
Science Fairs Aren't So Fair - klunger
http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/03/why-science-fairs-arent-so-fair/387547?single_page=true
======
wyager
I did a lot of science fairs in high school. I was pretty good at it, too; I'm
currently paying for college with the help of some military research
scholarships I won at an international science fair.

Here's my perspective on the whole thing. Take it as you will.

At the regional science fairs (where everyone starts out), there are a lot of
people there who are only doing it because they have to. Usually, their high
school requires it. A lot of these projects are shit, and a lot of them also
clearly stole the idea or got help from their parents. All of these get
eliminated at the regional level.

Then, we have the state level fairs.

When it comes to engineering projects (mechanical, electrical, or computer),
almost 100% of the projects are actually done by the students themselves. It's
very easy for engineering judges to tell when someone's bullshitting or didn't
actually put in the work, so almost none of the bullshitters make it to the
state level. Most of these people don't have any immediate family members who
could help them, even if they wanted help.

When it comes to biological sciences (medicine especially) the situation is
much different. Almost everyone in this category knows their shit, but it's a
lot harder to say if they actually did the work themselves or not. A lot of
the projects absolutely _require_ that the students work in industrial lab
environments. It's impossible for a student doing MRSA research to work in a
lab below BSL-2, for example. A lot of these students get lab access through
their parents (who may be doctors or researchers or something), so it's very
likely they are working alongside their parent, and it's possible that they
are working with the help of their parent. A huge portion of students doing
this kind of research _do_ have an immediate family member who can (and, with
some likelihood, does) help them.

Because it's much harder for judges to sniff out people who didn't do original
work in the biological sciences category, you get a lot more bullshitters in
this category making it all the way to the top science fairs. They're still
usually experts in whatever they're researching, but they didn't necessarily
put in the thought or effort themselves.

When I was at Intel's international fair, the guy who won the top prize
claimed to do some sort of cancer-detection research. It was pretty impressive
stuff, but after the science fair a whole bunch of incriminating stuff came
out. IIRC, there was some situation where his parent had a position of power
at some major research university, and he essentially plagiarized the research
of some researcher there with minor changes, but it was soon enough after the
actual research that no one caught it.

I can't speak as much to the other categories (sociology, mathematics, etc.).
I didn't have a lot of experience with those.

~~~
pcrh
>it's much harder for judges to sniff out people who didn't do original work
in the biological sciences category

This applies to biological research all this way up the chain, including
research done at top Universities, and by "top men".

~~~
robmcm
Perhaps we should only fund the women then.

------
ChuckMcM
Wow a lot of parental angst there. Lets take a paragraph out of that which
summarizes this:

 _" Last year my son, who was in third grade at the time, came home with a
sheet of paper from his school that listed three categories for appropriate
projects: developing a hypothesis and conducting an experiment to test that
theory, inventing something new, or researching 'something specific.' The
guidelines listed 'whales' as an example of something specific. Given that my
son was 8 years old, the idea that he could, on his own, do any single one of
these things seemed ludicrous."_

Ok, so here we have a parent which completely doubts what their kid can do. In
my experience this is a pretty bad place for a parent to be, as the kids seem
to _always_ be more capable than parents expectation.

But the author really drives it home here:

 _" Even the easiest of these items—researching a topic—is nearly impossible
for a child who hasn’t yet mastered the ability to browse the Internet. (As a
parent and the founder of a tech company, I’ve observed that in order to
browse the Internet one needs to know how to scan the screen, differentiate
between actual content and ads, and evaluate the trustworthiness of a
resource—elements that are far out of reach of most 8-year-olds.)"_

Get that? Browse the Internet? Here is a question, how hard is it to pick up
the volume of the Encyclopedia Britannica with the big "W" on the spine and
turn to the page on "Whales" ? Not that hard. I'm sure the problem with that
is that an 8 year old cannot be expected to drive themselves to the library.
(only half joking).

But in context it says volumes about the _parent_ and very little about the
_child_. Even the poorest child can research things like the kinds of insects
that live in their neighborhood. The sad part about this article is not that
Science Fairs are not fair, its that parents don't know what science _is_ and
so cannot help there children develop a sense of wonder and discovery.

