Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is how parent involvement in science projects can escalate (own experience). We talk to DD (2nd grade at the time) about the Science Fair at her school. I don't want to ask whether she wants to participate (this would send the message that she could opt out), but rather what she would like to do research on. I don't know how she came up with the idea of Sink or Float (they were likely dropping things in water at school).

We talk about the objects that she wants to test and she comes up with some. The discussion goes to what are those objects made of and whether we can find other objects made from the same material to see how those behave. If you leave it to the 2nd grader, those questions would be unlikely to come up. Is it ethical for a parent to intervene and point out those "research" questions? Some will say that the kid didn't come up with those questions, so it's already not her project anymore. Others will say that beginner researchers always need some guidance and it should be ok if they eventually understand what they are doing and why they are doing it.

The next issue is how we are going to document the results. Simply write them down or offer visual proof? I see this as an opportunity for me to teach my child how to use a camera. We choose a bright spot in the house, DD drops objects in water, then takes a few pictures of each object from different angles (the idea is to select the best picture later). Would she think about taking pictures on her own? Most certainly not. Would she think about taking multiple pictures to be able to trash those that came out unfocused? Certainly not.

Once the "research" was over, we talked about the elephant in the room: why are some objects sinking while others are floating? Have you ever heard about a 2nd grader talking about density? Mine definitely didn't know squat about it. Was I wrong that I seized the opportunity to talk to her about objects with higher and lower density than water sinking and floating, respectively? Was that too much parental involvement? She ended up presenting her "research" and I was proud of how much she learned (operating a camera, objects are made of different materials, each material has its own density, etc.). Would a 2nd grader left to her own devices be able to conduct the "research" this way? That's very unlikely.

I am doing research with graduate students, who also need a lot of guidance (on topics of higher complexity, obviously). I never see anyone coming into the lab knowing exactly what they want to do and how they want to do it. Even as a graduate student, you have to learn the topic, what techniques you have available, how to operate the instrumentation, how to process the data, and how to interpret the results. You don't reach the point where you are able to come up with feasible research ideas without practice and guidance. A teenager patenting a technology that cures cancer is obviously a fraud.

I think this is all good and teens should do a lot of research if interested. And should be encouraged.

But once your DC represents that as “her” independent research under her name, it becomes an ethical issue. Heavily curated, she was basically a tool carrying out a few procedures. She didn’t initiate the research topic, didn’t know how to interpret data, not to mention she didn’t come up with any original idea before, during, or after the experiment.

It’s a wonderful enrichment. Representing it as “independent research” crosses the line.

How many 2nd grade students participating in science fairs present their independent research? The point I was trying to make was that even graduate students need guidance. Pretending that you do independent research as a high schooler is dubious. You don't even understand what the research questions are at that age. You barely understand the basics.

Graduate students often are in-between, a tool and sometimes a thinker. But graduate students don’t claim they are independent, their PIs are always the corresponding authors on the paper. Their names are never listed on patents. Some graduate students never develop into thinkers.

High school kids are akin to lab technicians, whose names never appear on papers, other than acknowledgement sections. They are not even full time technicians.

You seem to be familiar with a couple of research projects that you dislike and are extrapolating that to the entire world of high school science research. I think you could educate yourself better about high school science research.

You should look into some of these programs. How they work, how the mentors work, what the educational goals, the wide variety of quality and the different programs and the different students involved, what is required for various competitions , how various competitions are judged , etc. and not make a bunch of ignorant assumptions.

Why don’t post a few recent Davidson fellowship projects here, and let the DCUM moms be the judges? I am sure there are quite some researchers here.

