Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Education Science

LABRats: The Mad Scientist's Club Meets Scouting 129

Posted by michael from the merit-badge-in-homemade-explosives dept.
Some random reader sent in this note: "The Society for Amateur Scientists (SAS), an organization that exists to help those with a love of science make new discoveries, has launched a youth program called LABRats to help young people do real science. There's a white paper available describing the program, which is something of a cross between the Mad Scientist's Club and the Boy/Girl Scouts. The idea is to train a small army of young scientists and engineers, 12-18 years old, to do experiments and solve problems in their communities by teaming them up with adult scientist/engineer mentors. Those who advance through the ranks of the program would have to complete a series of experiments, projects, and other tasks that demonstrate proficiency in the basics of science and engineering. The creators -- including Shawn Carlson, a MacArthur Fellow -- aim to make the highest rank comparable in difficulty to Eagle Scout. One of the SAS local chapters in Connecticut built an astronomical observatory, which was used by high school student Lisa Glukhovsky to measure the distance to near-earth asteroids. She was one of three Grand Prize winners in the Intel International Science and Engineering Fair for 2003. It sounds like a great idea to me. Sure, I'm a little worried that a few misguided youth might take the program's motto -- "Do the experiment!" -- a bit too literally when working on their Nuclear Engineering merit badge. But then again, maybe someday a LABRat will spot an asteroid with our name on it -- and tell NASA."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

LABRats: The Mad Scientist's Club Meets Scouting More

LABRats: The Mad Scientist's Club Meets Scouting

Comments Filter:

  • yow (Score:1, Funny)

    by OwlofCreamCheese ( 645015 )
    yikes, thats a long headline! I try and read it but all my brain hears is "ramble ramble ramble ramble"

  • Cool (Score:2)

    by FCKGW ( 664530 )
    This sounds like a lot more fun than the usual basic science class experiments with predetermined outcomes.
    • I like my science research course better. Three years of work, I get to pick the subject, and I get a paper published in professional journals by the end of high school.

  • Hmmm (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The idea is to train a small army of young scientists and engineers, 12-18 years old, to do experiments and solve problems

    We can call them "H-C Freelancers".
  • "But then again, maybe someday a LABRat will spot an asteroid with our name on it -- and tell NASA."
    NASA didn't trust their own engineers' warnings. Why would they listen to a kid they've never met before?
    • Screw NASA! Call the SGC!

      Of course, the smegging asteroid is probably about half naquadah...
    • Good point. Therefore I propose the young scientists be trained to tell Bush, Ashcroft or Rumsfeld that they're Al Qaeda operatives working on a space missle. That ought to get the paranoid delusionals working on the problem quickly enough.

      (political satire gratis)

  • Interesting, no mixed gender (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) * on Saturday October 18, 2003 @04:52PM (#7250197)
    I really like the outline but am not sure how I feel about "no mixed gender groups". I can see the point about social issues interfering with the kids learning, but I just have to think that a girls group would end up a bit more neglected or simply non-existant.

    I would love to volunteer time for such an organization to help local kids, but am not sure I could get behind that limitation. It's still very conceptual though, who knows if they will get anywhere.

    • Agreed (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Here's an idea, let's screw up these kids intellectually from an early age by imprinting them to think science/ technology/ learning and "geeky" things are things that boys and girls do separately.

      If you ask me this is going to exacerbate the problem that once the college age is reached, girls tend to feel uncomfortable in the male-dominated science / CS / engineering programs because they feel like poorly-integrated outsiders.

      • Yes!! (Score:2, Insightful)

        by SuperKendall ( 25149 )
        I agree, you can't separate women and men forever. Mixed groups at an early age are a good way to learn that everyone can work together, and in a controlled environment the typical societal roles can be clamped down. Especially in a scientific setting, which tends to be more gender neutral anyway. Smart is smart no matter the packaging.
      • Worse,

        Let's get them started on the path of earning a degree in science, mathematics, or engineering. Then, they can be unemployed in the US when they are of working age. Too bad, they aren't embarking on a "service-oriented" career, such as retail store clerk. At least that has not moved off-shore, yet.
        • At least when we go out for a burger, if the total is $4.55 and we give them a fivespot and a nickel, they won't get all confused...

