nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

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.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/mrsa-faces-defeat-from-wild-flower-48105.html

MOD Note
This thread was started off with the word 'fraud' being used. As this comes with a big can o' worms with it, I think that we should just allude to something fishy going on rather than making bold claims.

I'd like for the thread to continue in this vein, no allegations as such and to have a healthy discussion on the BT Young Scientist award.

Cool.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

cookie1977

kaymin wrote: »

I don't think that's a fair comment - you don't know what questions were asked of him or the depth of knowledge he displayed. Maybe if you were present for the judging process you might have a different view. The judges made their call - if you are really so concerned I'd suggest examining the qualifications of the judges instead as they are the ones that select the winner.

Well that jumped 20 steps.

I dont need to know anything more then what I see. I dont agree with the decision nor the pattern that's gone before and will no doubt continue in the competition. An educational arms race and to hell with the kids.

kaymin

cookie1977 wrote: »

So they say...
If it requires a third level institute to not only carry out the research for the young scientists competition but to win it and a parent in the exact field area of the project winner then that is very disappointing and not the competition that I was in back in 1994.

I don't think that's a fair comment - you don't know what questions were asked of him or the depth of knowledge he displayed. Maybe if you were present for the judging process you might have a different view. The judges made their call - if you are really so concerned I'd suggest examining the qualifications of the judges instead as they are the ones that select the winner.

fly_agaric

Was thinking, if they limited it (as was suggested earlier) to what can be done just with the "standard" secondary school science lab equipment (no mammies and daddies with very well padded wallets and purses to top up the school science lab funds, or university contacts with "ins" to well equipped labs), there wouldn't be much of a competition left!

When I was a kid, you were doing well with dirty beakers, rusty old bunsen burners + bottles of reagents that were probably well past the use by date. Ireland Inc. as people call it was never much for over-spending on its childrens' education.

I'm getting on at this stage though, and maybe they have plasma etchers, FTIR spectrometers, HPLC machines and god knows what else in every school up + down the country now since the Celtic Tiger roared!

cookie1977

kaymin wrote: »

I agree - most likely the judging process in the early stages won't have been rigorous. But to get back to the OP, according to the IT articles, the winning student would have gone through a rigorous judging process - so I don't think it is fair to deny him victory if he passed their knowledge tests.

Simon’s project was reviewed during five separate judging rounds. His work was reviewed by over 10 judges, in a cross-disciplinary approach,”

“The judges were aware that he had access to facilities in a third level institution as many of our participants do due to lack of some necessary equipment in their own school labs.

“The judges, through their rigorous questioning, were happy that the work and research had been undertaken by Simon, and that any assistance he received was acknowledged in his report book as is required by the BTYSTE exhibition rules.”

So they say...
If it requires a third level institute to not only carry out the research for the young scientists competition but to win it and a parent in the exact field area of the project winner then that is very disappointing and not the competition that I was in back in 1994.

kaymin

cookie1977 wrote: »

Not sure but remember the entry is competitive to begin with so this beat other projects into being selected for entry. The title should have raised eyebrows let alone the project summary.

I agree - most likely the judging process in the early stages won't have been rigorous. But to get back to the OP, according to the IT articles, the winning student would have gone through a rigorous judging process - so I don't think it is fair to deny him victory if he passed their knowledge tests.

Simon’s project was reviewed during five separate judging rounds. His work was reviewed by over 10 judges, in a cross-disciplinary approach,”

“The judges were aware that he had access to facilities in a third level institution as many of our participants do due to lack of some necessary equipment in their own school labs.

“The judges, through their rigorous questioning, were happy that the work and research had been undertaken by Simon, and that any assistance he received was acknowledged in his report book as is required by the BTYSTE exhibition rules.”

_Dara_

joe40 wrote: »

I think science competitions like this should be more about promoting "good research" I mean careful selection of variables, good use of controls, accurate collection of data and sound analysis. That probably is the case for most of the projects and of course all pupils get help and guidance.
For me the problem is the way the media fawn the top entrants as if they have just discovered a cure for cancer. These are secondary school kids, projects that are at university level are just not believable. Phd students get help from their professors, thats not how a secondary school science fair should function.
By all means teachers and parents should tweak their ideas and suggest methods but then back off. As for using university labs, thats just silly. They will have to be more innovative with project ideas and methodology if limited to school labs. They will have plenty of years in university.

Exactly. PhD students slave away for three to four years. And it really is slaving, between long lab hours and all the reading required. And at that end of that, surprising little work is done relatively. I'm not having a go at PhD candidates, I'm pointing out how much work goes into every little discovery made in science. A former housemate of mine was doing her microbiology PhD throughout our time living together. She's highly intelligent and competent. But she was frequently frustrated and depressed with how her research was going because it's bloody hard work. My undergrad project was nine weeks in a lab. You get pretty much nothing done in that time, only learn a few techniques. So people are just drawing on their own knowledge when feeling sceptical about the amount of work presented by these kids when they are so young and have a pile of other subjects to study.

