Why Chemistry Matters from the mouths of Nobel Laureates!

Source: TED Fellows

Does the modern image of a scientist reflect or match that of a past image?  Here is a modern image shown below:

Source: Science

And here is an image taken from the 1950s shown below:

Source: ShutterStock

How do they differ?  How are they the same?  The reason why I ask these questions is that science in general (and society for that matter) has been locked in the gender rigid mindset in professional aspirations.  As a result, there are a lack of females in science as are there a lack of minorities.  This image presents one far different from that in the cover photo above - which is representative of today's society.


In presenting the wrong image of a scientist, the gap of diversity is narrowed and science (as a whole) suffers from the loss of potentially great contributors which is terrible to say the least.  In the changing world in which we live today, diversity and inclusiveness have a greater meaning in all fields.  Especially science.  As I have mentioned in an earlier post, all of us (people) start out at one point in our lives as "amateur scientist's".  The difference between then and now are those individuals who pursue a profession of creativity and curiosity which is unbound by traditional means.

Science is an open ended field of search and discovery of understanding the world around us.  As highlighted in the video below from the mouth's of Nobel Laureates, science is really made for anyone who chooses to pursue their curiosity and thirst for knowledge.  Contrary to popular thinking, there are many different fields in science -- which do not require - math or complex equations.  Here is a video which is not new but will drive home the point of 'why chemistry matters' in a collection of elegant short statements:

After watching the video above, I hope that you are inspired to think creatively and follow your curiosity to its limits.  This is one of the great joys of scientific research as a profession.  Many people have misconceptions about science - which is terrible.  I find that view to be 'self-limiting' and not useful.  Each of us should understand that the field of science as a profession is within our reach.  That is if we are willing to do the work to pursue that line of work as a profession.



 Although, even if a person chooses not to pursue science as a profession, this does not mean that science is not accessible to each.  Each of us could potentially have access to the world wide web - which is limitless in knowledge about the world around us.  The act of pursuing that knowledge resides in each of us.



Related Blog Posts:



How Do Scientists Think?


Science Topics, Thoughts, and Parameters Regarding Science, Politics, And The Environment!


Dimensional Analysis Of Statistics And Large Numbers - Index Of Blog Posts

What Is Dimensional Analysis?

Source: Singularity Hub

What is dimensional analysis?  Have you ever used dimensional analysis in your everyday life?  Here is the introductory description which is located on the Wikipedia page for "Dimensional Analysis":

In engineering and science, dimensional analysis is the analysis of the relationships between different physical quantities by identifying their base quantities (such as length, mass, time, and electric charge) and units of measure (such as miles vs. kilometers, or pounds vs. kilograms vs. grams) and tracking these dimensions as calculations or comparisons are performed. Converting from one dimensional unit to another is often somewhat complex. Dimensional analysis, or more specifically the factor-label method, also known as the unit-factor method, is a widely used technique for such conversions using the rules of algebra.[1][2][3]

The concept of physical dimension was introduced by Joseph Fourier in 1822.[4] Physical quantities that are of the same kind (also called commensurable) have the same dimension (length, time, mass) and can be directly compared to each other, even if they are originally expressed in differing units of measure (such as inches and meters, or pounds and newtons). If physical quantities have different dimensions (such as length vs. mass), they cannot be expressed in terms of similar units and cannot be compared in quantity (also called incommensurable). For example, asking whether a kilogram is greater than, equal to, or less than an hour is meaningless.

Any physically meaningful equation (and likewise any inequality and inequation) will have the same dimensions on its left and right sides, a property known as dimensional homogeneity. Checking for dimensional homogeneity is a common application of dimensional analysis, serving as a plausibility check on derived equations and computations. It also serves as a guide and constraint in deriving equations that may describe a physical system in the absence of a more rigorous derivation.

Wow!  Does that sound complicated?  Basically, what the description says above is that if you are comparing the mass of two oranges, both the units of measurement (weight) in this case have to be in the same 'units' - grams, pounds, kilograms, etc.  If you weight orange number #1 and report a weight of 70 grams, then try to compare a second orange's weight reported as 0.400 kg (kilograms) - then the comparison cannot be completed.