Anonymous wrote:Boy oh boy so much bitterness and schadenfreude in the DCUM community - and judging by how all of these striver helicopter parents posting on this thread have such deep and intense animise toward those “getting one over”on the system, here is some advice… its life get used to it!! I think more of the venom comes from the fact that they haven't been able to game the system while other have lol

Anonymous wrote:Boy oh boy so much bitterness and schadenfreude in the DCUM community - and judging by how all of these striver helicopter parents posting on this thread have such deep and intense animise toward those “getting one over”on the system, here is some advice… its life get used to it!! I think more of the venom comes from the fact that they haven't been able to game the system while other have lol

Anonymous wrote:Boy oh boy so much bitterness and schadenfreude in the DCUM community - and judging by how all of these striver helicopter parents posting on this thread have such deep and intense animise toward those “getting one over”on the system, here is some advice… its life get used to it!! I think more of the venom comes from the fact that they haven't been able to game the system while other have lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is how parent involvement in science projects can escalate (own experience). We talk to DD (2nd grade at the time) about the Science Fair at her school. I don't want to ask whether she wants to participate (this would send the message that she could opt out), but rather what she would like to do research on. I don't know how she came up with the idea of Sink or Float (they were likely dropping things in water at school).

We talk about the objects that she wants to test and she comes up with some. The discussion goes to what are those objects made of and whether we can find other objects made from the same material to see how those behave. If you leave it to the 2nd grader, those questions would be unlikely to come up. Is it ethical for a parent to intervene and point out those "research" questions? Some will say that the kid didn't come up with those questions, so it's already not her project anymore. Others will say that beginner researchers always need some guidance and it should be ok if they eventually understand what they are doing and why they are doing it.

The next issue is how we are going to document the results. Simply write them down or offer visual proof? I see this as an opportunity for me to teach my child how to use a camera. We choose a bright spot in the house, DD drops objects in water, then takes a few pictures of each object from different angles (the idea is to select the best picture later). Would she think about taking pictures on her own? Most certainly not. Would she think about taking multiple pictures to be able to trash those that came out unfocused? Certainly not.

Once the "research" was over, we talked about the elephant in the room: why are some objects sinking while others are floating? Have you ever heard about a 2nd grader talking about density? Mine definitely didn't know squat about it. Was I wrong that I seized the opportunity to talk to her about objects with higher and lower density than water sinking and floating, respectively? Was that too much parental involvement? She ended up presenting her "research" and I was proud of how much she learned (operating a camera, objects are made of different materials, each material has its own density, etc.). Would a 2nd grader left to her own devices be able to conduct the "research" this way? That's very unlikely.

I am doing research with graduate students, who also need a lot of guidance (on topics of higher complexity, obviously). I never see anyone coming into the lab knowing exactly what they want to do and how they want to do it. Even as a graduate student, you have to learn the topic, what techniques you have available, how to operate the instrumentation, how to process the data, and how to interpret the results. You don't reach the point where you are able to come up with feasible research ideas without practice and guidance. A teenager patenting a technology that cures cancer is obviously a fraud.

I think this is all good and teens should do a lot of research if interested. And should be encouraged.

But once your DC represents that as “her” independent research under her name, it becomes an ethical issue. Heavily curated, she was basically a tool carrying out a few procedures. She didn’t initiate the research topic, didn’t know how to interpret data, not to mention she didn’t come up with any original idea before, during, or after the experiment.

It’s a wonderful enrichment. Representing it as “independent research” crosses the line.

How many 2nd grade students participating in science fairs present their independent research? The point I was trying to make was that even graduate students need guidance. Pretending that you do independent research as a high schooler is dubious. You don't even understand what the research questions are at that age. You barely understand the basics.

Graduate students often are in-between, a tool and sometimes a thinker. But graduate students don’t claim they are independent, their PIs are always the corresponding authors on the paper. Their names are never listed on patents. Some graduate students never develop into thinkers.

High school kids are akin to lab technicians, whose names never appear on papers, other than acknowledgement sections. They are not even full time technicians.

You seem to be familiar with a couple of research projects that you dislike and are extrapolating that to the entire world of high school science research. I think you could educate yourself better about high school science research.