I've also worked with highly pathogenic bacteria. There is a good bit of training involved in being allowed to do so and only a handful of people have those permissions.

BowSideChamp

How did this teenager do a project working with MRSA? Surely this was a h&s risk which should have been conducted in a specialised lab with qualified scientists.

cookie1977

kaymin wrote: »

How did this project fare in the rankings? As far as I understand the judges question the students to gauge whether the project is their own work. If this project didn't rank then perhaps the judges knew the student hadn't done the work.

Not sure but remember the entry is competitive to begin with so this beat other projects into being selected for entry. The title should have raised eyebrows let alone the project summary.

kaymin

cookie1977 wrote: »

You're absolutely right. The question arises in this thread is who came up with what here? Again as someone mentioned already, is it the young scientists exhibition or a chance for senior scientists to show how good they are?

I refer you back to a previous post of mine:
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=105850914&postcount=226

You cannot say that a young scientist came up with this. Plus Golgi apparatus staining? That's what postgrads/postdocs do.

How did this project fare in the rankings? As far as I understand the judges question the students to gauge whether the project is their own work. If this project didn't rank then perhaps the judges knew the student hadn't done the work.

joe40

I think science competitions like this should be more about promoting "good research" I mean careful selection of variables, good use of controls, accurate collection of data and sound analysis. That probably is the case for most of the projects and of course all pupils get help and guidance.
For me the problem is the way the media fawn the top entrants as if they have just discovered a cure for cancer. These are secondary school kids, projects that are at university level are just not believable. Phd students get help from their professors, thats not how a secondary school science fair should function.
By all means teachers and parents should tweak their ideas and suggest methods but then back off. As for using university labs, thats just silly. They will have to be more innovative with project ideas and methodology if limited to school labs. They will have plenty of years in university.

diomed

professore wrote: »

There are lots of schools that never send anyone.

Another project for next year.
"why do schools not enter students for the young parent of the year competition?”

evolving_doors

kaymin wrote: »

My sister is lecturer in UL and has been involved with young scientists in the past. If you don't ask you don't get.

How did they make contact with your sister. Just fire off an email?
Is there a structure in place in the college. Are there guidelines on who to take on, or is it purely at the discretion of the academic?

_Dara_

kaymin wrote: »

Do we want to go down the path of participation medals and the like instead?

I think most people hate participation medals. But the playing field needs to be level.

cookie1977

kaymin wrote: »

Who is saying that? Science is never perfect. Some posters are talking about restricting access to resources / others so that every participant is put on a level playing field - it reminds me of communism as it hinders initiative. If students are capable of coming up with something new (and they've proven themselves to be in the past) then why not give them every opportunity to do so in the future.

Do we want to go down the path of participation medals and the like instead?

You're absolutely right. The question arises in this thread is who came up with what here? Again as someone mentioned already, is it the young scientists exhibition or a chance for senior scientists to show how good they are?

I refer you back to a previous post of mine:
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=105850914&postcount=226

You cannot say that a young scientist came up with this. Plus Golgi apparatus staining? That's what postgrads/postdocs do.

evolving_doors

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

And you think the Universities would have resources and time to meet the several hundred secondary schools that would look for their input?

Well you could prioritise friends and family first then so!!

_Dara_

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

And you think the Universities would have resources and time to meet the several hundred secondary schools that would look for their input?

Having worked in a research lab in a university, that would be a bit fat no. Universities would not have the time and money and often inclination to help every secondary school student who comes to them for help. Researchers are already pulling long hours with their own research and with supervising undergraduate projects.

kaymin

cookie1977 wrote: »

Why do they need to come up with something new? It's about developing an inquiring mind. And that also has a lot to do with failure. It doesn't have to be a perfect science project with a beginning, middle and end. It's about building knowledge. Not every scientist becomes a nobel prize winning one but perhaps their work might help a future scientist make the nobel prize winning discovery.

We're not helping the kids by saying "if only you were more ambitious and had better contacts your project could have been perfect".

Who is saying that? Science is never perfect. Some posters are talking about restricting access to resources / others so that every participant is put on a level playing field - it reminds me of communism as it hinders initiative. If students are capable of coming up with something new (and they've proven themselves to be in the past) then why not give them every opportunity to do so in the future.

If students simply come up with something that has been done a thousand times before it doesn't really prove anything other than they can follow someone else's work.

Do we want to go down the path of participation medals and the like instead?

kaymin

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

And you think the Universities would have resources and time to meet the several hundred secondary schools that would look for their input?

My sister is lecturer in UL and has been involved with young scientists in the past. If you don't ask you don't get.

NIMAN

Wombatman wrote: »

Was already on with Ryan.

Missed that....I switched over after the awful Room 101, chuck stuff in the bin segment.

cookie1977

kaymin wrote: »

Without accessing third level institutions it's likely that the students won't come up with anything new - at least in the science field. Rather than complain about elitism / lack of resources / contacts, perhaps schools should try to link up with universities with a view to using their resources / seeking their input. Ultimately this will generate a better outcome for Ireland Inc. Restricting access to resources will stunt students with initiative.

