STAT - Tasmanian Science Talent Search - 2007 Judges Comments

(Please first re-read Comments from 2006 as all are still relevant)

I was very impressed with the standard of this year’s Research entries, particularly in the Junior and Intermediate age divisions. The very high quality of report presentation and the methodical layout of the scientific report reflects both considerable skills of scientific literacy as well as a general pride in the students’ efforts.

Most students were definitely able to “talk the talk”, but the winning entries also showed which students were prepared to “walk the walk”.

Allow me to explain a bit…

The best entries definitely showed a disciplined, planned and thorough approach, maintained over an extended period of time. Top enthusiastic students should be encouraged to be thinking NOW about their 2008 research entry, to give sufficient planning time, and the opportunity to use free time over the summer holidays, if desired, for longitudinal studies of substance. Two weeks is not sufficient time to study comparative growth rates under different conditions! In any case, marine and beach studies are much more enjoyable in the summer!

The best entries embodied careful methodical procedures which produced multiple results showing a definite reproducible trend in relation to the hypothesis being tested, allowing calculations and meaningful averages to be compared (with obvious deviations discussed if left out of calculations, with possible explanations.)

Topics which are of significant personal interest to the students (e.g. hayfever solutions, effectiveness of hydration drinks following exercise, action of waves at beaches etc) will result in superior projects because the student will generally put much greater effort and time into it. So choose wisely!

Graphs were used in a meaningful way to highlight trends and comparisons, and were not overused. If replicated set-ups are measured, (as would be expected) take averages of the replicates then compare these under different experimental conditions. There is no need to graph all the measurements for replicated individuals within one set-up. Over-use may make the report initially look bigger and more technical, but is actually frustrating and time-wasting for the discerning reader (i.e. The judges!)

Quantitative results were used where at all possible. (e.g. plant growth measured as height, number of leaves, thickness of stem, degree of wilting..) All raw data should be recorded. Tables and graphs must be clearly and adequately labelled.

Much thought had gone into planning before experimenting so that realistic situations are investigated. E.g. if investigating the effects of different solutions on plant growth, consider first the concentrations which are likely to be relevant e.g. the expected diluted concentration of shampoo in shower water, rather than adding neat or 50% diluted shampoo direct to the plants.

Appropriate controls were set up to show the natural effect or implications of the basic procedure without the presence of any other variable.

Good use was made of photos, involving selective use of clear, meaningful photos which were fully labeled and magnification shown, even if only by comparison with a reference object e.g. a matchbox. Many students used multiple photos as a “short cut” to show comparative results, rather than being an addition to quantitative measuring of the dependent variable. With digital cameras, and instant ability to check whether the photo is good enough, there is no excuse for poor focus. A reminder to all, that if the student is photographed doing certain procedures, then all the necessary safety precautions should be adhered to, e.g. wearing safety goggles.

Background information should only be included if directly relevant to the investigation undertaken, and then it is probably preferable to include it as an appendix at the back, referred to where appropriate in the body of the report. In general, references were well documented and outside assistance acknowledged.

Some additional comments related to specific topics:

Many students tackled psychological testing procedures which are extremely difficult to control because of the many variables between human subjects, any of which might affect the results. A large number of subjects should be used in such tests, and the variable being tested should be very specific.

Studies of bacterial growth are also popular, but it is essential that sterile procedures are followed for any meaningful results to be achieved.

Also, Consumer Science investigations were very popular, especially at the primary level. It is better to do just one or two aspects of the topic rather than try to study a wide number of aspects, if this means you fall short on replication.

I look forward to further development and improvement in Student Research Investigations next year!

Margaret Hosford
Director TSTS 2007