And what is truly heartbreaking for me is that the author's child has no hope
of learning what science is from this person, and if they don't get it in
school, well they will grow up believing anything they read on the Internet as
truth. That makes for a very sad story indeed.

~~~
needleofjustice
Yup, I agree! If we want to point fingers, lets point them at people of
influence who should know better. But authors of internet articles are fairly
low on that totem. Leaders in the sciences, public-policymakers, educators and
marketers should all be held accountable for the public perception of science.

On one hand, science should be taught as an art. It is a creative endeavor,
and when well-taught it engages the mind naturally. Why aren't we asking these
kids what interests them and helping them apply the appropriate science?

On the other hand, science is incredibly useful and necessary to understand
the world today, and fix the bugs in our social systems that otherwise are or
will cause human suffering.

I think finding a handful of heroes to fix all our problems is dumb. We are at
a point where fulfilling the greatest potential of all humans should be the
goal of any thoughtful person.

Let people fix their own problems, but also let them borrow your tools. And
science is an amazingly cool set of tools for fixing things.

------
timr
I've been disgusted for years by the parade of "winners" of the major science
fairs, most of whom have privileged access to research labs, wealth, or both.
Because, protip: no high school student can do graduate-level scientific
research. When you see that, it means that the student had special access to a
lab that was already doing the work.

And yet, year after year, these folks are given lucrative scholarships and
trotted out by the media as examples of the best-and-brightest scientific
talent. There's no way to reform it -- there's an incentive to game the
system, so parents will find a way to a game it. It's just one more example of
the perpetuation of wealth across generations.

~~~
zo1
_" It's just one more example of the perpetuation of wealth across
generations."_

You say that as if it's a bad thing. The thing you seem to be complaining
about is one of the wonderful things about parenting. I.e. to
impart/share/teach/give what you have accumulated over your life. Whether that
is something physical, or intangible such as knowledge, makes no difference.

~~~
superqd
I agree with this. I struggled at first (with my daughter's performance in a
recent science fair), but realized that my experience was a gift I could give
to her in the form of a better-than-average ability to explain seemingly
complicated ideas to an 8 year old. And to provide somewhat expert guidance on
the scientific method itself.

To a certain extent, this happens in many other ways at schools as well. I
mean, those kids with very athletic, or sports oriented, parents, may be more
driven or have better guidance in athletic endeavors that would my kids. But
we seem not to care about that (until the parents are screaming during a
game).

And likewise with music, or art, and so on. So I think I've decided not to get
too concerned about how others might view my daughter's work on her project.
It would be unfair (to her) if I decided _not_ to give her explanations that
were the benefit of my own experience.

------
Hydraulix989
Anecdotal evidence to the contrary: I was from an unprivileged background
growing up in a dying blue collar steel town outside of Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania that used to be the company town for ALCOA.

I was that one weird kid that was really into computers instead of football
like everyone else. I taught myself C++ programming, OpenGL, and matrix math
in high school because I wanted to develop 3D games.

I convinced my high school principal to let me enter a flight simulator that I
wrote during summer break of sophomore year into the Pittsburgh Regional
Science Fair (at my own expense), and I won. I remember standing on stage
sticking out like a sore thumb from the usual snooty, upper class high schools
that everyone knew from around the area.

That day, I met a robotics professor at CMU who was one of the judges, and
that introduction, along with sending a DVD video of my work to a few top
universities with my college application ended up changing my life.

------
primitivesuave
I judge high school engineering projects at the Synopsys Science Fair and
California State Science Fair, and have become quite skilled in BS detection.
Aside from the usual methods to detect BS, the most revealing question in my
experience has been _" what problems did you run into while doing this
project?"_ I ask this question to every student regardless of whether I think
their project was BS or not, and the responses from legitimate students are
usually sincere admissions of incompetence, while the response from a BSer is
some inconsequential roadblock that they easily overcame. Students who are
willing to submit a project where they did not produce the actual content will
be willing to pawn off any experience or skill as their own, and will vastly
overstate their abilities. The students who are humble about what they have
accomplished and understand the full implications of their work are usually
the ones who produce original work and win science fairs.

This year, I saw a project where a high school senior used deep power analysis
and machine learning to break AES 128 on a microcontroller
([https://instagram.com/p/0JzlxBoIaJ/](https://instagram.com/p/0JzlxBoIaJ/)).
The student was from a prestigious private school, and the project required an
expensive high-precision oscilloscope. Naturally I assumed that he had bought
the project off eBay, so I didn't hold back in my questioning. But after I
began questioning him, it quickly became clear that this was just an
exceptionally bright mind who was willing to put hundreds of hours into deep
understanding of a topic and reading the relevant research, before embarking
on some original work of his own. He iterated over many possible solutions,
and had an incredible demonstration of a working one. When I asked him
difficult cryptography questions, he answered them precisely. And when I
questioned him on his research methodology, he was humble in acknowledging his
shortcomings and truthful in citing the research that guided certain aspects
of his project. It is unfair to the exceptional few students capable of
producing such a project to assume that all high school students are incapable
of doing graduate-level research.