At least until you convert the weight of orange #1 to units of kilograms or weight #2 to units of grams.  If both weights were expressed in the same units -- say grams, then orange #1 weighing = 70 grams -- would be much smaller than orange #1 weighing = 400 grams.  The same logic applies to base quantities (dimensions) -- like length, mass, volume, height, speed, etc.



How about trying another route to clarify the description in the excerpt above.  If you have ever tried to follow a recipe while cooking, then chances are you have engaged in 'dimensional analysis' without knowing that you were doing so.  Don't believe me? Follow the quick cooking example below.

Example: Cooking

Here is a quick example of using 'dimensional analysis' in your kitchen.  Take the recipe shown below as an example:

The recipe above calls for 100 mL of milk.  That is 100 milliliters of milk.   What if the kitchen in which you are preparing the shake does not contain a 'measuring cup' shown below which is extremely useful in converting between different units of measurement:

Source: HomeDepot

Upon closer inspection of the image of a 'measuring cup' above, one can easily see a series of markings at different heights with different labels.  These labels indicate different volumes of measurement in different units.  According to the image of the recipe shown earlier, the amount of milk called for in creating the shake was 100 mL -- Which could easily be converted using the instrument above -- i.e. measuring cup.



Although, what would you do if you did not have a measuring cup within the kitchen in which preparation of the shake was taking place?  How would a person find the conversion factor to convert between units of 'milliliters' and units of 'cups'?  One easy method with the advent of the internet has been to resort to to a 'search engine' like 'Google' or 'Bing'.



Proceed to bring up a web browser and bring up Google.com and type in the search space: "How Many Milliliters In A Cup?" and the web page with the conversion (interactive) columns should appear as shown below:

Note: The conversion shown above is 'interactive' - which means that the labels are 'drop down' menus which can serve to change either 'units of measurement' or 'dimensions' (i.e. length, area, volume, time, speed, etc.).  Feel free to play with the web page to convert between units of various dimensions.



Next, with the conversion factor known which will assist us in converting between units of 'cups' and units of 'milliliters', the remaining step in the conversion is to carryout a mathematical operation as shown below:

The result indicates that in order to follow the recipe (approximately -- not precisely), roughly 1/2 cup of milk will correspond to 100 milliliters of milk.  Note that the conversion is approximate -- since 1/2 = 0.5 not 1/2 = 0.423 !!!



Is the method of carrying out a dimensional analysis problem is clear?  If the answer is yes, then you are ready to read past blog posts which mainly use 'dimensional analysis' to cast statistics reported in the news into perspective -- click here to access the index of past blog posts.  If you are not comfortable with carrying out 'dimensional analysis' problems, see the tutorial below.

Dimensional Analysis Tutorial

A Tutorial on Dimensional Analysis is shown below:

After watching the video above along with reading the content of the blog post so far, you may be wondering where to get conversion values if not from the internet.  Science textbooks have conversion tables.  After a quick search of conversion tables, the 'Accidental Scientist' appeared with a host of information.  Here is a screenshot of an example of a table of conversions below.  Note: if you click on the source, you will be directed to the site:

As you can see, there is no need to memorize conversions -- at least all of the conversions.  That is what reference materials are for when needed.

Conclusion...

In the paragraphs above, the useful (and fun) method of carrying out calculations using 'dimensional analysis' was shown.  Armed with the power to carry out comparisons with conversion factors allows you to verify a large portion of statistics which are reported in the popular news on a day-to-day basis.  Is this useful?  Depends on how much energy that you choose to exert in understanding the process of using it to live a better life.


Understanding the power of comparison with conversion factors will add extra dimensions of happiness to your life.  How do I know?  When a person can visualize or comprehend the magnitude of a reported statistic by putting the value into perspective using dimensional analysis, the problem or subject matter of the news article becomes that much more useful to the reader.  Again, thank you for visiting the website and check out the dimensional analysis blog posts by clicking here.