          Seriously though, I think that view is too pessimistic and ignoring long term trends. An even surer way to send work overseas is to not have any locals that can do it!
    • Separating the genders has shown benefits in middle school classrooms. It also removes many barriers.

      As for females being slighted, I doubt it. Seems to me our society isn't as dense as it used to be.

      Come, join the real world.
      • Let's say you live in a small town and are a girl. Now there is a LABRats chapter with eight boys. Well, you have no LABRats. That's not being slighted, it's being marginalized for very little reason.

        I also think that the benefit is more marginal in a scientific setting, where gender plays very little role compared to the populace at large. In any random group of kids gender may be a distracting issue, but kids interested in science tend to be able to have better focus.

        I am not some kind of feminist c
        • I think you've hit upon the crucial problem - there may not be enough people interested to have two local chapters running separately. And in this situation, it's most likely the girls that will lose out.

          However, I also see why they would prefer to have it that way - there is a lot of research showing that when girls and boys are separated in classroom situations it positively influences both groups. The girls are the big winners generally, with increased class participation and fewer inhibitions about dem
          • Touching on the increased class participation and confidence in an all-female classroom...

            Wouldn't it be better if we could get the same results in a co-ed environment from the same girls? Wouldn't this offer a good opportunity for that, as well?

            In my experience as a student, I did find it more common for girls and women to be less aggressive about demonstrating knowledge... but more worrying, also less confident about the knowledge they did have. On the other hand, males tended to be not only more aggres
      • Shivetya sez: "Separating the genders has shown benefits in middle school classrooms. It also removes many barriers." Studies have also shown that the preference/deference problems are reinforced and perpetuated by the teachers. Rather than igonring the "problem" by creating a situation which allows it to continue (although hidden by lack of interaction), it should be faced head on by people prepared not to allow that sort of thing to happen. When the focus becomes the job at hand, the kids become socializ

      • Re:Grow up. (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Confessed Geek ( 514779 )
        Having been a boyscout from gradeschool to 18 and then having lived in both coed and single sex floors in dorms, I think segregating the sexes is a bad idea. Its bad for the females as another poster stated in that because if you have 6 boys and 2 girls interested, the boys chapter will get more resources and be more stable, while the 2 young ladies will have less resources and may not have enough numbers to maintain stability.

        On the other side, having women around helps moderate / civilize young men. Al
    • Several years ago I did some science enrichment work with a Boys and Girls' club in South Central LA. It was a mixed-gender group of 11-13 year-olds from the surrounding neighborhood (a scary 'hood, too: bars in every window, pit bulls in every yard, and burned-out vehicles and graffiti everywhere). The counselors held the children to very high standards of conduct, so we never encountered gender issues in the lab.

      BTW, in several hundred presentations to groups ranging from pre-school through grad school
    • Yeah couldn't they find an organization that allowed all kids in? The Boy Scouts of America isn't exactly a paragon of inclusion.
    • Ok, after some thought, I have the best solution - offer the program, but only for girls!! No worry about mixed gender, because there is one gender. I agree that somehow women in general tend to migrate away from engineering and by getting as many girls interested as early as possible you just might end up evening out the situation by college. In a way, boys already have such a group - the Boy Scouts - and will be fine even if ignored by top scientists. I don't think the Girl Scouts fills the same roll f
    • I've got to agree, speaking as a (former) computer engineer who happens to be female, the no-mixed gender idea is both antiquated and very subject to eventual abuse if (ha!) the young girl's groups receive less focus.

      Come on guys...welcome to the 21st century!

  • Nuclear Engineering (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Some scout actually did build a breader reactor after he got interested in nuclear engineering, he now works on the USS Enterprise.

