qin dynasty

Today we watched the San Jose District elementary investigatory project contest. It was disappointing because I have seen 3-4 studies which were “ripped off” from studies already done before by highschool students in Antique National School.

1. Electrolyte for Wet Cell Battery from Averhoa bilimbi or Kamias Fruit Extract. This was our study in 2002. I clearly remember this because I was the group leader who conducted this study. The only difference was they did not proceed on to stuffing the extract inside the battery.

2. Cement-Bonded Board with Oryza Sativa Straw or Husks (I’m not sure which). This was a study done on 2001, I think, which made it to the Intel National Competition.

3. Chitin from crab shell as pH something something (neutralize) of nata de coco effluent. This was a study by another group in our batch in 2002.

4. Water Hyacinth as water filter. My sister had a research just last year titled bioremediation of water hyacinth for removal of cadmium in water. Something like that.  Their study was a rip off also of another study already conducted in Thailand. I was not able to read the content of the investigatory project but I strongly feel that this one may have a different title but in essence it is a rip off of a ripped off study. We still have the aquariums they used in their study at home.

It is such a shame that this is happening to elementary students. For one, I experienced it in high school that our study was condcuted already years before. I have proof because I have talked to the person who was in the group who conducted the study. Same title, same procedure. He happened to be a brother of a batchmate. Really such a shame that it is happening all over again. And i bet this will happen over and over again.

Plus I did not like the fact that they allowed a study which used crushed coral as a material. Didn’t they know that it is unlawful for anybody to take home let alone crush these corals?! Alas! The honorable board of judges did not even take note of this. They did not even notice. Talk about ignorance. They keep on talking about environment-friendly but they don’t even know the law.

There was this judge who pointed out that why did the students did not conduct or present cost estimate or cost analysis. Haller! That sort of thing was beyond the objective and scope of most of the studies.

Plus I hate the fact that they are insisting that the elementary students should have conducted statistical analysis such as ANOVA or Analysis of Variance. The students don’t even know how to interpret them. These things are not being taught in the school. Plus they don’t even include research as a subject in elementary. What they want the students to do is to pay statisticians to do it. And I think what happened was that it was the teachers and or the parents who did the study. The children just posed in the picture for the sake of documentation. It was quite evident during the question and answer portion. The student don’t know what is really going on in their investigatory project.

Plus it was really sad that in school there are those who do not practice ethics or let alone have a delicadeza. Being acknowledged in one study as an “adviser” or a person who have contributed a lot to the study, then this person should have not participated as a judge. Sad to say even the commitee on the selection of judges don’t mind. I don’t know if they did not really know that this person was involved in the development and the writing of some of the studies, or they just turned blind.

Plus there was this category in which the judges declared no winner as the two entries were not qualified for the category. Hell! I think the judges have no right to say that they are not qualified. The District Screening Committee should be the judge of that and not the invited judges. Plus they could have informed the children earlier that “I am sorry you are not qualified for this contest and therefore you should not present and we would no longer ask you question.” And I think that the disqualification must be based on the merit of the study alone and not including the presentation done later.

And I hate the research attitude in schools here in Antique. It is very narrow minded. There were instances in which the judges insist their own opinion on the study such as you should have used this instead of this because this is typically use. Then what would happen if we only focus on the typical, the already tested. Where is innovation in that? In this kind of attitude we are not fostering learning, innovation, development of knowledge, creation of knowledge. And we are molding mediocre minds that would just parrot things and does not practice critical thinking.

Sad, sad, sad….