Related Blog Index:


Dimensional Analysis Of Statistics And Large Numbers - Index Of Blog Posts

President's Executive Order on Immigration Harms Science Research

Science impacts every aspect of our world.  There is not any part of the world where science plays no part.  When politics interferes with the science world, science is then localized and trivialized to a simple problem that can be solved with a stroke of a pen.  Since science is not localized, but global, executive orders like the recent ban on immigrants entering the United States potentially will harm science.  A recent article in the trade magazine 'Laboratory Equipment' titled "Trump’s Immigration Ban Hurts Research, Science" reminded me of this very crucial fact.  In the paragraphs below, I offer a few thoughts on the matter.

Politics Affects Science

People vote to elect politicians to both houses of congress.  Those elected representatives decide based on their constituents beliefs how to fund science research.  As you will see in a couple of days (next blog post), politicians need to be more educated on the importance of science.  Science is a global operation.  Scientists try to convey the message to Washington on the importance of science and its role in society.  

Last November, I wrote a blog post that had the "20 questions" from the organization "ScienceDebate.org" -- which contained the top 20 questions each candidate should answer regarding the most pressing needs of science.  In a follow up blog post, there were other groups that followed with additional questions regarding science funding.  Of course, this was all before the election.  Since then, a lot has changed in the sense that science funding is completely up in the air.

As I mentioned above in the introduction, a recent article in the trade magazine 'Laboratory Equipment' reminded me of the importance that immigrants play in the role of science research in the United States.  Here is an introduction of the article highlighting the point:

Politics aside, speaking solely in the context of scientific research and innovation, President Trump’s recent Executive Order to ban citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries, including green card holders*, is harmful to America’s research, development and innovation pipeline.

Today’s research is inherently global. Scientists collaborate with foreign researchers for a multitude of reasons, whether it’s because their foreign counterpart is a leader in a specific area of interest, or because the foreign researcher is the perfect complement to the intended research. Either way, a foreign collaborator’s contributions to the research cannot be understated.

International travel is also a major component of modern research. Not only are scientists expected to travel abroad for conferences; they also often have to travel to fulfill their job and research requirements.

For example, hundreds of U.S. scientists flocked to Sierra Leone and other West African countries during the Ebola outbreak of 2014/2015. If the current Executive Order was enacted then, any U.S. researcher that traveled to help stop the deadly virus—but was born in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya or Yemen—would have been denied reentry into the U.S., despite their visa category.

International and national meetings are extremely important.  Networking in person is critical.  Recently, at a science fair, those skills kicked in with other science judges and proved extremely useful.   I wrote about that experience in a recent blog.  Without those interactions, science is left to be communicated through the digital and print landscape.  Journal articles are a great way to disseminate scientific results.  Although, there are a tremendous amount of details (experimental methods, obstacles, lessons, etc.) regarding experiments which are never transmitted in the journal article, but available through 'person-to-person' interaction.  Need I say more?

Communicating science at meetings is crucial to forwarding science research and funding.  Collaborations are made which can last a lifetime.   On the same plane of importance, accepting international graduate students into our graduate programs is critical toward advancing science around the world.  International graduate students either stay after obtaining their degrees or leave to return to their country of origin.  Either way, science is influenced in an unspeakable way for the benefit of man and the world.  I wrote a blog about this highlighting the importance of international graduate students making American scientists stronger. 

The author highlighted this in an excerpt shown below:

“Immigration strengthens the fabric of this nation and our University. Immigrants spark innovation, launch new businesses, and enrich our culture and arts. They are a precious national resource and invaluable to Penn,” she said.

As of this writing, 50 Nobel Laureates have signed a petition and open letter opposing the Executive Order. The Laureates are joined by 443 members of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, Arts; 82 winners of Fields/Dirac/Clark/Turing/Poincare Medals, Breakthrough Prize, Pulitzer Prize and/or MacArthur Fellowship; 14,800 U.S. academic faculty members; and over 18,000 academic supporters.

