Archive
Science Fair Judging Procedure
By James H. Choi
http://Column.SabioAcademy.com
Source URL
Note: This is a column I wrote for the Chicago Tribune. Although it mentions a specific region by name, the process is similar in other regions, so I thought it would be helpful for all readers.
The science fair judging process varies from region to region, but Illinois Region 6, which covers Evanston to Barrington, has a three-step process for selecting students to advance to the International Science Fair (ISEF).
Some schools hold an in-school science fair to select their representative for external competitions. Schools like Niles North, Niles West, and Stevenson, which are very active in science research, have their own qualifying processes. You should check with your teacher to understand the specific procedures at your school.
For students at schools that do not prioritize science fairs, it may still be possible to compete as an individual without going through a qualification process, provided all procedures are followed and the science teacher approves.
Most public high schools in Region 6 (including Barrington, District 211, New Trier, Glenbrook North/South, etc.) do not allow students to represent their school in these competitions. However, there are opportunities to compete independently for students passionate about science, and we can provide more information on how to proceed.
In Virginia, many high schools require all Honors-level and advanced students to engage in science research. These students often participate in intramural qualifiers, which are highly competitive, before advancing to regional science competitions.
The students who make it to the regional competitions are judged in three stages.
The first type of judge is the Floor Judge, who interviews students on-site in front of their posters. Their primary role is to ensure that everything is in order, verify that the student understands the principles of scientific research, and evaluate the quality of the project. If the Floor Judge considers the project flawless and of a high standard, they will take on of the student’s reports. However, if the report is not taken, the student will not be eligible to receive any awards.
Floor Judges come from a variety of backgrounds, which can greatly influence the evaluation process. In some regions of the United States, Floor Judges may include university professors, while in others, they might be non-scientific volunteers. In Illinois Region 6, for example, Floor Judges are typically parents and middle or high school teachers.
This diversity in judging backgrounds means that evaluations can vary widely, especially for students conducting advanced research. A judge without a strong scientific background may not fully grasp the complexities of high-level projects. In such cases, evaluations may focus on more accessible factors, such as the student’s ability to clearly explain his/her work, the thoroughness of the research, and the overall impression the project leaves. This highlights the importance of presenting research in a way that is both thorough and easy to understand for a broad audience.
The second stage is the Best of Category judging, which is mainly composed of school teachers. There are three or four judges per category, and since there are more than ten categories, there are dozens of them. They sit around a table per category and read the reports in turn, selecting the two best students in each category. At first, we wait for the floor judges to send in their reports, and then they start coming in one by one, and then we start working. There are many ways to do this, but for me, I just picked the two best reports that I received and then when a new report came in, we discussed whether it was better than the previous two to determine the top two. It is important to note that these Best of Category judges do not meet the student, which means that no matter how well prepared your presentation is and how complete your poster is, it will only be seen by the Floor Judge, and from this point on, you will be judged 100% on the report.
The third and final step is the selection of students for ISEF. This year, we decided to invite only Ph.D.s in science and engineering, so we asked local universities to help us, but they only sent one professor each from the University of Chicago and Northwestern University, so we ended up with four people, including me. How many students are selected depends on the budget. ISEF does not allow students to compete at their own expense, so they must apply at local science fairs. This year, we sent five researchers. This step is also done without meeting the students, but by reading their reports. Each discipline sends two Best of Category reports, which is more than 20 copies. If you do the math, you can imagine how fast-paced the process is, as we have to read and discuss these reports within two hours to select the best students. Therefore, when writing your report, you should take that into account and try to make it as easy to understand as possible by using shapes for every concept so that the judges can understand it at a glance.
Regional Science Competition Judging Review
By James H. Choi
http://Column.SabioAcademy.com
Source URL
Note: This article was contributed to the Chicago JoongAng Daily in 2014. The details describe the story at the time, but the content is still useful today, so I will post it again in 2025.
Last Saturday, the Illinois Region 6 Science Fair took place. I served as a judge for the ISEF this year, which means that I have the important task of selecting the five best research papers from hundreds of submissions to advance to the international competition ISEF. This task is important because it can affect the life paths of the five selected students. The five students whose research I selected, along with professors from the University of Chicago and Northwestern University, will receive full support, including transportation, to participate in the International Science Fair to be held in Los Angeles in May. Students who have attended this competition unanimously describe it as a “life-changing experience,” and the changes are evident even to observers. Students who have spent a week immersed in a world where scientists, including Nobel Prize winners, are celebrated as heroes develop a pride in science that surpasses the pride our children feel as Koreans after visiting Korea. They will no longer fear being labeled as nerds or geeks but instead will take pride in their love of science.