You should look into some of these programs. How they work, how the mentors work, what the educational goals, the wide variety of quality and the different programs and the different students involved, what is required for various competitions , how various competitions are judged , etc. and not make a bunch of ignorant assumptions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is how parent involvement in science projects can escalate (own experience). We talk to DD (2nd grade at the time) about the Science Fair at her school. I don't want to ask whether she wants to participate (this would send the message that she could opt out), but rather what she would like to do research on. I don't know how she came up with the idea of Sink or Float (they were likely dropping things in water at school).

We talk about the objects that she wants to test and she comes up with some. The discussion goes to what are those objects made of and whether we can find other objects made from the same material to see how those behave. If you leave it to the 2nd grader, those questions would be unlikely to come up. Is it ethical for a parent to intervene and point out those "research" questions? Some will say that the kid didn't come up with those questions, so it's already not her project anymore. Others will say that beginner researchers always need some guidance and it should be ok if they eventually understand what they are doing and why they are doing it.

The next issue is how we are going to document the results. Simply write them down or offer visual proof? I see this as an opportunity for me to teach my child how to use a camera. We choose a bright spot in the house, DD drops objects in water, then takes a few pictures of each object from different angles (the idea is to select the best picture later). Would she think about taking pictures on her own? Most certainly not. Would she think about taking multiple pictures to be able to trash those that came out unfocused? Certainly not.

Once the "research" was over, we talked about the elephant in the room: why are some objects sinking while others are floating? Have you ever heard about a 2nd grader talking about density? Mine definitely didn't know squat about it. Was I wrong that I seized the opportunity to talk to her about objects with higher and lower density than water sinking and floating, respectively? Was that too much parental involvement? She ended up presenting her "research" and I was proud of how much she learned (operating a camera, objects are made of different materials, each material has its own density, etc.). Would a 2nd grader left to her own devices be able to conduct the "research" this way? That's very unlikely.

I am doing research with graduate students, who also need a lot of guidance (on topics of higher complexity, obviously). I never see anyone coming into the lab knowing exactly what they want to do and how they want to do it. Even as a graduate student, you have to learn the topic, what techniques you have available, how to operate the instrumentation, how to process the data, and how to interpret the results. You don't reach the point where you are able to come up with feasible research ideas without practice and guidance. A teenager patenting a technology that cures cancer is obviously a fraud.

I think this is all good and teens should do a lot of research if interested. And should be encouraged.

But once your DC represents that as “her” independent research under her name, it becomes an ethical issue. Heavily curated, she was basically a tool carrying out a few procedures. She didn’t initiate the research topic, didn’t know how to interpret data, not to mention she didn’t come up with any original idea before, during, or after the experiment.

It’s a wonderful enrichment. Representing it as “independent research” crosses the line.

How many 2nd grade students participating in science fairs present their independent research? The point I was trying to make was that even graduate students need guidance. Pretending that you do independent research as a high schooler is dubious. You don't even understand what the research questions are at that age. You barely understand the basics.

Graduate students often are in-between, a tool and sometimes a thinker. But graduate students don’t claim they are independent, their PIs are always the corresponding authors on the paper. Their names are never listed on patents. Some graduate students never develop into thinkers.

High school kids are akin to lab technicians, whose names never appear on papers, other than acknowledgement sections. They are not even full time technicians.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is how parent involvement in science projects can escalate (own experience). We talk to DD (2nd grade at the time) about the Science Fair at her school. I don't want to ask whether she wants to participate (this would send the message that she could opt out), but rather what she would like to do research on. I don't know how she came up with the idea of Sink or Float (they were likely dropping things in water at school).

We talk about the objects that she wants to test and she comes up with some. The discussion goes to what are those objects made of and whether we can find other objects made from the same material to see how those behave. If you leave it to the 2nd grader, those questions would be unlikely to come up. Is it ethical for a parent to intervene and point out those "research" questions? Some will say that the kid didn't come up with those questions, so it's already not her project anymore. Others will say that beginner researchers always need some guidance and it should be ok if they eventually understand what they are doing and why they are doing it.