Enhancing our culture and arts is just a couple of many aspects in which are lives are improved.  Scientists take an executive order very seriously.  Especially, since the executive order can have such a drastic impact on all of academic progress -- not just science.  The group of academic supporters have signed a petition which is shown below from the website "NoToimmigrationBan.com":

President Donald Trump has signed an Executive Order (EO) proposing a 90-day suspension of visas and other immigration benefits to all nationals of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Yemen, Libya and Somalia. The unrealistic conditions required for discontinuing the suspension make it very likely that this EO will turn into a permanent ban. We, the undersigned academics and researchers from a variety of fields of study, backgrounds, and personal convictions, would like to voice our concern and strongly oppose this measure on three grounds:

1.    This Executive Order is discriminatory. The EO unfairly targets a large group of immigrants and non-immigrants on the basis of their countries of origin, all of which are nations with a majority Muslim population. This is a major step towards implementing the stringent racial and religious profiling promised on the campaign trail. The United States is a democratic nation, and ethnic and religious profiling are in stark contrast to the values and principles we hold.

2.    This Executive Order is detrimental to the national interests of the United States. The EO significantly damages American leadership in higher education and research. US research institutes host a significant number of researchers from the nations subjected to the upcoming restrictions. From Iran alone, more than 3000 students have received PhDs from American universities in the past 3 years. The proposed EO limits collaborations with researchers from these nations by restricting entry of these researchers to the US and can potentially lead to departure of many talented individuals who are current and future researchers and entrepreneurs in the US. We strongly believe the immediate and long term consequences of this EO do not serve our national interests.

3.    This Executive Order imposes undue burden on members of our community. The people whose status in the United States would be reconsidered under this EO are our students, friends, colleagues, and members of our communities. The implementation of this EO will necessarily tear families apart by restricting entry for family members who live outside of the US and limiting the ability to travel for those who reside and work in the US. These restrictions would be applied to nearly all individuals from these countries, regardless of their immigration status or any other circumstances. This measure is fatally disruptive to the lives of these immigrants, their families, and the communities of which they form an integral part. It is inhumane, ineffective, and un-American.

These bans, as proposed, have consequences that reach beyond the scope of national security. The unethical and discriminatory treatment of law-abiding, hard-working, and well-integrated immigrants fundamentally contravenes the founding principles of the United States.

We strongly denounce this ban and urge the President to reconsider going forward with this Executive Order.

The above letter is an example of what academics can do when 'academic freedom' is under fire.

Conclusion...

The above letter is a sign that adverse effects come with restricting science.  Please cut and past the letter above and send an e-mail to the following e-mail address with the following instructions:

To add your name, please send an email to [send AT NoToImmigrationBan DOT com] from your academic email.

The subject of your email must be one line: name, award/distinction, title, affiliation

(e.g. John Doe, Nobel Laureate (Physics 1999), Professor, Harvard University)

Thank you for your support.  You are part of making the world a better place by ensuring that science is a global effort.  Science needs to be elevated.  I have written about the fact that science usually ends up buried on the back of the newspaper.  Science should be front and center.  If the public were aware that their tax-payer money is what drives research into creating new treatments for diseases, space flight to the outer limits of our understanding, along with building new technologies at the limits of detection (nanoscale) -- maybe they would feel differently about learning and motivating science research.  At the very least, this executive order has brought out the scientific community to rise up and shout to the world that an injustice is occurring.




Until next time, Have a great day!

STEM Outreach Is Useful For All Participants!

Last Thursday, I had the opportunity to participate in a science fair at a local elementary school as a judge.  I participated last year and had a wonderful time.  Additionally, I wrote about the fact that the projects presented at the science fair should be age (and grade) appropriate.  Here is the blog post regarding the continuing need in science fairs.  With the digital age of technology emerging at a rapid pace, the ability to present a science project is easier than ever and make the presentation look professional.  Still, when you are a judge at a science fair judging 3rd grade posters, the level of detail should not exceed the grade or skill level.  At the same time, having the family involved in a 3rd grader's science project brings everyone into the project -- which elevates STEM overall -- and that is a good outcome for participant.  Before I dive into the blog post, the following question should be entertained:



What is STEM?