  • Great Idea (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Tacoguy ( 676855 )
    I got started in electronics at age 12 thru Ham Radio. Mentors kept me on track and I decided electronics was for me. I went through University and got a degree as an electronic engineer and never lost the spirit of discovery. This sure beats most of the half-baked ideas that the educrats are having on the burner now.

    Best

    TG

  • One question (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Can gay atheists apply?
  • I just spent 50 bucks on "Mad Scientists Club" books so I can relive my childhood. All because of a little throwaway link in a story I didn't bother reading.

    Argh!

    • I also recently bought the Mad Scientist's Club books (available online from Purple House Press [purplehousepress.com]). I can definitely state that The Mad Scientist's Club got me interested in electronics when I was a kid.

      This program sounds like a great idea.

  • Is it only in Los Angeles? (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Then why are the calling it "LA Brats"?

    Oh...

    Never mind!

  • saw a link to "Airzooka" on /. and decided to investigate more. Found this [amasci.com] and from a box of chips and broken condom (no trolling, really!) I built a gun that shoots vortexes of air :)
  • "a bit too literally when working on their Nuclear Engineering merit badge."

    You mean like this guy? =)
    http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m1111/n1782_v 297/ 21281407/print.jhtml

  • Acronym... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tokerat ( 150341 ) on Saturday October 18, 2003 @05:43PM (#7250407) Journal

    I started the "Society for Amature Radio Scientists", but for some reason, no one wanted to join. :-(
  • If done well, this program could help gather useful data on a range of pressing sociological, climatological, and environmental projects. I only hope they do more than those tired pre-canned experiments that appear in every "science experiments for kids" book. With enough people collecting real data on real experiments, we could learn a lot more than can be accomplished by a single professor or a grad student.

    This could be an excellent use of all those idle brain wave cycles. Best wishes for LABRats a
  • What's that?
  • Man, I wish there had been something like this when I was a kid. I gotta sign up as a mentor for his thing. Anybody know how, off hand?
    • The program doesn't exist yet. But I'd certainly sign up to mentor a local chapter.

      I already do this stuff for my kid - how much harder could it be to do it for an entire pack...oh - wait...

  • Forrest Mims Engineer's Notebook (Score:4, Informative)

    by Pooua ( 265915 ) on Saturday October 18, 2003 @06:32PM (#7250591) Homepage
    I noticed that the SAS Store sells "Forrest Mims Engineer's Notebook." I would like to highlight one little comment in the advertising blurb:

    "His editorial exploits have included an assignment from the National Enquirer to evaluate the feasibility of eavesdropping on Howard Hughes by laser (it was possible, but Forrest declined to take part) and getting dropped by Scientific American as their 'The Amateur Scientist' columnist because he admitted to the magazine's editors that he was a born-again Christian."

    The Forrest Mims Engineer's Notebook [sas.org]

    I just want to point out that Mr. Mims wasn't dropped from "Scientific American" exactly because he is a born-again Christian. He was dropped because he is a Creationist. "Scientific American" is just one of the many bigoted publications that refuses to deal reasonably with the subject of Creationism. As a consequence of their firing Mr. Mims, I have refused to buy "Scientific American" for the last several years.

    Another blurb on Forrest Mims from another site: ISCID: Forrest M. Mims III [iscid.org]

    • Way back in college for some English class or another, we read some essay by a Scientist-Nun (Or Nun-Scientist, if you prefer).

      The point of her article was that God started ("created", so to speak) the process of life and evolution.

      Seems reasonable to me.

      Its the best of both worlds...
      -A nun that accepts the scientific facts as we now understand them
      -A scientist that accepts the fact that there are some things that we can't measure and/or reproduce in the lab

      (I wish I could remember her name. Or, that I
      • If this Forrest Mims guy is a Creationist/Scientist in the spirit of the Nun-Scientist, then he can call BS at "Scientific American" and I'll agree. If however, he is a Creationist/Scientist that rejects accepted science out of hand, then I would have to agree with the magazine.