The next issue is how we are going to document the results. Simply write them down or offer visual proof? I see this as an opportunity for me to teach my child how to use a camera. We choose a bright spot in the house, DD drops objects in water, then takes a few pictures of each object from different angles (the idea is to select the best picture later). Would she think about taking pictures on her own? Most certainly not. Would she think about taking multiple pictures to be able to trash those that came out unfocused? Certainly not.

Once the "research" was over, we talked about the elephant in the room: why are some objects sinking while others are floating? Have you ever heard about a 2nd grader talking about density? Mine definitely didn't know squat about it. Was I wrong that I seized the opportunity to talk to her about objects with higher and lower density than water sinking and floating, respectively? Was that too much parental involvement? She ended up presenting her "research" and I was proud of how much she learned (operating a camera, objects are made of different materials, each material has its own density, etc.). Would a 2nd grader left to her own devices be able to conduct the "research" this way? That's very unlikely.

I am doing research with graduate students, who also need a lot of guidance (on topics of higher complexity, obviously). I never see anyone coming into the lab knowing exactly what they want to do and how they want to do it. Even as a graduate student, you have to learn the topic, what techniques you have available, how to operate the instrumentation, how to process the data, and how to interpret the results. You don't reach the point where you are able to come up with feasible research ideas without practice and guidance. A teenager patenting a technology that cures cancer is obviously a fraud.

I think this is all good and teens should do a lot of research if interested. And should be encouraged.

But once your DC represents that as “her” independent research under her name, it becomes an ethical issue. Heavily curated, she was basically a tool carrying out a few procedures. She didn’t initiate the research topic, didn’t know how to interpret data, not to mention she didn’t come up with any original idea before, during, or after the experiment.

It’s a wonderful enrichment. Representing it as “independent research” crosses the line.

How many 2nd grade students participating in science fairs present their independent research? The point I was trying to make was that even graduate students need guidance. Pretending that you do independent research as a high schooler is dubious. You don't even understand what the research questions are at that age. You barely understand the basics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We toured an Ivy and I googled our tour guide and his brother who us also in Ivy that he mentioned during the tour.

He said played a lot of sports in his small but very selective predominately Asian tech school.

In at the ripe age of 14 he presents a research that involves deep knowledge of environmental science, designs and builds a data collection device and build a web server to transmit data to, then developed neural networks to analyze the data.

His older brother a year earlier, in his junior year, also presented a similar project that also involved AI and a device to transmit environmental data. He won an ISEF award for this.

Their dad happens to be a CTO in a company that works with telecom hardware.

Please explain to me how is this humanly possible for 14-15 year olds to have time to play sports, get good enough grades and test scores for Ivies, have learn how to build hardware devices, web servers, neural networks and conduct research? How is this real?

In my previous company it took an entire company to build things like that.

I’m just curious. Please, explain this to me.

Just wanted to point out that the kid is volunteering to give tours in college on top of many other things that your kid also isn't going to be motivated to do.

Why the hate? Imagine all the effort and energy of travel sports focused on science interests. You go compete for sports trophies while other kids compete for science fair ribbons.

Anonymous wrote:We toured an Ivy and I googled our tour guide and his brother who us also in Ivy that he mentioned during the tour.

He said played a lot of sports in his small but very selective predominately Asian tech school.

In at the ripe age of 14 he presents a research that involves deep knowledge of environmental science, designs and builds a data collection device and build a web server to transmit data to, then developed neural networks to analyze the data.

His older brother a year earlier, in his junior year, also presented a similar project that also involved AI and a device to transmit environmental data. He won an ISEF award for this.

Their dad happens to be a CTO in a company that works with telecom hardware.

Please explain to me how is this humanly possible for 14-15 year olds to have time to play sports, get good enough grades and test scores for Ivies, have learn how to build hardware devices, web servers, neural networks and conduct research? How is this real?