STEM is an acronym which stands for: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM).  The combination of the physical and life sciences along with emerging technological fields and the mathematics which solidifies the group as a whole.  The reach of STEM is broad based and cannot be overstated! Currently, there is a need to elevate the amount of students heading into colleges to pursue a career in one of the fields encompassed by STEM initiatives.  Additionally, to protect our environment and the health of our nation (and world), a basic understanding of issues which the basic student or enthusiast can impact with an education or knowledge of the broad areas of STEM is important.  In the paragraphs below, I want to touch on the what I learned from the experience and how useful such outreach is for each participant.

What Is A Science Fair Judge?

A science fair judge is a special person.  No, I am not just saying that because I participated recently as a science fair judge.  The first time that I watched my wife -- Kayla -- who is also a scientist participate as a science judge, I honestly thought the following: "that is so nice of her...but I think that this is a waste of my time -- personally."   Oh, how arrogant I was and ignorant.



In order to participate in certain science fair events, you usually have to take time off of work.  The judging usually occurs during the day time while school is in session.  That in of itself requires a person to think of others and take time out to further a cause that they believe in.  Last year, I was a science fair judge at the same elementary school as this year.  Unfortunately, due to privacy concerns on behalf of the parents and students -- photos were not allowed.  But that won't stop me from conveying the benefits of participating in such an event.



There was a mixture of participants this year which made the event a great time.  The total judging time took around 4 hours.  All together there were 7 judges: a librarian, a chemical engineer (petroleum engineer), a mechanical engineer, 2 biochemists, a computer scientist, 2 chemists, and a science teacher (retired).  Having a diverse crowd made the judging process that much more fun and interesting.  Each of us bring our own opinion and professional background to the judging arena.



Whenever scientists get into the same room, the feeling is probably similar to a group of medical doctors.  Without the humongous ego though.  Scientists are skeptical along with traditionally being results/data driven.  This carries over to the critique of 3rd grader science projects as you can imagine.  Each of us have our own idea as to the level of greatness a given project has attained.



I was surprised to learn so much from other judges at the contest.   Surprised because sometimes such events are usually judged by scientists who are judging posters at the speed of light to get done and go home.  Taking your time and giving each project a level of respect is important.  Treating the posters like you would a 'grant application' or a paper submission to a funding source is important.



Teasing out the level of participation of the student and the family members is difficult to do in some situations.  A science fair project should fit the skill level of the participants.  Although, this year, I was talking to the science teacher (retired) and she had an interesting impact on me on multiple levels.  Why?


First, when the rules were being set before the judging session started, we were told to look at the folders out in front of the posters.  One of the qualifications was the bibliography.  Specifically, each students should cite at least ONE BOOK each.  School administrators were tired of seeing "online" references to websites such as "YouTube" on a given project.  Although, the generation participating in the science fair contest is growing up in a digital age.  Which means this requirement is rather outdated.



These students are growing up in a digital age.  Finding resources now requires engaging in an online search.  Rather than restrict the students to a local library which might or might not have the proper resources, the online world is sufficient for the emerging student of today -- being raised in the digital world.  This year differed greatly in comparison to last year in that we were able to interview the 3rd graders at their poster.  When asked: "where did you come up with this wonderful idea?" The common answer was: "From watching videos on YouTube".  A few years ago, I watched a "YouTube" video on how to change a Honda Civic car window motor and was thankful to have my window working a short while after the tutorial.  Therefore, how can we fault these children for searching online.



During my discussion with the retired teacher, she completely agreed that referencing a source from online is the new trend.  That is not to say books are no valuable.  An online search can reveal a rare book which might be out of print or completely hard to get your hands on a physical copy of.  The process of searching online for a reference and learning is a take home message that both of us agreed upon that outweighed the source of the information (online vs. library).  I enjoy spending time at the library on the campus (university) where I work.  But I can find a large amount of information on my laptop in my office too.  Each has their strong points.



Understanding the rules by which to judge the science posters is a process in of itself -- since we have 9 minds from different backgrounds coming together.  Nonetheless, the process is completely informative.  Ideas which you might not have thought of arise from others which are mind boggling to you.  At least, that has been my experience both years so far.  I will talk more about learned ideas in the next section.  The point is that simply participating with other judges presents the opportunity to talk and form rules and point out strong points (and weak points) about a given project -- which teach each of us about our respective professional work and opinions.



