Lessons: Synopsys Science & Technology Championship 2023

Last week was the 2023 Synopsys Science & Technology Championship in San Jose, CA. I was invited to volunteer for Grand Prize (High School) judging, Category (Middle School) Judging, and Check-in. It was my first time doing check-in and it was fun being a trainee. I’ve done the judging before. But this time, I was tasked with selecting a project for a Special Award in the Environmental area, and I learned a few things. The following are impressions I got from the project and student I selected for the Special Award, and reflections on what influenced the decision with respect to YCISL ideas.

• “I thought the idea had creative and personally connected origins.” Part of creativity depends on what on what others are doing at this instance in time. I had reviewed many Machine Learning projects and none had problem-solving depth. I also had reviewed numerous environmental sustainability projects that made over-reaching claims and promises. The winning project had a simple creative idea and involved a rigorous scientific approach and process. During the judging interview, I checked that there was a personal interest in the subject which in conversation expanded to similar applications. In YCISL, we have the elevator pitch exercise where students design a creatively persuasive one-on-one discussion.
• “I felt a sense of authentic curiosity and a research question with good scope (not too small, not too big).” Beyond the curiosity that is expected at such an event, an authenticity in the inspiration and motivation helps distinguish the project idea. Then it also helps to frame the idea with a scope that is Goldilocks-“just right” so I don’t wonder why there is such poor alignment between the promise, problem and solution. The winning project had vivid vision that fit the scope and performed actions that made the vision interesting.
• “The project poster was clear and displayed an end to end research study. There was scientific methodology involved that required independent scholarly learning, skill and mastery. The narrative was focused and compelling (I really wanted to know the outcome and where it could lead to).” Poster presentations need to be balanced from end to end for effective storytelling. For me, that includes starting with an idea that has grab, and concludes with a bibliography that gains my trust in the project quality.
• “I did have a 1-on-1 meeting with him at the poster where he presented project highlights…I found his oral presentation presence and delivery to be perhaps the best I saw today (it helped that we were both interested in sports).” For me, there were three opportunities for this project to impress me including the proposal review, the pre-interview poster read, and the interview-based discussion. The most critical one in this case was the poster read. I may not have been as keenly attentive during the interview if the poster hadn’t been so impressive. Still, a successful interview was still required for me to conclude that this project and student researcher was distinctly outstanding and deserving of the Special Award. The student did not rush and, as I recall, practiced active listening.

To wrap up this entry, I am going to list the top three basic dealbreakers that I generally observed at the event:

• Bibliography. A weak or absent bibliography erases credibility.
• Over-promise, Under-deliver. Un-managed expectations reduces believability. Some project titles were not refined enough.
• Science. A scholarly mastery of science at the grade-level or higher needs to be apparent. This is reflected in preparatory, methodology and analysis components.