~~~
timr
...or, you were fooled, and your methodology for BS detection isn't perfect.

I've seen, first-hand, kids who were coached to perfection at this sort of
thing. And they could easily pass your test: one common pattern is for the kid
to be handed a "project" that is pre-conceptualized and nearly complete, and
have them do the last 5% of work in consultation with a senior researcher
(typically a post-doc).

The kid basically flails around for a while, struggles a lot, and learns to
talk the talk, but doesn't do much of anything in terms of productive work. So
they'll struggle like crazy and hang around brilliant, hard-working people
(and therefore be humbled and able to pass your test), but that doesn't mean
they did the research.

Doing a research project end-to-end takes _years_ of concerted effort. It's
almost completely unrealistic to think that a high school senior has put in
the time.

~~~
primitivesuave
I get what you're saying. Think about it from the perspective of the dishonest
student though - they're handed a project that does some amazing thing, and
need to pass it off as their own work. Unless they have the domain knowledge
around that amazing thing, they couldn't possibly have done the amazing thing,
and science fair bullshitters are generally not willing to put in the time to
get a deep understanding of the area their BS'd project is in. The student I
mentioned had a deep knowledge of cryptography, and with that understanding
and the knowledge of relevant scientific research, was able to build something
new that did an amazing thing. But if he was handed that project, I doubt he
would have the motivation to research crypto to the extent that he did, or be
conversant with another person. And most importantly, _he knew what he didn 't
know_.

------
lutorm
I've judged at the local school science fair in California, at the Intel ISEF
a bunch of years ago, and I was also part of the organization that arranges
the national science fair (Utstallningen Unga Forskare) in Sweden. Hence, I
think I have some perspective on this topic.

The American science fairs are a completely different thing from what we did
in Sweden. First, the Swedish one is strictly for 17-19 year olds. But more
importantly, the Swedish one is not a competition -- the whole idea is that
you do this voluntarily, because you have some project you are excited about,
and because you get feedback about your project from real scientists.

What purpose does it serve to make it a competition? Isn't the idea to
encourage the idea that science and engineering is fun and interesting? Making
it a competition just serves to accentuate the issues mentioned in this
article: giving an extreme advantage to kids who have access to professional
equipment and personal mentoring.

And the whole thing about doing "original science" is ludicrous, especially
when it's applied to middle school kids. What matters is whether the outcome
is known _to the student_ , not to the world. Kids engage in authentic inquiry
every day, and whether the topic is "original science" or not matters not one
bit.

If the choice is between the kid who investigated how different rubber bands
shoot rocks of different sizes, but did it by his or herself vs. the one who
was hand held through some fancy-sounding project at their parents lab, my
choice will go to the former every time.

And yes, maybe there are super prodigies out there who actually mastered a
research field enough to not only be able to do cutting edge research but also
to know enough to pick a topic that is as high school students. I'm not
worried about those kids, they don't need encouragement.

------
martythemaniak
The Simpsons noticed this phenomenon and proposed a solution 20 years ago.

[https://s-media-cache-
ak0.pinimg.com/originals/79/78/1d/7978...](https://s-media-cache-
ak0.pinimg.com/originals/79/78/1d/79781db88dbbcde81febb7537554c684.jpg)

"And the award goes to the kids who clearly didn't have any help from their
parents"

~~~
busyant
I'm right in the middle of this. I have two sons (11 and 8 yo).

Yesterday was the cub scouts Pinewood derby. The "kids" each build a 4-wheeled
car out of a pinewood block. There are various rules that need to be adhered
to. I resisted putting my stamp on the cars, but ___most_ __of the cars in
that derby looked like they were machined by Ferruccio Lamborghini. My kids '
cars looked like someone had vomited on a block of pinewood. They did okay in
the race, so that made me happy.

