BT Young Scientist - is there something fishy? MOD Note in OP

Roger Hassenforder

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

I find your concern for the winning kid laudable.

Its just a pity you dont have as much sympathy for all the 1000s of the other kids that entered, who were shafted along the way.

Grand. Open a new thread entitled - "Just how fcking hard is it to win @ YS"

My only issue with this thread is (a) the title and (b) the fact that some keyboard warriors like TheAnalyst_ have decided that the current winner is a fraud - I don't agree with that approach- so yes, I want the thread closed down.

Open any other you wish on YS in general.

cookie1977

Deleted User wrote: »

Great- so open a new thread on YS exhibition- this thread is all about is the current winner of YS a fraud. I don't care what the thread has "developed" into, it's not the original title of the thread. That's my only issue here.




If you want to pick on a 15 year old schoolboy, go knock yourself out- I won't be joining you on that journey.

How do you know the title means that? It could mean the BT Young Scientist "Competition". No one called him a fraud (except you in that post).

Fann Linn

Couple of threads in the Mayo forum I'm not too happy about. Can we shut them down, please?

Wombatman

Fann Linn wrote: »

Couple of threads in the Mayo forum I'm not too happy about. Can we shut them down, please?

New article on Irish Times

"Mayo defended amid accusations of being a sh1t hole".

Jeapers ya can't be up to them trolls.

kaymin

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

Its not resources, its about his mother. This is her work.
If you know anythign about academic research you know how projects are formed. The interplay between junior researcher and the supervisor.
He was given a readymade experiment by numbers that she obviously uses with new students. The process is the same and only the plant changes. This is useful as a learning exercise for students and I've been involved in a few myself.
His achievement was understanding enough of science to pass an interview.

Nothing massively wrong about it but what is wrong is entering it into a second level competition. The 7,000 euro. The bloody media adulation and then the arrogant interviews after.
The biggest problem for me are all the other students that never stood a chance.

So there's nothing massively wrong with what he did other than he was a little arrogant afterwards. Everything else you complain about (prize money, media attention, the act of winning) is not within his control. Seems like the ire on this thread is misplaced.

Why did the other students not stand a chance if what he did is a relatively straightforward exercise - there's something flawed in your logic.

bucketybuck

bucketybuck wrote: »

I don't wish to pick on anybody, be it schoolboy or sanctimonious junior mod on the internet.

Ok, that's nice

cookie1977 wrote: »

How do you know the title means that? It could mean the BT Young Scientist "Competition". No one called him a fraud (except you in that post).

I didn't call him a fraud but don't let the truth get in the way of anything- the opening thread title and associated post pretty much infers it- you don't need a junior cert to figure that one out- but maybe you haven't even done yours yet?:)

cookie1977

Deleted User wrote: »

I didn't call him a fraud but don't let the truth get in the way of anything- the opening thread title and associated post pretty much infers it...

And that's your opinion which you're entitled to.

Roger Hassenforder

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If you want to pick on a 15 year old schoolboy, go knock yourself out- I won't be joining you on that journey.

Its sad that it is at the end of the day, a 15yr old boy at the centre of this. But who put him there? His mother.
His mother who is an academic in the area, with 3rd level resources, and a crony local academic colleague on the judging panel, flogging old rope as new.

Whats even sadder though, is all the other kids that entered, who have been shafted.
The message from BTYSE is now, "unless youre a privileged kid with third level resources, you havent a hope. Dont bother. The table is rigged. But hey, we still want kids to do STEM subjects... so pay your money, you'll get a day out in Dublin"

TheAnalyst_

kaymin wrote: »

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

Its not resources, its about his mother. This is her work.
If you know anythign about academic research you know how projects are formed. The interplay between junior researcher and the supervisor.
He was given a readymade experiment by numbers that she obviously uses with new students. The process is the same and only the plant changes. This is useful as a learning exercise for students and I've been involved in a few myself.
His achievement was understanding enough of science to pass an interview.

Nothing massively wrong about it but what is wrong is entering it into a second level competition. The 7,000 euro. The bloody media adulation and then the arrogant interviews after.
The biggest problem for me are all the other students that never stood a chance.