This overall motivation alone is highly desirable, but the practical benefits are even greater. First of all, the positive effect on college admissions is enormous. In my personal experience, more than half of my students who have advanced to ISEF or STS have been accepted to universities at the level of MIT or Princeton. Three students who did not win an ISEF award were immediately scouted as interns in the labs of judges during the judging process. It is not uncommon for students I judged at ISEF to recognize each other in the hallways of MIT or Harvard years later.
That’s not all. If you have this kind of experience, even after you are accepted to college, you will have opportunities at a completely different level than your classmates. For example, one student, despite his status as a freshman, is working in MIT’s computer vision laboratory where graduate students work. When I asked how he got in, he said that he got a job at the computer vision lab because his ISEF computer vision award was recognized. From the very beginning of his first year of college, he has already started a career that is different from that of his classmates who are working as teaching assistants or helping with administrative tasks, and in the world of the “Matthew Effect,” this gap will only widen.
And what better education can prepare students for life in a modern economy that emphasizes “original ideas” and “your own color” than the experience of pursuing your own research from the beginning in high school, where you are rewarded for your success and the opportunities that open up for you?
The judges have opened the door for some students to take their first steps into this wonderful world. Isn’t it a huge responsibility to decide which students are most qualified to benefit from this!
For the past six years, only students from Niles West and Niles North high schools have studied at that level, but this year, students from two other high schools have advanced to ISEF. Judging from the last names of the students, it seems that there are two Korean students among them. Korean parents have been only aware of the math competition and have been indifferent to the science competition, but that may be starting to change.
The judges have opened the door to this wonderful world for some students. What a responsibility it is to decide which of the most qualified students will receive this privilege!
For the past six years, only students from Niles West and Niles North high schools have made it to that level of study, but this year, students from two other high schools have advanced to ISEF. Judging from the last names of the students, I think there are two Korean students among them. Korean parents have been indifferent to the science competition, but that may be changing.
For students who want to go to a competitive college, this science competition is one of the best academic activities that can provide motivation, a formal record of activity, and practical improvement at the same time. And compared to other regions I know, the competition in Region 6, where many of this newspaper’s readers live, is not yet at the level of fierce competition. There are many studies that are reluctantly done because they were told to do them at school, and there are also studies that were wasted time because they didn’t know the basics, so although there are many students who participate, studies with unique and fresh ideas that can be confidently submitted to ISEF are still rare. Therefore, just like in other regions, if children of professors and doctors start submitting their work en masse, the rest will be left empty handed and watch the opportunities slip away. However for now, being born as a scientist in Region 6 is still an “easy” opportunity that is fully achievable. Parents who are well-versed in science and engineering are advised to focus on guiding their children’s research activities rather than test scores so that their children can enjoy their studies and follow a wise path that is also recognized. Also, in the years when your child participates, you can volunteer as a judge for Region 6 to contribute to the local community and have the double effect of preparing your child more thoroughly for the following year.
Protected: How to win at Regional Science Fairs Part 3
Protected: How to win at Regional Science Fairs Part 2
How to win at Regional Science Fairs Part 1
How to win at Regional Science Fairs Part 1
by James H. Choi
http://Column.SabioAcademy.com
james.choi@sabioacademy.com
Dear Sabio Students,
The Regional Science Fairs are the last obstacle between you and the ISEF (International Science and Engineering Fair). The ISEF pays for you to vacation with science geniuses from all around the world, and the fair’s host organization goes out of its way to entertain you. In 2011, the host took finalists to Universal Studios in L.A. And it holds dance parties too. All expenses, including hotel and airfare, are paid, and you get a stipend to spend on whatever will enhance your attitude that “life is good.”
But succeeding at the regional fairs is hard; the winners are few. This document shows you how many winners go to ISEF from your region; just find your Regional Science Fair in the document.
So how many went to ISEF from your region? And how many entered? Chances are, you have 100:1 to 1000:1 competition (i.e., you’re competing against 100 to 1000 other students). Granted, most of them are clueless. “My mom told me to do this,” they’ll say. But it takes only two or three serious competitors to nudge you off the winners’ podium. One reason there are so few winners is that they cost money. Every winner costs an ISEF sponsor thousands of dollars — for the airfare, hotel, and (yes) that handsome stipend. It’s actually against the rule for the student to pay for anything.