Not to diverge too much.  The chemical engineer was a retired petroleum engineer who lives in Porter Ranch in the San Fernando Valley.  The same Porter Ranch which was all over the news due to the exorbitant methane gas leak out of the Aliso Canyon Gas facility last year.  I was asking him about his position from being a resident which was completely fascinating.  He did not smell the gas too much.  Although his wife complained about the smell constantly.  He did mention that the industry was very much aware of the regulations and was rather 'complacent' instead of being 'proactive' in making changes which would have increased the safety of the site.



I mentioned that I wrote a blog post last year regarding the massive size of the well.  Further, a follow up blog discussed the misleading amount that was stored under ground.  He said that what surprised him most about the leak was that each gas well was supposed to have a "shutoff control valve" at the surface and at the bottom of the well in the event of a massive leak.  Had the leaking well had the "shutoff control valve" at the base (bottom of the pipe exiting the well), the leak could have been stopped instantly.  What a disaster?  What a complacent mistake in judgement?  But the 'bottom line' (profits) of the corporation is more important than safety.



This was one of a number of good conversations that might not normally be possible had we not decided to come and participate in this shared interest.  Elevating science in elementary school is extremely important.

3rd Grade Science Projects?

When I first showed up to judge, I was told that we would be judging 3rd grade science fair projects.  At first, I thought, when I was in 3rd grade, I was not interested in science and I loved just playing around on the playground.  Science was not my priority.  I was pleasantly surprised to see that the students of today differ greatly from myself and have a joy of science -- even at this young age.  Additionally, each has a seriousness about their projects which matched their enthusiasm.



Last year, the winner of the science fair was a young man who studied the composition of soil.  He took a large amount of time to write up his results and draw out his poster.  I wrote a blog regarding the event.  In that blog post, I discussed that science fair projects need to fit the age of the child engaging in the project.  Age-appropriate projects are important for the student to learn how to proceed with the project from the start to finish.  That means coming up with the idea to the execution of the project.  Obviously, the parent will have to help to a large extent with the execution of the project.  But the idea should still come from the student.



Although, I will touch on in a moment an argument raised by a retired elementary science teacher which caused me to pause and think twice about the strict requirement of age-appropriate projects.



What does a science project that is not age appropriate look like?



This year, an example of a science fair project from the fair that I participated at was a study of the 'drag' or 'turbulent' air coming off of a race car (indy 500 car).  Great idea.  But I am not sure that a student in the 3rd grade would have come up with that on her/his own.  Maybe by watching a race or two, a question would arise as to the reason for the giant fin on the rear of the car by the child.  I am skeptical that the student decided to study 'turbulent' behavior with a fan and a wing.  Furthermore, the graphics were great in the illustrations and I would be challenged to duplicate them myself.  This is an example of a project that is not age appropriate.



Another example would be of a project which makes use of an 'oscilloscope' to measure frequency and bandwidth of an incoming electrical signal.  A 3rd grade science project?  Really?  And in the students notebook, the analysis of the incoming signal was expressed by using calculus and functions typically used in signal analysis.  I was very skeptical of this project along with the previous project.



In both cases, the parents professional life might have heavily influenced the choice of a project to pursue.  Great ideas for a college student or a graduating senior in high school.  But out of the league for a 3rd grader.



How do you tease out the amount of participation of the 3rd grade student in his/her project?



Last year, the students were unaccessible to answer questions regarding their projects.  This raised the level of skepticism among the more advanced science projects (not age-appropriate).  The director of the program decided this year to have the students come in and be interviewed by the judges.  This provided the student with the opportunity to share their part of the project with the judges.



Having the students participate and explain their work gave them a sense of accomplishment.  I am not sure that I would have been able to do what these students did at the same age many years ago.  As I mentioned, I was more interested in playing.  The interviewing sessions turned out to be of great importance for the judges.  Additionally, giving the students a 'voice' is the first step toward producing a great science communicator for the future.