So there's nothing massively wrong with what he did other than he was a little arrogant afterwards. Everything else you complain about (prize money, media attention, the act of winning) is not within his control. Seems like the ire on this thread is misplaced.

Why did the other students not stand a chance if what he did is a relatively straightforward exercise - there's something flawed in your logic.

kaymin wrote: »

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

Its not resources, its about his mother. This is her work.
If you know anythign about academic research you know how projects are formed. The interplay between junior researcher and the supervisor.
He was given a readymade experiment by numbers that she obviously uses with new students. The process is the same and only the plant changes. This is useful as a learning exercise for students and I've been involved in a few myself.
His achievement was understanding enough of science to pass an interview.

Nothing massively wrong about it but what is wrong is entering it into a second level competition. The 7,000 euro. The bloody media adulation and then the arrogant interviews after.
The biggest problem for me are all the other students that never stood a chance.

So there's nothing massively wrong with what he did other than he was a little arrogant afterwards. Everything else you complain about (prize money, media attention, the act of winning) is not within his control. Seems like the ire on this thread is misplaced.

Why did the other students not stand a chance if what he did is a relatively straightforward exercise - there's something flawed in your logic.

Your post is shocking on many levels.
If he had any sense he would have kept his head down knowing what had just happened although his reply to one question on the late late showed some awareness. 
No my real ire is directed towards his mother. 
It is a straightforward exercise if you have a mother who has already devised and published an experiment and has full acesss to university labs and restricted pathogens.

Roger Hassenforder

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

I
Whats even sadder though, is all the other kids that entered, who have been shafted.
The message from BTYSE is now, "unless youre a privileged kid with third level resources, you havent a hope. Dont bother. The table is rigged. But hey, we still want kids to do STEM subjects... so pay your money, you'll get a day out in Dublin"

That part of your post is good Roger. And I don't have the answer. I just feel that a lot of posters here are doing something very unscientific- adding 2 plus 2 and getting 5- without proper evidence and facts. It's supposition, and mind bending inference.

inequality, lack of resources, parents less than well educated, are all barriers to success in life, not just winning YS.

but I will say this- part of the skills of the future are resourcefulness- asking people for help, asking people for assistance. These are key skills, which, to a degree in the past were frowned upon.

Disadvantaged people will have fewer opportunities in terms of accessing the people that could help them the most- but resourcefulness as a skill, can help- as can resilience and other skills.

I don't know the right answer to the original OP to this thread- but neither does any other poster on this thread- and they're behaving as though they do. And I don't like that.

kaymin

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

Your post is shocking on many levels.
If he had any sense he would have kept his head down knowing what had just happened although his reply to one question on the late late showed some awareness.
No my real ire is directed towards his mother.
It is a straightforward exercise if you have a mother who has already devised and published an experiment and has full acesss to university labs and restricted pathogens.

I'm really not seeing the problem - a good science teacher could provide equally good guidance. Many students access third level resources - some posters to this thread mentioned that they had done it when they had participated in the YS. Are you seriously recommending limiting the resources students should have available to them? Will they be able to use google? Where do you stop? What you and many others seem to be recommending is absurd.

The lads behaviour is irrelevant - judge the project on its merits.

TheAnalyst_

The lads behaviour is irrelevant - judge the project on its merits.

Ok. Methodology has been used 10 years ago by his mother. No literature review done as the same work has already been researched in 2012. His comments about toxicity and organic material shows a very poor understanding of science.

kaymin

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

Ok. Methodology has been used 10 years ago by his mother. No literature review done as the same work has already been researched in 2012. His comments about toxicity and organic material shows a very poor understanding of science.

Ok, if what you say is true then your anger should be directed at the judges, no?

TheAnalyst_

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

Ok. Methodology has been used 10 years ago by his mother. No literature review done as the same work has already been researched in 2012. His comments about toxicity and organic material shows a very poor understanding of science.

Have you read his full submission?

cookie1977

Deleted User wrote: »

Disadvantaged people will have fewer opportunities in terms of accessing the people that could help them the most- but resourcefulness as a skill, can help- as can resilience and other skills.

