Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Science Fair

Yes to that! I like to see students who obviously created their own boards. Who screwed up the experiment and CAN TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENED. Who are excited about what they discovered, even if what they discovered was only new to them.

But this is the rub. Sometimes the most interesting experiments are the messiest. They don't fit into neat little boxes, but explore areas of passion and interest.

Her "at home only" project with the mice was the most interesting, but it sure was messy (literally and figuratively). The sample size was too small and her experimental model wasn't working, so she ended up trying like three different things. But it was cool and a lot of fun. And we all found the results very interesting. For example, she couldn't prove that food color affected mouse intellect or memorization (the original goal). But she did discover that it affected activity level, weight, and odor.

Right now socially aware experiments seem to be in vogue... ones with a TEDx vibe, if you know what I mean.

One of my pet peeves with science fairs is that they often confound experimental science with engineering projects--often to the disadvantage of both. I've seen some pretty cool engineering projects not recognized at all in science fair judging because there was no space for anything without a classically-testable hypothesis and repeated measures (I am, I should note, all for the empirical method and reproducibility). If you build a fabulous robot, you should get some credit for it, even if you can't easily make a graph or table with at least three trials for each condition. I think science fairs should have a science and an engineering category, judged separately. I've never seen this below the high school level.

And I agree, I like to see a project that exhibits the student's understanding of the scientific method.

DD is very interested in field biology, so she was all excited about science fair (next year)--till we learned that it is virtually impossible to get approval of any project involving live organisms, even just observation in the field. If that is incorrect, please let me know, but this is what we have been told.

You'll have to look at the specifics, UM-- some policies have a mechanism for seeking subject approvals, and some (unfortunately) lack all such mechanisms, so it's functionally impossible to even do observational field work with those more rigid policies. Sometimes there is a loophole built in for observational studies-- read the fine print.

You can sometimes get around the animal subject prohibition if you can find a way to piggyback on an institutional approval for animal/human subjects (e.g. IRB) that is already in existence, or starting for another purpose such as a grant/pilot study. To do that you have to know someone who is willing to underwrite the project on their approval, though-- university or research department, usually. It never hurts to ask if you happen to find someone in that position with similar research interests, though.

The real problem with those kinds of prohibitions is that taken to extremes, they mean that even polling classmates for the purposes of doing statistical analyses can be considered under the constraints of involving "human subjects." Which is ridiculous, of course, if you're asking for volunteers to run through a red/green colorblindness test or something, IMO, but there it is-- apparently the process of asking someone a few questions after they look at neutral images is potentially scarring to one's peers.


I'm also pretty sure that birdwatching is not bothering the birds in question if you're doing it through binoculars, too, but even that can be off-limits under the most strict policies. The Cornell lab, though-- that has an approval, and you might be able to get some wiggle room by going through that channel. I don't know that, but it probably can't hurt to ask.

Yes my older son did a project one year that won his class and the school but didn't go to district because he used a human subject (not to mention that his n was one, so the number of subjects was too small). But everyone liked the project. (He was studying neumonics and memory). Could have scarred that girl for life....but where was the teacher? ....nope handed out the assignment and rubric and was done with it...didn't catch the human subject and didn't catch the group was too small.


The next year he studied hamburger meat and how much fat and water cooks out of the different grades of burger. And if you pay less per pound for a fattier meat if you end up with the same cost per pound once cooked as the leaner meat.

We couldn't poll on taste because humans and would muddy the actual question. And what is funny is he doesn't eat meat.

Yes, we have lots of connections to faculty, etc doing approved research, so she might be able to get around it that way. But then she's piggybacking, not doing her own thing, And yes, we have been told that even observational study of birds through binocs would be a huge hassle. But I'll want to confirm that.

According to the Intel ISEF:

"9. Before experimentation begins, a local or regional Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Scientific Review Committee (SRC) associated with the Intel ISEF-affiliated fair must review and approve most projects involving human participants, vertebrate animals, and potentially hazardous biological agents.

10. Every student must complete the Student Checklist (1A), a Research Plan and Approval Form (1B) and review the project with the Adult Sponsor in coordination with completion by the Adult Sponsor of the Checklist for Adult Sponsor (1).

11. A Qualified Scientist is required for all studies involving BSL-2 potentially hazardous biological agents and DEA-controlled substances and is also required for many human participant studies and many vertebrate animal studies."

So at the regional level, there are provisions for approving all kinds of experiments.

HOWEVER, schools often take the path of least resistance and blanket forbid anything difficult or possibly controversial.

My local school district requires special approval if for use of humans or animals. And if you "question" other students as your test subjects you must get their parental approval. It believe it's just the students science teacher who approves these applications. They don't allow anything that would harm the animal, and err on the side of rejecting it if it could at all hurt the animal.

I have seen approvals for projects that include observations of birds in the wild, behavior of dogs, behavior of people. My son did his 6th grade science project testing hearing.

As for other live organisms. I don't think there is a prohibition, but I do know my kid's science teachers discouraged projects that involved growing plants partly because of time constraints. And partly their past experience with students projects that failed to grow at all.