What is an example of an age-appropriate science project?



A good example of an age-appropriate science project this year was the study of bacteria (or germs).  I interviewed a student who chose to look at the effect of washing your hands versus the amount of germs present.  What?  The student chose to vary the amount of time spent on washing his hands versus the amount of residual germs that were present.



The student did a total of 3 experiments, one each day.  He would wash his hands for three different time intervals: 10 seconds, 20 seconds, and 60 seconds.  After each washing, he would swab (take a sample) from his hand and put the swab into a petri dish (a small cylindrical plastic dish).  Instead of growing the bacteria at a faster speed by using an incubator, he used the natural sunlight as a heat source.  An incubator is a container that provides a controlled environment to grow cells (source: Wikipedia):

In biology, an incubator is a device used to grow and maintain microbiological cultures or cell cultures. The incubator maintains optimal temperature, humidity and other conditions such as the carbon dioxide (CO2) and oxygen content of the atmosphere inside. Incubators are essential for a lot of experimental work in cell biology, microbiology and molecular biology and are used to culture both bacterial as well as eukaryotic cells.

After the bacteria had grown using the natural sunlight, he came up with a counting method to count the colonies that had grown in each dish.  With the numbers of colonies recorded, he plotted them on an excel sheet.  Over the course of the three days, the data was inconsistent.  Two days were exactly the same. Whereas the third day, there was a sudden spike (increase) in germs.



I was able to ask the question regarding the inconsistency of the data over the three day period.  He offered that the day in question could have been a day where more students were sick.  Now, this is a good answer from a 3rd grader.  The project was simple.



Further, the project was innovative since the 'microbiome' is a hot topic in the news along with 'antibiotic resistance.'  The student chose soap that was not 'antibacterial' soap -- to ensure the growth of germs.  Had he used 'antibacterial' soap, the measure of the colonies would have been virtually impossible -- since 'antibacterial' soap completely (or nearly) eliminates germs.   I thought that the student was well versed and chose an attainable science project which required little supplies but answered a very important questions.



I asked the student about the relevancy of his project to the environment of a hospital.  He mentioned that his project supported the reason why doctors have to 'scrub in' before surgery for a long period of time.  Doctors spend a very long time washing their hands before they enter the operating room to ensure that they have eliminated any source of bacterial contamination from their hands and arms.



What are the benefits of any science project 'age-appropriate' or 'not age-appropriate'?



I mentioned above that I learned a lesson from a retired elementary science teacher regarding participation in science projects.  Previously, I was strict regarding the level of difficulty regarding the science project.  If the project is too difficult, then the student does not participate and loses interest.  Basically, the parent is competing in the science fair project not the child.


Although, the teacher I mentioned, taught me that regardless of the science project, if the entire family is participating in a science fair project then more people benefit from engaging in STEM activities.  I had never thought of the process in that light before.  Getting the family involved in the project, means getting more people interested in STEM projects.



The student will have more opportunities to compete in science fair projects as he/she progresses through their education.  But the parents and family might not help out as the student gets older.  Therefore, engaging the entire family is engaging a wider audience to the benefits of participating in science fair projects.  Everyone learns about science.

Conclusion...

I have shown that there are numerous benefits to being a science fair judge.  Everyone who participates in the process eventually comes out more educated from the experience.  Having the students participate with interviews greatly enhances their ability to communicate science.  Additionally, experiencing the enthusiasm of the student inspires the judges (at least me) to continue to engage in outreach.  The experience overall was very positive and I plan to continue to help out at as many as I am able to throughout the year.



The diversity of projects inspires scientist like myself who get caught up in projects that are advanced compared to the elementary level.  Science is about curiosity.  Science is about asking questions and seeking answers.  Science is a continuous journey of asking and seeking answers.  Science is about challenging yourself and your understanding of the world around you.  I encourage each of you to participate in a science fair -- either as a judge or a family member with a project.  I am inspired by these young children to do a better job at communicating science.  If they can do it at their age, then I can improve more at my age.



Until next time, Have a great day!!!!