D became an Intel STS semifinalist today, will it help her HYPS application?

DEET
Sun, 01 Feb 2009 08:12:49 +0000

DEET, may I ask how you came up with 33 STS finalists who worked in labs last year? That information is not provided in any publicly available source that I’ve seen. I don’t think the number is that far off, frankly, but I am curious to know how you got the figure.

Counting Down – the 33 STS finalists working in labs figure came from a quote from the director of science education programs for the Society for Science and the Public that was in a New York Times article by Amanda Fairbanks that appeared on January 31, 2008.

2boysima wrote:

As has been noted in other threads where this issue has been brought up…most scientists work with mentors and other scientists in labs. It’s part of the scientific process. Very few are hermits working by themselves. Why should it be any different for the winners of Intel/STS?

And it shouldn’t be a surprise that colleges…especially professors at colleges…are attracted to applicants who have this kind of experience.

I was not referring to hermits working by themselves. For a lot of kids who enter ISEF, the only mentor they have available is their high school science teacher. While there are many talented high school science teachers, they just are not able to give the same kind of advantage to their student as a student working under a professional scientist at a research lab can provide.

To illustrate the results of this difference in resources available to the students, just look at last year’s ISEF grand award results for a few states –
Number of Projects- Grand Prize winners- % winning - State
65 - 36 – 55% - New York
8 – 0 Wyoming
28 – 6 Utah
13 – 1 South Dakota
16 – 1 North Dakota
65 – 8 – 12% Wyoming Utah South Dakota North Dakota combined

Unless students from Wyoming, Utah, South Dakota, and North Dakota are just naturally not as smart as those from New York, something else must be at play here. Could it be that the students from these areas don’t have equal access to professional scientists as mentors and don’t have research lab opportunities? Is it fair that they should compete with no accounting for the differences in resources available to them?