/colleagues willing to look the other way?

Can you please Google order of authorship on scientific papers. There are hundreds of different scientific publications and they all have different guidelines and rules, but in general someone that makes a small contribution comes at the end of the list. No one with any knowledge would be confusing that person with any kind of lead researcher.

Order of authorship depends on scientific areas. Some do alphabetical, some put corresponding author at the very end, some order based on decreasing contributions. The problem is not the ordering. It's the fact that being co-authors makes kids seem more impressive than they really are. Wow, this 16-year-old published a paper in journal of XYZ! When in reality they were merely cleaning data or doing other mindless, mundane work. Work that could have been done by any kid.

The high school kid is not responsible for people's ignorance. People with knowledge understand that not everyone on the byline is a lead researcher and no one is trying to claim that.

I don't know a lot about sports. If some kid tells me about some sports event they're involved in and I think it's super impressive and it's not that impressive that's on me, not the kid. But they are allowed to have their sports accomplishment and celebrate it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. The science fair kids always have mentors. Usually they are paid and do most of the work while explaining to the kids what’s going on. I learned this when someone my DD looked up to placed in a science fair.

Now I know another kid who placed in last year’s state science fair who did not have a mentor. Or so he says. Dad is in tech. Son is really not that intellectual and cannot tell how why he started the project or what he did. I suspect dad (works at Microsoft) did it.

People that work at Microsoft are allowed to have kids and they're allowed to teach their kids about data and data collection and how to clean up data and how to manipulate data and how to analyze data. Presumably someone taught the person working at Microsoft those skills and they are allowed to teach them to someone else.

Pretty sure Venus Williams is allowed to teach her kid how to play tennis and Taylor Swift is allowed to teach her kid how to compose a song and Stephen King is allowed to teach his kid how to write a story.

But Venus Williams would not be allowed to go play a game for her kid so kid can win a medal, right? There’s no equivalence here!

That and Venus Williams started training at the age of 4 and played in her first official pro tournament was at 14. It took her 10 years to train to that level and I’m sure it was 40 hours a week or more.

Are you telling me your kid started data science, IoT, web technologies and environmental science in elementary school and got to professional level at the age of 14?

Spare me from this BS. I know how long it takes.

The level of time required to become world class in one of the most popular activities in the world is very different from the level of time required to be able to do research that wins a competition for high school students

No. Research is serious business that takes years to learn the trade. From acquiring basic competence in the subject, to being able to even read conference/journal papers to understand what has been done, that typically requires at least a few graduate-level classes. The individual then needs to come up with ideas that can potentially advance the state of the art, realize those ideas by designing/performing experiments or developing a theory, and turn the results obtained into publishable papers that can fend off criticisms from reviewers. That's a long journey filled with blood, sweat, and frustration dotted with occasional Eureka moments. Can a high schooler do it in an independent fashion? Sure, there are Bill Gates, Terrence Tao, and the likes among us, but they are 1 in 100,000. Not 1000 in 100,000 who apply to top schools each year and claim to have done published research.

You need to relax. There are over 3 and 1/2 million kids that come out of high school every year and a very small percentage of them are interested in science research at all. Of the very small number some do poor quality projects, some do average quality and some do high quality projects. You've got yourself in a snit over a tiny amount of high school kids.

It's not the number of kids involved, nor the quality of the research produced, that's the issue. It's ethic and honesty. Are you okay with kids unethically claiming they have published research papers when in reality all they did was the equivalent to washing test tubes? They barely knew the subject, did not contribute a single ounce of thought, did not write a single sentence for the papers, and yet are dishonestly listed as co-authors because their parents pay for the opportunities or hook them up with friends/colleagues willing to look the other way?

Can you please Google order of authorship on scientific papers. There are hundreds of different scientific publications and they all have different guidelines and rules, but in general someone that makes a small contribution comes at the end of the list. No one with any knowledge would be confusing that person with any kind of lead researcher.

Order of authorship depends on scientific areas. Some do alphabetical, some put corresponding author at the very end, some order based on decreasing contributions. The problem is not the ordering. It's the fact that being co-authors makes kids seem more impressive than they really are. Wow, this 16-year-old published a paper in journal of XYZ! When in reality they were merely cleaning data or doing other mindless, mundane work. Work that could have been done by any kid.

No one is born knowing how to clean data. If a researcher wants to teach a high school kid how to clean data and have them do that and then give them some acknowledgment that is okay. and the kid has learned how to do that skill and the researcher got their clean data.

If you think learning to clean data is is crap then discourage your kid from being involved in it and have them do something else. You don't have to crap on students that do want to learn how to clean data or learn how to do other skills that are part of the science research toolbox.

