IT Milk: entry

Our presentation on “Dynamically Programming Math Learning Modules & Quizzes For Online Interactivity” was fantastic at tonight’s Undergraduate Research Fair. We didn’t win, but I was satisfied with our powerpoint presentation and delivery.

There were some amazing projects. I was surprised to discover that we had such dedicated and innovative minds at our small campus at Penn State Hazleton.

Most notable was Paul Dildine’s biofuel production project. Paul created his own biofuel production facility in his garage, which is capable of processing 150 gallons of biofuel per day. He takes waste vegetable oil from restaurants, and then filters and purifies it (it is a little more complicated than this) to create combustible fuel.

Unfortunately, Paul did not win either. The winners had good presentations, but I am sorry to say that they were not the outstanding ones. I was shocked by the results, and I started to question if the judges compiled the rankings backwards by accident.

This brings me to the question about how research fair projects should be graded. Based on the winners of tonight’s fair, I have no idea what kind of criteria the judges used to grade us. There wasn’t any consistency between the first, second and third place winners. It wasn’t the delivery style, for sure. And it couldn’t have been content either. So I’m thinking that it was probably empathy for the presenter(s).

Obviously, research fair participants should be graded on originality and dedication. As I had seen in a couple of projects tonight, projects should not be informative about currently existing theories, nor should they be pulled out of an exercise in the Physics 2 textbook.

One student completed a sociological survey of the religious profile of his hometown Jim Thorpe, Pennsylvania. And what did he get for passing out 170 surveys and processing the data to analyze it for patterns? Nothing really. But instead, some kid who did a humorous but trite presentation about how “Staph infection is everywhere” took third place.

I am happy with the overall event of the research fair, but I think the judges did not give the prizes to their rightful owners. That’s what happens when you present an overwhelming majority of science and technology-related projects to a small liberal arts campus. The judges freak out and screw up their own pre-defined grading system.