3 ms·
Real science depends on room to fail, but starting in middle school science fairs, it's clear that negative results and "failed" experiments aren't what the tea
by learc83 13y ago
Real science depends on room to fail, but starting in middle school science fairs, it's clear that negative results and "failed" experiments aren't what the teachers/judges are looking for.
I made it through to the state science fair in 8th grade. It was based around magnetism, and after months of work, it turned out my tests just weren't sensitive enough to measure any difference in any of the electromagnets I built.
When I mentioned this to my teachers, they encouraged me to fix the results with a wink and a nod. Sure I could have turned in a "failed" project and maybe got a B, but I was an A student and there was no room for failure.
I'd love to see some data on how many high level science fair projects are faked each year.
- XorNot 13y agoExcept this is completely mis-stating it. People love negative results. But proving something doesn't work requires proving you didn't stuff up the implementation. That is amazingly hard, and about 10x more work then showing a positive result. For example what you're talking about with magnetism isn't a negative - you can prove that an effect is bounded by the lower limit of accuracy of your instruments. Physicists do this all the time, because it's the correct way to phrase the result. I'll not to speak to the quality of your teachers though.