Plenty of students make it to their states’ science fairs. But they won’t go further, to the regional fairs . You must, and you must do well there — because only succeeding at the regional fair qualifies you for ISEF.
In addition to selecting only a few winners out of hundreds, the regional science fair makes your job harder because of all the criteria its judges set. If you were Einstein standing in front of the judges and explaining the newly discovered Special Theory of Relativity, you would still lose the fair if your poster weren’t the right size, or if you were shy and acted like it, such as by not looking the judges in the eye.
No (g00d) sports player is going to enter a game without knowing the rules. But many Science Fair contestants are clueless! Don’t be one of them. To learn the rules, study this Chicago Regional Science Fair Scoring Rubrics. (Find your specific region’s rules and prepare your presentation accordingly.) Look at that sheet: How scientifically profound your research is comprises only a small part of the maximum 53 points! But how you ran the experiment and how you validated the results each count more than whatever great truth your experiment uncovers in its conclusion. If you lose just a few points in the “Display” and “Presentation” criteria sections (which together total 16 points), you won’t stand a chance to win even if you were Einstein.
Those who are doing simulation research need to prepare especially well because they also must explain why they should get a full score on an extra “Experimental Approach” section. A good sample argument might look like this:
This research’s purpose is to reduce the need for doing actual experiments. There are many experiments that are too costly (e.g., car-crash tests), too destructive (e.g., the effect of a nuclear power plant explosion) or impossible (e.g., what would happen to the tide if we had two Moons?). Simulation research like mine eliminates all unnecessary experiments and allows us to focus our money and time on the few areas that truly require experiments.
or like this:
An experimental approach is built into this simulation. When I wrote an algorithm for the simulation, I had to decide on the approach, of course, and it is this: then show the flow chart.
As for the control group, you can say something along the lines of this:
I have implemented two different types of simulations. Type A serves as a control group because it was allowed to take a natural course. Type B is the test group because I actively regulated this and that (insert your variables here).
or this:
The simulation is the experiment, and what we observed in nature/industry/society is the control. My research is on how to improve what we already have in nature/industry/society by intervening using my algorithm.
As for the “Reliability of Data” section, show an impressive number of random numbers, initial conditions or variations on constants. All of those could be meaningless scientifically speaking. But the judges are conditioned to look for multiple experiments with averaged values, which account for random variations. Rather than trying to explain the preciseness of simulated digital data, do multiple runs by changing plausible variations to the first run, which makes it look similar to multiple runs, multiple measurements. You’ll lower the expected error type of traditional scientific experiments
If you did purely theoretical work, such as work with the Number Theory, then you need to explain why you should get a full score on estimating your experimental error. You need to invoke Pythagoras, who came up with the Pythagorean Theorem, which produces zero error. Also, bring up Einstein, who didn’t do a single experiment. The only equipment Einstein ever used was a blackboard, yet his purely theoretical work become a foundation of many technological developments. Emphasize that theoretical work like yours, and just like Einstein’s, opens doors for the experimenting scientists to test your theory, which in turn allow engineers to produce real gadgets, such as the iPad (or whatever a popular engineering product is at the time).
P.S.
A special words of caution for those who grew up in the Far East. You need to work on your firm handshakes and steady gazes into the judges’ eyes. These indicators of confidence are considered acts of rudeness in Far Eastern cultures (e.g., Japanese, Korean, Chinese.) Every time I judge someone from that culture, I am left with an impression that he or she has something to hide and suffers from a severe self-esteem problem — so I judge that student unworthy of being a winner. Even though I used to act like that student, I still succumb to this powerfully negative impression. Imagine what a judge unexposed to other cultures would think? You have no chance with anyone from the West if all you give is a dead-fish handshake and shifty, downcast eyes.
It sounds simple, but it takes a lot of practice to overcome this culture barrier. Every time I meet a dead-fish handshake student, I correct the problem on the spot. I correct students’ gazes as well. It takes three or four tries before a student can do a half-way decent job of either, but I know they’ll revert back to the old handshake and eyes when I’m gone. Their facial expression says, “What is this weirdo doing? I have to forget this incident quickly!” They don’t understand I’m preparing them for Western judgments. So be sure to practice these gestures. Ask your teacher if your handshake seems confident or firm. And practice talking to an adult your parents’ age while looking into their eyes. Any teacher would be inspired by you asking for five minutes to practice this. If you feel you are rudely staring at the adult, then you are doing it right.
Sabio Column 