In my previous company it took an entire company to build things like that.

I’m just curious. Please, explain this to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is how parent involvement in science projects can escalate (own experience). We talk to DD (2nd grade at the time) about the Science Fair at her school. I don't want to ask whether she wants to participate (this would send the message that she could opt out), but rather what she would like to do research on. I don't know how she came up with the idea of Sink or Float (they were likely dropping things in water at school).

We talk about the objects that she wants to test and she comes up with some. The discussion goes to what are those objects made of and whether we can find other objects made from the same material to see how those behave. If you leave it to the 2nd grader, those questions would be unlikely to come up. Is it ethical for a parent to intervene and point out those "research" questions? Some will say that the kid didn't come up with those questions, so it's already not her project anymore. Others will say that beginner researchers always need some guidance and it should be ok if they eventually understand what they are doing and why they are doing it.

The next issue is how we are going to document the results. Simply write them down or offer visual proof? I see this as an opportunity for me to teach my child how to use a camera. We choose a bright spot in the house, DD drops objects in water, then takes a few pictures of each object from different angles (the idea is to select the best picture later). Would she think about taking pictures on her own? Most certainly not. Would she think about taking multiple pictures to be able to trash those that came out unfocused? Certainly not.

Once the "research" was over, we talked about the elephant in the room: why are some objects sinking while others are floating? Have you ever heard about a 2nd grader talking about density? Mine definitely didn't know squat about it. Was I wrong that I seized the opportunity to talk to her about objects with higher and lower density than water sinking and floating, respectively? Was that too much parental involvement? She ended up presenting her "research" and I was proud of how much she learned (operating a camera, objects are made of different materials, each material has its own density, etc.). Would a 2nd grader left to her own devices be able to conduct the "research" this way? That's very unlikely.

I am doing research with graduate students, who also need a lot of guidance (on topics of higher complexity, obviously). I never see anyone coming into the lab knowing exactly what they want to do and how they want to do it. Even as a graduate student, you have to learn the topic, what techniques you have available, how to operate the instrumentation, how to process the data, and how to interpret the results. You don't reach the point where you are able to come up with feasible research ideas without practice and guidance. A teenager patenting a technology that cures cancer is obviously a fraud.

I think this is all good and teens should do a lot of research if interested. And should be encouraged.

But once your DC represents that as “her” independent research under her name, it becomes an ethical issue. Heavily curated, she was basically a tool carrying out a few procedures. She didn’t initiate the research topic, didn’t know how to interpret data, not to mention she didn’t come up with any original idea before, during, or after the experiment.

It’s a wonderful enrichment. Representing it as “independent research” crosses the line.

Anonymous wrote:Here is how parent involvement in science projects can escalate (own experience). We talk to DD (2nd grade at the time) about the Science Fair at her school. I don't want to ask whether she wants to participate (this would send the message that she could opt out), but rather what she would like to do research on. I don't know how she came up with the idea of Sink or Float (they were likely dropping things in water at school).

We talk about the objects that she wants to test and she comes up with some. The discussion goes to what are those objects made of and whether we can find other objects made from the same material to see how those behave. If you leave it to the 2nd grader, those questions would be unlikely to come up. Is it ethical for a parent to intervene and point out those "research" questions? Some will say that the kid didn't come up with those questions, so it's already not her project anymore. Others will say that beginner researchers always need some guidance and it should be ok if they eventually understand what they are doing and why they are doing it.

The next issue is how we are going to document the results. Simply write them down or offer visual proof? I see this as an opportunity for me to teach my child how to use a camera. We choose a bright spot in the house, DD drops objects in water, then takes a few pictures of each object from different angles (the idea is to select the best picture later). Would she think about taking pictures on her own? Most certainly not. Would she think about taking multiple pictures to be able to trash those that came out unfocused? Certainly not.