Why do they need to come up with something new? It's about developing an inquiring mind. And that also has a lot to do with failure. It doesn't have to be a perfect science project with a beginning, middle and end. It's about building knowledge. Not every scientist becomes a nobel prize winning one but perhaps their work might help a future scientist make the nobel prize winning discovery.

We're not helping the kids by saying "if only you were more ambitious and had better contacts your project could have been perfect".

Tom Mann Centuria

kaymin wrote: »

Without accessing third level institutions it's likely that the students won't come up with anything new - at least in the science field. Rather than complain about elitism / lack of resources / contacts, perhaps schools should try to link up with universities with a view to using their resources / seeking their input. Ultimately this will generate a better outcome for Ireland Inc. Restricting access to resources will stunt students with initiative.

And you think the Universities would have resources and time to meet the several hundred secondary schools that would look for their input?

kaymin

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

Be more ambitious with their projects while happening to live in an area with third level institutions or have good connections. Elitism is all well and good but perhaps then it should be an individual pursuit outside of school involvement.

Without accessing third level institutions it's likely that the students won't come up with anything new - at least in the science field. Rather than complain about elitism / lack of resources / contacts, perhaps schools should try to link up with universities with a view to using their resources / seeking their input. Ultimately this will generate a better outcome for Ireland Inc. Restricting access to resources will stunt students with initiative.

Tom Mann Centuria

NIMAN wrote: »

He's bound to be on the LLS on Friday night anyway, wonder will our Ryan ask him any of these difficult questions?

:pac:

Wombatman

NIMAN wrote: »

He's bound to be on the LLS on Friday night anyway, wonder will our Ryan ask him any of these difficult questions?

Was already on with Ryan.

NIMAN

He's bound to be on the LLS on Friday night anyway, wonder will our Ryan ask him any of these difficult questions?

professore

diomed wrote: »

Year School
1995 Abbey Grammar School, Newry
1993 Abbey Grammar School, Newry, Co. Down

1977 Colaiste Mhuire, Dublin
1972 Coláiste Mhuire, Baile Atha Cliath

2013 Kinsale Community School, Cork
2006 Kinsale Community School, County Cork
2009 Kinsale Community School, County Cork

1999 Scoil Mhuire Gan Smál, Blarney
2010 Scoil Mhuire Gan Smál, Blarney, County Cork

1975 St Finian’s College, Mullingar, Co. Westmeath
2003 St Finnian's College, Mullingar, County Westmeath

2004 Synge Street CBS, Dublin
2007 Synge Street CBS, Dublin
2012 Synge Street CBS, Dublin

43 years of the contest, 14 won by multiple school winners.
723 secondary schools in Ireland.

There are lots of schools that never send anyone.

Tom Mann Centuria

kaymin wrote: »

The main issue posters to this thread had about the winner is that he never acknowledged his mother. Now we find he did acknowledge his mother in his thank you speech along with every other person that assisted him in a significant way. The issue has now been changed to the fact he had access to resources that other students don't have access to - personally I don't have an issue with this as maybe it will encourage others to be more ambitious with what they try to achieve from their projects.

To those that think he should have come up with his project without reference to anyone else's work or input seem to be ignorant about how science generally works - most scientific progress is made through tiny collaborative steps that are possible through the cumulative work done by others previously.

Be more ambitious with their projects while happening to live in an area with third level institutions or have good connections. Elitism is all well and good but perhaps then it should be an individual pursuit outside of school involvement.

TheAnalyst_

Yeah the IT seem to be doing their best to counter all the legitimate points raised online.

Martina1991

kaymin wrote:

The issue has now been changed to the fact he had access to resources that other students don't have access to - personally I don't have an issue with this as maybe it will encourage others to be more ambitious with what they try to achieve from their projects.

kaymin wrote:

To those that think he should have come up with his project without reference to anyone else's work or input seem to be ignorant about how science generally works - most scientific progress is made through tiny collaborative steps that are possible through the cumulative work done by others previously.

How would not having resources make students more ambitious. It would be disheartening.

I want to be rich. But I guess I just need ambition.

Wombatman

faceman wrote: »

Article in the Times about it now.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/young-scientist-winner-defended-amid-accusations-of-outside-help-1.3356238

In a series of interviews before, during the awards ceremony on Friday, and since, Simon Meehan repeatedly thanked his grandfather, Eddie Lucey, a well-known herbalist from Bandon; his science teacher, Karina Lyne; his mother Dr Brigid Lucey and UCC for assistance in conducting his research.

This bit is simply not true. Google all the coverage of the win. Granddad and teacher thanked constantly. Mother rarely mentioned. If she is, it is as "his mother" with no reference to the fact that she is a ‎senior lecturer in biological sciences in CIT. This omission is clearly by design.