On the other hand, my 11 yo has an upcoming science fair at his elementary
school. This time, I "became what I hate", because I helped him a little too
much. I got lab equipment from work.

We're not doing anything fancy, but my "fingerprints" are all over it. He's
making the poster, but I told him that the poster should contain his name and
also state "with help from Dad."

~~~
dalke
I'll share my first science experiment that I was happy about. I came up with
it in a college class, so well after my science fair days, but it might be
something your kids could do.

There was pathway with a circular fountain in the middle. The path goes around
the fountain. People have the choice of going left or going right. On the
outside of the path are benches. My question was, will people avoid walking
near someone sitting on the bench?

I still remember the numbers. I only measured it when a person was walking
alone on the path. If no one sits then 90% of the people veer right to go
around the fountain. (Clearly I want to re-do this in the UK.) When I sat on
the bench on the right side, only 80% of the people would take the right. 10%
of the people changed their path to avoid me, sitting on the bench, reading a
book.

This is the sort of observational research that your eldest could easily do.
Observational research the basis for a lot of research, though often
overlooked in favor of flashier technology and lab equipment. The author of
one book I read - I believe he was a field biologist - wrote that he gets
asked how to encourage someone's child to get involved in science, and he
suggests to buy a hand-held click counter.
[http://99percentinvisible.org/episode/revolving-
doors/](http://99percentinvisible.org/episode/revolving-doors/) is an example
of how test which sign is the best way to get more people to use a revolving
door than a regular door, with the goal of reducing the heating bill.

Down this way also lies eccentricities, like John Trinkaus, who won an IgNobel
Prize
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ig_Nobel_Prize_winners#...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ig_Nobel_Prize_winners#2003)
for publishing reports like "percentage of young people wear baseball caps
with the peak facing to the rear rather than to the front". That's pure
observational studies, with no experimental variable or control. It won't do
well in a science fair.

------
droopyEyelids
I feel like it's impossible for many people to acknowledge the fact that the
world isn't fair.

To me, that's the basic assumption that you have to start with. Afterwords,
you're free to figure out how to make things more fair, but if you don't start
out understanding that things will always be messed up, you're left with a
senseless rant.

From what I got through it seems like the author was upset that some parents
can spend more time with their kids and that teachers were setting a high
standard, and that wealth in families can function as a privilege for
children. Those seem like pretty fundamental issues to me. The science fair is
maybe like a microcosm of life that way, but I didn't get what was a problem
unique to it.

~~~
VLM
On paper the kids do the work, but in practice, its more "what can they get
away with".

I made it to the state region levels as a kid with a lame project, but I did
it all myself, and I remember walking the aisles thinking to myself, "I can
probably win against that kid, but there's no way I can win against that kid's
Dad who obviously did all the work"

The pinewood Derby in scouts kind of suffers from a similar problem, "who's
dad has the best woodworking shop"

This might be a useful life lesson, in that on a very large scale the first
thing you learn in business, politics, law is whats right or legal doesn't
matter, its all in what you can get away with and who your parents are, and
the top players tend to be better at getting away with things and won the
genetic lottery. A meritocracy ... of crooks. And that's an education all in
itself that will provide a lifetime of benefits once understood at an early
age. So I'm not necessarily seeing a problem with education kids.

~~~
spiritplumber
That's not the sort of lesson I want kids to learn. Including my kids.

I want kids, including my kids, to learn that life is fair and if they don't
see it be fair, they have to sit down and fix that.

------
VLM
This quote shows something really bad, although it wasn't explicitly
discussed:

"But at the three fairs I’ve attended over the last several years, the unknown
rarely makes an appearance. At my son's fair last year, at least a handful of
students did the popular "experiment" in which the "scientist" waters plants
with three different liquids—one of which is typically soda or detergent—to
determine which is best for plant growth.

"Were you surprised that water made the plant grow?" I asked one child after
she presented her experiment.

"No," she said."

Aka "Science = boring and predictable and uncreative" Which is pretty much the
opposite of reality, although a fairly accurate example of K12 science
education...

Try harder kids? I put 10 seconds into it and got the idea of pond water,
fresh chlorinated tap water, and collected rain water?

Then again, some decades ago I successfully won the local grade school with
what boils down to a grid of detergents/soaps vs sources of dirt. (edited to
highlite that dumb project ideas are not a recent invention of 2015, I mean
think about it, a hypothesis that clothes detergent cleans dirt from cloth the
best is lame, although what cleans kitchen grease was a good question, I think
hand soap won?)

There is an interesting side dish of some fairs in some decades have allowed
research projects or "inventions", which is pretty lame. Do science, do a book
report, or do an art project, but don't confuse yourself into thinking the
three activities are indistinguishable.