I don't know the right answer to the original OP to this thread- but neither does any other poster on this thread- and they're behaving as though they do. And I don't like that.

Disadvantaged people, as you say, do have fewer opportunities and that includes access to people and resources in third level. This needs to be addressed and we cant just rely on individual gumption or ambition (as previously mentioned). We have to assist these disadvantaged schools and people and not just leave them to their own devices.

More than likely kids from disadvantaged backgrounds and schools have parents who also are from a similar background. And this is the point of this thread (so thanks for highlighting it). This kid was from a very fortunate background with parents and parents friends in third level institutions.

kaymin

cookie1977 wrote: »

Disadvantaged people, as you say, do have fewer opportunities and that includes access to people and resources in third level. This needs to be addressed and we cant just rely on individual gumption or ambition (as previously mentioned). We have to assist these disadvantaged schools and people and not just leave them to their own devices.

More than likely kids from disadvantaged backgrounds and schools have parents who also are from a similar background. And this is the point of this thread (so thanks for highlighting it). This kid was from a very fortunate background with parents and parents friends in third level institutions.

But this is not a good reason to lower the standard that students can aspire to. It's akin to teaching a class of kids at the level of the student that is the slowest learner - all the other kids suffer.

Roger Hassenforder

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That part of your post is good Roger. And I don't have the answer. I just feel that a lot of posters here are doing something very unscientific- adding 2 plus 2 and getting 5- without proper evidence and facts. It's supposition, and mind bending inference.

inequality, lack of resources, parents less than well educated, are all barriers to success in life, not just winning YS.

but I will say this- part of the skills of the future are resourcefulness- asking people for help, asking people for assistance. These are key skills, which, to a degree in the past were frowned upon.

Disadvantaged people will have fewer opportunities in terms of accessing the people that could help them the most- but resourcefulness as a skill, can help- as can resilience and other skills.

I don't know the right answer to the original OP to this thread- but neither does any other poster on this thread- and they're behaving as though they do. And I don't like that.

In a way i agree with you too!

But if competition isnt on a level playing field its a sham.
Id suggest removing the significant cash prize, its an allurement to skullduggery.
Ban equipment that wouldnt be normally found in a secondary school.

We're giving kids the wrong message.
Privilige and contacts win, "Bending" rules. Not hard work, effort and perseverance. Which are the values we want to instil?

I was initially furious at this kid and his guff. Now i kind of pity him, but am furious at his mother. She should have known better. She as a mother should have had regard for all the other mother's kids.

People have genuine greviences here with the conduct of the kid for his (albeit childish, but nonetheless illadvised) utterances, his mother, the judges, the system.
Its rotten to the core. This particular winning project has really exposed it.

TheAnalyst_

kaymin wrote: »

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

Ok. Methodology has been used 10 years ago by his mother. No literature review done as the same work has already been researched in 2012. His comments about toxicity and organic material shows a very poor understanding of science.

Ok, if what you say is true then your anger should be directed at the judges, no?

No, his mother is the professional scientist and she should be ashamed. She could have supported him in a much fairer way and certainly not given him a project in her own research area. Judges certainly have a role to play in this.

cookie1977

kaymin wrote: »

But this is not a good reason to lower the standard that students can aspire to. It's akin to teaching a class of kids at the level of the student that is the slowest learner - all the other kids suffer.

You're right but it is about creating some sort of a level playing field for all. In a class (like your example) every student is taught the same by the same teacher. There isn't one kid in the class with a team of 3rd level lecturers teaching them privately at the back. Equality of opportunity.

Roger Hassenforder

kaymin wrote: »

But this is not a good reason to lower the standard that students can aspire to. It's akin to teaching a class of kids at the level of the student that is the slowest learner - all the other kids suffer.

Its not lowering the standard
Its levelling the field

kaymin

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

No, his mother is the professional scientist and she should be ashamed. She could have supported him in a much fairer way and certainly not given him a project in her own research area. Judges certainly have a role to play in this.