        Accepted by whom? Evolutionists? Or, Creationists?

        If Mr. Mims' work had been unacceptable, "Scientific American" could point to that, but they can't. They did not fire him because his articles were defective. They fired him bec

        • That's because it's not science.

          Science is a constant succession of "why?" and "how?". Each answer prompts more questions; as those questions are answered, yet more come forth.

          Some people desperately wish to posit a Deity either creating man or at least starting the process of evolution. One answer happens to be a lot more removed from recent history, but they're essentially the same thing. As soon as the answer to a "why?" becomes "because that's what God did", then all further questioning stops.

          • Evolution, like any theory, is indeed open to question - this is essential to science. Currently, however, no other theory even approaches the utility of evolution.

            What Creationists forget is that there are three parts to a good theory. First, a good theory must fit the data - Creationism is perfect at this, while evolution is only pretty good. This gives Creationists false hope. Second, a good theory must be testable - a major weakness of Creationism. Third, a good theory must explain the data and be

            • There's such an overwhelming body of evidence in favor of evolution that outright disproving it is essentially impossible. There will probably be some modifications made to details of the theory, but it's essentially impossible that it would ever be overturned.

              I am quite certain that, a hundred years from now, evolution will remain a bedrock of science. Overturning it would require a discovery of impossible magnitude.

              Anyone who argues that the Earth was created 8,000 years ago (or whatever their pet num
        • editors simply refuse to run them, regardless of merit.

          Perhaps those articles have religious merit, but they get rejected from science journals by science editors because they have no scientific merit.

          Science describes the natural world. As such it simply cannot tell us about the Supernatural. Valid science is incapable of saying anything about God or religion.

          There are only two viable routes for Creationism:

          Option one: simply state that God created the universe and accept that the rest of science (inc
        • There aren't any openly Creationistic articles in those journals purely because the editors simply refuse to run them, regardless of merit. Uh, no. It's because none of the articles submitted have any merit. How 'bout you show us a single instance of a pro-Creationist article published anywhere that meets the technical standards of the scientific community?
    • As a consequence of their firing Mr. Mims, I have refused to buy "Scientific American" for the last several years.

      In that case, count yourself as lucky: you've missed the issue in which they attack creationism in a major article. (I, OTOH, count myself as lucky that I subscribe; I liked that article.)

    • Probably an understandable move for SciAm, assuming Mims is like most born-again Christians. There is *no* scientific theory of "creationism" that a) accounts for a literal interpretation of Genesis, or b) necessitates a creator. Get over it, people. There are a substantial number of scientifically-inclined Christians that deal with it just fine.

      Forest Mims *is* a great writer for electronics stuff, so it's a shame SciAm couldn't give him a column that wouldn't deal with biology -- cool electronic proje
      • Forest Mims *is* a great writer for electronics stuff, so it's a shame SciAm couldn't give him a column that wouldn't deal with biology -- cool electronic project of the month, or somesuch. His Engineer's Notebooks are great, understandable references, and it's good to see that they're being used to teach kids basic electrical principles. Goodness knows we need more technically-savvy people, and it's best to hook them young. :)

        That's what I'm getting at, champ... Mr. Mims did not write about Creationism

    • [Mims] was dropped because he is a Creationist. "Scientific American" is just one of the many bigoted publications that refuses to deal reasonably with the subject of Creationism.

      I'm a life-long Southern Baptist, and I wish to observe that you help nobody when you try to paint this as flat-out unconscionable bigotry.

      Suppose Mr Mims was to publish a creationist book, or speak at a creationist conference. He could, in such a situation, cite his association with SciAm to bolster the credibility of his arg

      • I'm on a very liberal church board, and we're grappling now with whether to let a startup, earnest yet fundamentalist-seeming church find a worship home in our Parish Hall for a nominal rental fee every week. I'm personally an "escaped" fundamentalist with a strong background in science, thanks to people like Brinley, Hofstadter, and Feynman.