~~~
therealdrag0
Yeah, they need to be encouraged to ask questions about what happens in their
lives. Stuff that they genuinely care about.

For example, the other day I was peeing and though, "Is there less splatter by
aiming my pee above the water line or below the waterline?" If I was Richard
Feynman, I'd probably actually do an experiment. Now that may not be allowed
in a school fair, but it's an example of a trivial everyday thing that one can
wonder about, and design an experiment about, yet maybe hasn't been
established as fact (like plants like water).

~~~
thaumasiotes
Below the waterline. All you need to do to learn this is pee with bare legs.
;p

------
mrdrozdov
As a kid, I remember science fairs being an enjoyable time to run around a
gymnasium learning about cool things with my friends and classmates. There
were two projects that I actually remember vividly. One involved measuring
distance using laser pens. The other was about how to make different sounds
with wine glasses filled of water. If I dig deep into my memory, I think that
I probably had one that involved plants, the light spectrum, a vinegar plus
baking soda volcano, plus a few more that all probably came out of a science
fair book I found in the library. The point is that none of them were
scientifically ground breaking as say a new method for pancreatic cancer
detection, but I still got almost perfect grades. I never did win any awards,
certainly not any monetary ones, but I learned a considerable amount from the
hands on experience.

Since that time, I've gone to a top 10 engineering school, have written
research papers, and even have a patent. I'm applying for PhD programs now to
study Artificial Intelligence, which I think is as noble a cause as any, and I
haven't thought about my science fair experiences until reading this article.

My opinion on the science fair is that it should be more about playfulness and
exploration than competition. After all, science should be a team effort
rather than a battle royale, and we should worry more about helping one
another than whether Sally won because her parent's helped her cut
construction paper while Timmy was on his own.

If you are a parent worried that the science fair system is too corrupt,
perhaps steer your child towards the rise of high school hackathons. I
mentored high school students at MIT's Blueprint and was amazing to see high
schoolers deploying machine learning solutions after less than 24 hours. The
best part was that the hackathon itself was run by college students who are
there to help any way they could, which could be one way to level the playing
field.

------
Glyptodon
I stopped reading when the author basically implied that making a trifold
poster about whales was too much to ask of her third grader because it would
require using the internet.

There are probably a lot of problems with science fairs, particularly at
higher grade levels. But her example is pretty terrible.

My 2nd grade science fair project was making a book about the planets. I chose
it because I thought space was cool.

All it involved was checking out space books from the school library and then
putting a page for each planet in a binder with facts like how big the planet
is or how far from the sun along with a hand drawn picture (ie a circle with
moderately correct colors). I think there were some extra pages for the Sun
and a random moon or two.

It could have easily been a trifold poster with most of the same stuff. I had
loads of fun because I liked learning anything about space. It could have
easily been about whales or something else if that's what I was interested in.
But all it took was some help from the school librarian: "I want to do my
science fair projects on planets. Do you have any books about planets?"

The next year I found a book of experiments in the school library and did one
of them and explained it on a trifold. It was fun and not rocket science. I
think most of the "experiments" in the book required stuff like rubber bands,
paper, and straws.

I'm not clear why finding a few books in the school library and making a
trifold poster is a headache for an elementary school student.

After that I never attended a school with a science fair, but I think it was
perfectly reasonable the few years I did participate.

------
protomyth
"Even the easiest of these items—researching a topic—is nearly impossible for
a child who hasn’t yet mastered the ability to browse the Internet. (As a
parent and the founder of a tech company, I’ve observed that in order to
browse the Internet one needs to know how to scan the screen, differentiate
between actual content and ads, and evaluate the trustworthiness of a
resource—elements that are far out of reach of most 8-year-olds.)"

Given your child a book (or ebook I guess). Wow, just wow. Has the
disappearance of things like encyclopedias increased the barrier of entry to
knowledge?

Science fairs (or "Imagination Fairs" as they seem to be called) could be fun,
but I get the feeling this is a lot of parents ruining something cool to be
competitive.

------
joshontheweb
I remember science fairs. I definitely had help from my parents and/or my