[Anonymous]

"The services pair high schoolers with academic mentors for 10-15 weeks to produce research papers. Online services typically shape the topic, direction and duration of the project, and urge students to complete and publish a paper regardless of how fruitful the exploration has been. “Publication specialists” then help steer the papers into a dizzying array of online journals and preprint platforms. Almost any high school paper can find an outlet.

[Anonymous]

“You’re teaching students to be cynical about research. That’s the really corrosive part. ‘I can hire someone to do it. We can get it done, we can get it published, what’s the big deal?’”

"The research services brag about how many of their alumni get into premier U.S. universities. Lumiere Education, for example, has served 1,500 students, half of them international, since its inception in the summer of 2020. In a survey of its alumni, it found that 9.8% who applied to an Ivy League university or to Stanford last year were accepted. That’s considerably higher than the overall acceptance rates at those schools."

The sad part is that this fraudulent scheme works...

[Anonymous]

The business of churning out high school research is a “fast-growing epidemic,” said one longtime Ivy League admissions officer, who requested anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to speak for his university. “The number of outfits doing that has trebled or quadrupled in the past few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"The services pair high schoolers with academic mentors for 10-15 weeks to produce research papers. Online services typically shape the topic, direction and duration of the project, and urge students to complete and publish a paper regardless of how fruitful the exploration has been. “Publication specialists” then help steer the papers into a dizzying array of online journals and preprint platforms. Almost any high school paper can find an outlet.

You can beat on science research kids if that's how you get your fun. You can beat on sports kids or music kids or arts kids. Everyone's kid has trophies and prizes and acknowledgments for involvement in different activities. None of them are Mozart but some certainly do have a stronger interest or talent in an activity than others and there is nothing wrong with them putting effort into developing it.

They're all just high school students in the process of educating themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The business of churning out high school research is a “fast-growing epidemic,” said one longtime Ivy League admissions officer, who requested anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to speak for his university. “The number of outfits doing that has trebled or quadrupled in the past few years.

It's the monetization of yet another activity for kid. Youth sports is a multi-billion dollar business. The kids are still learning how to play sports and how to do music and how to do research and all kinds of other things. But there is an ugly attempt to make it only available to kids with money and resources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The services pair high schoolers with academic mentors for 10-15 weeks to produce research papers. Online services typically shape the topic, direction and duration of the project, and urge students to complete and publish a paper regardless of how fruitful the exploration has been. “Publication specialists” then help steer the papers into a dizzying array of online journals and preprint platforms. Almost any high school paper can find an outlet.

You can beat on science research kids if that's how you get your fun. You can beat on sports kids or music kids or arts kids. Everyone's kid has trophies and prizes and acknowledgments for involvement in different activities. None of them are Mozart but some certainly do have a stronger interest or talent in an activity than others and there is nothing wrong with them putting effort into developing it.

They're all just high school students in the process of educating themselves.

Let’s not teach high school students to commit academic fraud. First and foremost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The services pair high schoolers with academic mentors for 10-15 weeks to produce research papers. Online services typically shape the topic, direction and duration of the project, and urge students to complete and publish a paper regardless of how fruitful the exploration has been. “Publication specialists” then help steer the papers into a dizzying array of online journals and preprint platforms. Almost any high school paper can find an outlet.

You can beat on science research kids if that's how you get your fun. You can beat on sports kids or music kids or arts kids. Everyone's kid has trophies and prizes and acknowledgments for involvement in different activities. None of them are Mozart but some certainly do have a stronger interest or talent in an activity than others and there is nothing wrong with them putting effort into developing it.

They're all just high school students in the process of educating themselves.

Let’s not teach high school students to commit academic fraud. First and foremost.

Spending hundreds of hours learning to clean data and other science research tasks is not committing academic fraud. Is learning how to kick a soccer ball athletic fraud? A lot more kids get into college for being able to kick a ball then knowing how to clean data I can tell you that. And no one is ever going to pay them a red cent for kicking that ball. Whereas you could possibly translate research skills into some kind of financial compensation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hate how cynical people are here. A lot of kids out there are gifted and capable of a lot

Not middle schoolers doing things that PPs have said take full teams at highly resourced companies.

[Anonymous]

And please don't post the article about the regeneron cheater that got his prize taken away yet again. That was fraud and was unusual and that is why it was of great note.

If you let that cheater prejudice you against every single student that wants to be involved in science research, that's on you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate how cynical people are here. A lot of kids out there are gifted and capable of a lot

Not middle schoolers doing things that PPs have said take full teams at highly resourced companies.

You're such a disingenuous sour scold. Have fun being that.