        Now in my early middle age I'm reinvestigating Christianity for the salvageable aspects of it. Which started explicitly as a scientific experiment, in the interest of
      • I'm a life-long Southern Baptist

        That is statistically interesting, but tells me nothing more than that. My last senior chief in the U.S. Navy was a tobacco-smoking, beer-bellied, foul-mouthed Southern Baptist. I have visited several Southern Baptist churches in which the preacher would condemn cigarette smoking, but, after the service, the members would stand around in the parking lot, smoking cigarettes. Just about anything passes for a Southern Baptist.

        and I wish to observe that you help nobody when

        • Suppose Sci Am rejected Mr. Mims because Mr. Mims were a Moslem? Or, a Buddhist? Or, a Communist? Or, a Nazi?

          If a Muslim or Buddhist was going around making suspect scientific claims which might reflect badly on SciAm, then they would be within reason to break that association.

          As a scientific publication, they broke an association over what-they-believe is bad science. That's a reasonable thing to do.

          If they had fired him merely for being a Christian, that would be unreasonable. But that is not what

          • Let's ask it another way: suppose they had fired a flat-earth believer? Would you say that was bigotry? If not, who gives you the right to say for other people which scientific claims are ridiculous and which should be tolerated, that flat-earthers can be fired but creationists can't?

            If you would claim that firing a flat-earther is bigotry, then is there any scientific claim that you believe would justify breaking their association? Or do the editors of a scientific publication have no choice whatever bu

  • ...their virginity. This does sound interesting as I am an Eagle scout and I am college now majoring in chemistry. I wish this was made a few years back, I would've joined it.
  • The manifesto for LABRats says they'll wear a distinctive item of clothing...not a military style uniform.

    Now - I just *know* we slashdotters can come up with good suggestions;

    * Pocket protectors - emblazoned with the LABRat's logo done in simulated whiteboard marker ink.

    * White lab coats. ...just the kind of thing a trendy teenager will want to be seen in!
    • Possibilities...

      1) A little pin of a Slide Rule.
      2) Pants that are 3 inches above the ankle
      3) Strategically placed tape on the glasses (bandaids may be substituted with permission)
      4) A sign on their back that says "Kick Me"

      (BTW.. I'm just kidding. If this had existed when I was a kid, I would have signed up in a second. Of course, it didn't. So, instead, I took drugs, followed the Grateful Dead, and somehow still ended up in the computer industry.)

      (PS.. Mom & Dad... I was kidding about the d
  • Kinda depressing if humanity's sum total of asteroid-watching is three boy scouts and a dog with rabies...
  • Getting an Eagle Scout rank in Boy Scouts isn't really that hard. A lot of the adult leaders make it so easy to advance and a lot of summer camps I've been to fudge the requirements for required badges.
  • Great. So even more kids can grow up to discover that, despite 25+ years of school, 80-hour work weeks, and endless financial hardship, they can't actually get a job because universities mostly only want to hire adjunct professors.

    And people wonder why we have trouble attracting students to a career in science.
  • Can I request in advance that slashdot repeat this post in a few years? Thanks. My kid won't be old enough for another 5 years. Oh, I know they'll repost it several times between now & then, but I just wanted to be sure :)
  • It's neat that their site uses ALIGN=JUSTIFY. Few people know that even exists. It would be even neater if they justified all the paragraphs that need it, instead of only half of them, but hey, what do you want?
  • their using kids as lab rats :-D
  • Now if people were really serious about making this work, they would link the mentoring process to the scientist working for the department of defense. DOD would be able to mine the unfettered imagination of young people and shape/mold the most promising talents along productive lines of scientific inquiry. Sort of like taking a DNA sample from the top scorers at the video arcade.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Being against torture ought to be sort of a multipartisan thing." -- Karl Lehenbauer, as amended by Jeff Daiell, a Libertarian

Close