partners parents. I don't think we ever won anything more than an honorable
mention but the experience was really great. One time we did a soil erosion
study looking at what kind of tiered mounds would erode less. The second one I
forgot what the hypothesis was, but it got me and a friend to study blood and
come to an understanding of clotting via platelets. My friends mom was a nurse
and had us into the hospital to use the microscopes and take microscopic
pictures of blood. The most fun was building an electric motor with my dad
(RIP) out of nails and copper wire. I think the test was to see what manners
of winding the wire would produce a faster motor. Nothing ground breaking. I'm
sure we could have found the answers through study and not testing but it sure
helped me grasp the concepts better. These were all elementary school projects
and pretty rudimentary but it taught me that you are able to figure things out
on your own. You don't necessarily need someone else to do it for you. Not an
argument with the article really, just my own experience.

------
learc83
I remember what I learned from going to the state science fair in middle
school:

how to fabricate results when the testing apparatus you built isn't sensitive
enough to actually conduct the experiment.

I think science fairs could be greatly improved if they were more accepting of
failed experiments.

------
utunga
The time I spent with my dad building a model of a turbofan jet engine - with
real spinning blades - for our local science fair, is one of my fondest
memories of him. And while it is true that he helped a lot we also did all the
work _together_. Just sayin'.

------
bsder
This is why "bucket of bolts" competitions are better.

"The task is X. Here is the bucket of parts you are allowed to use. Build the
best solution you can."

Given the current state of robotics, an alternative is: "Here is the robot.
The task is X. Write the program to pull that off."

However, those kinds of competitions require _way_ more work on the part of
the organizers.

------
haneefmubarak
related:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9208624](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9208624)

I was going to put it all in one comment, but I wasn't sure what the HN
character limit was.

------
superqd
This was rather timely, for me. I have been struggling with the assumption
that my daughter's science fair was due to me, rather than her. I was very
proud of her work/effort, and wanted to share that with friends/family, but
many of the reactions were, essentially, "well, it was really you who won".
And that couldn't be further from truth.

Now, one reason, I assume for this reaction, is due to two things: 1) they
know I'm science nerd (I have a degree in physics), and 2) she's really young,
but won for the whole school (she's in the second grade, and won 1st place for
the school, and her own grade). They say this, without even knowing what she
did or how she did it. To me, the entire point of the fair is to get kids AND
parents involved in science, while exposing kids to the scientific process.
So, to me, I get my daughter to do as much of her project as she can. And even
things she can't do, I still get her to try, even when it takes her a long
time (like typing her slides that get glued to her board - she types with one
finger pecking very slowly). But she loved the work, and felt like she was
learning something. Her experiment was incredibly simple (literally a cup of
water and a timer), and she thought of the procedure herself, and the question
she wanted to answer was hers.

But, even after I explain this to someone, they still feel my daughter was
unfairly advantaged, or at the very least, was given some better than average
coaching, because of my background/experience. To a certain extent, I kind of
agree on that point. I do try really hard to explain the concepts to her in a
way that an 8 year old can understand. But, ultimately, it all comes down to
her. The idea and experiment were hers.

When I walked the gym and saw the other experiments/projects, many were highly
decorated and beautiful (my daughter's had no decoration, just a title and the
required sections with text in her own words). And many experiments had rather
elaborate processes, and/or complex devices. Sadly, I too thought that many
parents were at work, rather than the kids, even knowing how much I made my
daughter do on her own. But it all seems to come down to the kids. And, some
here have mentioned, the judges are pretty good at detecting BS. So although a
perusal of the fair wouldn't make it obvious which kids did their own work, or
how much they really learned, and that's where the assessment of the judges
has to be taken into account.

And it was that that made me feel better about my daughter's work. I was proud
of her, because I knew that it was she who did it, and was glad the judges
were able to see it. But I totally know that many parents do over-involve
themselves to the point the kids don't learn anything. It seems a difficult
balance to strike, but it does seem possible to distinguish the extremes.