I have to disagree. All the students get help of some sort. It's for the judges to challenge the students sufficiently to establish whether they have mastered the subject of their project.

kaymin

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Its not lowering the standard
Its levelling the field

What about students with higher IQs - shouldn't that be factored in. Or students with greater initiative - surely that's unfair to the layabouts.

cookie1977

cookie1977 wrote: »

Disadvantaged people, as you say, do have fewer opportunities and that includes access to people and resources in third level. This needs to be addressed and we cant just rely on individual gumption or ambition (as previously mentioned). We have to assist these disadvantaged schools and people and not just leave them to their own devices.

More than likely kids from disadvantaged backgrounds and schools have parents who also are from a similar background. And this is the point of this thread (so thanks for highlighting it). This kid was from a very fortunate background with parents and parents friends in third level institutions.

Thread title is "BT Young Scientist a Fraud?"

it's the sort of title the Daily Mail use when they want to avoid a law suit- they simply place a question mark at the end of it.

The opening post by user Marty Bird:

I was watching this and see the winners mother is a very well known senior medical scientist/lecturer with the microbiology department of University College cork, she oversaw a very similar study back in 2007 with another post grad student a very strange coincidence, I’m not saying the lad didn’t do the work but to have a parent who is directly involved in that particular field and to have supervised a similar study 11 years ago is strange.

This is full of inference while conveniently not coming out with a stated view- Marty Bird asked the question- "BT Young Scientist a Fraud?" - I'd like that poster to provide their view now- Yes they are, OR no they're not.

They haven't answered that question. Yet. Because I don't think they're brave enough to answer that question. And I don't subscribe to the view that this thread was set up to discuss the advantaged/disadvantaged of society- I not a fcking fool.

TheAnalyst_

Yes but right now its a competition to see who has the best help.

Martina1991

Deleted User wrote:

inequality, lack of resources, parents less than well educated, are all barriers to success in life, not just winning YS.

Deleted User wrote:

but I will say this- part of the skills of the future are resourcefulness- asking people for help, asking people for assistance. These are key skills, which, to a degree in the past were frowned upon.

Those barriers are part of life. Why do they have to be in our schools with standardised education.

Are you saying tough sh!t to anyone who wants to succeed but has limited resources?

There's a big difference between being resourceful in a rural school and having everything you need at arms reach.

kaymin

cookie1977 wrote: »

You're right but it is about creating some sort of a level playing field for all. In a class (like your example) every student is taught the same by the same teacher. There isn't one kid in the class with a team of 3rd level lecturers teaching them privately at the back. Equality of opportunity.

Actually usually the slow learners get extra lessons / special classes.

You're suggesting putting a limit on what students can achieve. You should instead be focusing on the judges and ensuring their evaluation process weeds out students who relied on others to complete their project and haven't mastered the subject of their project

TheAnalyst_

Nobody is saying there is criminal fraud in the legal sense but there certainly was an attempt to deceive. The spiel about the grandfather whilst completley ignoring the real figurehead behind his work. It was only the OP that gave us the facts to make up our own mind. The winner, the judges, the media were not coming forward with any of this information.

Martina1991

kaymin wrote:

But this is not a good reason to lower the standard that students can aspire to. It's akin to teaching a class of kids at the level of the student that is the slowest learner - all the other kids suffer.

That analogy doesnt make sense.

Why would the standard have to be lowered. The best and brightest would still rise to the top if they were truly the best.

It's more like having a class of 10 students. Giving half of them access to 3rd level institutes equipment and supervisors and giving the other half whatever they can find in their secondary school laboratory.

Those with the best resources have the best chance of winning.

cookie1977

kaymin wrote: »

Actually usually the slow learners get extra lessons / special classes.

You're suggesting putting a limit on what students can achieve. You should instead be focusing on the judges and ensuring their evaluation process weeds out students who relied on others to complete their project and haven't mastered the subject of their project

Ok that's fine. Twist everything I say. I've posted clearly what I think:
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=105862732&postcount=353

kaymin

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

Yes but right now its a competition to see who has the best help.

I don't know enough to be able to agree or disagree - if you are right then it comes back to the judging process and establishing a robust evaluation process that assesses whether the student can demonstrate a good understanding of his subject