Once the "research" was over, we talked about the elephant in the room: why are some objects sinking while others are floating? Have you ever heard about a 2nd grader talking about density? Mine definitely didn't know squat about it. Was I wrong that I seized the opportunity to talk to her about objects with higher and lower density than water sinking and floating, respectively? Was that too much parental involvement? She ended up presenting her "research" and I was proud of how much she learned (operating a camera, objects are made of different materials, each material has its own density, etc.). Would a 2nd grader left to her own devices be able to conduct the "research" this way? That's very unlikely.

I am doing research with graduate students, who also need a lot of guidance (on topics of higher complexity, obviously). I never see anyone coming into the lab knowing exactly what they want to do and how they want to do it. Even as a graduate student, you have to learn the topic, what techniques you have available, how to operate the instrumentation, how to process the data, and how to interpret the results. You don't reach the point where you are able to come up with feasible research ideas without practice and guidance. A teenager patenting a technology that cures cancer is obviously a fraud.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We toured an Ivy and I googled our tour guide and his brother who us also in Ivy that he mentioned during the tour.

He said played a lot of sports in his small but very selective predominately Asian tech school.

In at the ripe age of 14 he presents a research that involves deep knowledge of environmental science, designs and builds a data collection device and build a web server to transmit data to, then developed neural networks to analyze the data.

His older brother a year earlier, in his junior year, also presented a similar project that also involved AI and a device to transmit environmental data. He won an ISEF award for this.

Their dad happens to be a CTO in a company that works with telecom hardware.

Please explain to me how is this humanly possible for 14-15 year olds to have time to play sports, get good enough grades and test scores for Ivies, have learn how to build hardware devices, web servers, neural networks and conduct research? How is this real?

In my previous company it took an entire company to build things like that.

I’m just curious. Please, explain this to me.

What are you insinuating?

High school research is fraud.

Anonymous wrote:Here is how parent involvement in science projects can escalate (own experience). We talk to DD (2nd grade at the time) about the Science Fair at her school. I don't want to ask whether she wants to participate (this would send the message that she could opt out), but rather what she would like to do research on. I don't know how she came up with the idea of Sink or Float (they were likely dropping things in water at school).

We talk about the objects that she wants to test and she comes up with some. The discussion goes to what are those objects made of and whether we can find other objects made from the same material to see how those behave. If you leave it to the 2nd grader, those questions would be unlikely to come up. Is it ethical for a parent to intervene and point out those "research" questions? Some will say that the kid didn't come up with those questions, so it's already not her project anymore. Others will say that beginner researchers always need some guidance and it should be ok if they eventually understand what they are doing and why they are doing it.

The next issue is how we are going to document the results. Simply write them down or offer visual proof? I see this as an opportunity for me to teach my child how to use a camera. We choose a bright spot in the house, DD drops objects in water, then takes a few pictures of each object from different angles (the idea is to select the best picture later). Would she think about taking pictures on her own? Most certainly not. Would she think about taking multiple pictures to be able to trash those that came out unfocused? Certainly not.

Once the "research" was over, we talked about the elephant in the room: why are some objects sinking while others are floating? Have you ever heard about a 2nd grader talking about density? Mine definitely didn't know squat about it. Was I wrong that I seized the opportunity to talk to her about objects with higher and lower density than water sinking and floating, respectively? Was that too much parental involvement? She ended up presenting her "research" and I was proud of how much she learned (operating a camera, objects are made of different materials, each material has its own density, etc.). Would a 2nd grader left to her own devices be able to conduct the "research" this way? That's very unlikely.

I am doing research with graduate students, who also need a lot of guidance (on topics of higher complexity, obviously). I never see anyone coming into the lab knowing exactly what they want to do and how they want to do it. Even as a graduate student, you have to learn the topic, what techniques you have available, how to operate the instrumentation, how to process the data, and how to interpret the results. You don't reach the point where you are able to come up with feasible research ideas without practice and guidance. A teenager patenting a technology that cures cancer is obviously a fraud.