NRP's done!
NRP's finally over for me today, after my presentation at the NRP symposium today. It's over for many others like me too, but some people are going to bring their projects a step further to participate in things like SSEF, A*TS or even ISEF (if they ever manage to make it). I'm in a dilemma whether to do likewise.
It is practical to do so because by just going that extra little step a lot more can be gained for my portfolio. Instead of merely "NRP" I would have a much more prestigious science conference added to my list of achievement and isn't that something worth the small amount of effort I have to put in (relative to that I've put in for NRP itself, which spanned the entire year)?
But what's the point in doing so? Just to get the name of the conference onto the piece of paper that's surposed to show my worthiness? I don't think by participating in SSEF (or even winning something) by showing yet another panel of judges some posters and powerpoint designed to conceal the lack of content in my actual project could actually raise my academic competency or knowledge any higher than where it is now. If I could ever get a prize for SSEF, like I've already gotten for NRP using merely a ppt, I would be just about as disappointed in SSEF as I am currently in NRP.
I think the problem with research program (or maybe only NRP for that fact) is that it's emphasis still lies heavily on its ends - students would produce reports and do presentation on "their projects" (which are usually neither initiated nor carried out on their own) to get the certificate and recognition for having done "an excellent research project". Also, the fact that many projects available for the program are recycled projects which already have sets of predictable data further decreases the value in the projects, as both mentors and student partcipants would tend to stick to an established protocol in experimentation, look out for the predictable results (and disregard results that disagree with the pre-established ones by finding reasons like "experimental error" or lack of precision in handling variables in such "informal" research) and only use ones that are similar to the predicted results to reach yet again the long established conclusion. This would cause: first, the lack of discipline in exercising the rigorous scientific procedures in investigations (or am I wrong to believe that such procedures are always strictly adhered to in actual science research?), since as long as the experimental outcomes somewhat resembles the "correct", pre-established ones, the experimentation is considered succesful; second, the over-reliance of students on their mentors to tell them what to do (and of course what to expect) or in other words, little independent thinking, let alone innovation. While it is true that we may not even have the basic knowledge on which independent thinking and innovations can be built upon, it is disappointing that the programs do not actively encourage students to inject their own ideas into the projects.
My project, for example, was one that was planned and lead by my mentor throughout. Although my experience in NRP was generally good as my mentor was a Ph.D student currently doing his own research in the field of our project who willingly took my group through all the basic theories so that we could gain a basic understanding of the context before embarking on anything (I was quite surprised actually that he had taken time off his own work to guide us through ours without even showing signs of reluctance or impatience in entertaining us), I am still a little disappointed at how the project turned out.
It doesn’t seem right that I could slack around for one year without using my brain much yet get an award at the end of it.
And I realise that the fault does not lie entirely with the program, but also with the student participants who enroll in this program so that they could have a nicer looking portfolio, or the current system which compels students to do this. Seeing people walking away quite happily with certificates at the end of the symposium, I was brought to wonder if they were feeling accomplished for their efforts and achievements in the project, or they’re just satisfied to get another prestigious program listed in their portfolio. It would be quite saddening if it’s the latter.