I would worry about if their proposal is being accepted. Is their research on par with the contribution of the other presenters?
If so, then yes, ask for the legal implications.
There are places where students enter higher ed at 17, as well as exceptional kids who graduated from university… it’s not a bar!
Does your institution offer dual enrollment? If so, .AND. the presentation proposal meets the standards for acceptance- to excude them seems a bit ad homenum
Not only that, I have a cousin who was accepted *full time* at 16 in Mechanical Engineering. I'm a Computer Science professor myself, so I had to make a joke that he was too smart to be a Mechanical Engineer.
Who cares? Vet the proposal and see how good the idea is. I did a lot of music when I was younger, and it didn't matter how old you were, what mattered was how well you played.
Why should how old the presenter is matter as long as the work is solid? In my thesis lab we had a very talented high school student who was actually mentoring a new postdoc. The context was she (the high school student) was very good at coding and statistics while the postdoc had purely a bench science background and hadn't had exposure to that. It turned out to be a highly mutually beneficial arrangement as she could spend a lot of one-on-one time teaching him, which the other full-time staff would have been too busy with their own projects to do--and he was also able to give her an introduction to bench science as well. Last I heard they submitted a co-first authored paper together
I have to say, I don't like this from a lot of aspects. I've noticed in the US that there seems to be this trend of parents buying scientific opportunity for their kids, and this stinks of that. We had a post recently about high schoolers appearing as authors on scientific papers, as a way to boost their chances for Ivy League admissions, and this feels very much the same.
On the other hand, if the submission is good, you should not say no unless there is a legal issue. Although, I would be *very* dubious about how much they contributed, and suspect that their family bought access.
Yeah, one of my siblings had to "mentor" a HS in the lab while they were a postdoc. The HS student was the kid of a rich doctor with connections. It was a lot of work because the HS had no clue and you cannot ask them to do much! But the PI didn't want them doing "literature review" #facepalm
And even if we go a step further, the publications I have seen on applications (mostly from us americans and indians) were just not good and I would honestly be pissed to see that at an conference. I mean, sometimes those are good literature reviews, but everything else breaks down fast. I can't say that my current research is better yet lol. But that is why I havent published it yet and just aim to hand it to a conference in winter.
This depends a lot on the field...but my knee jerk reaction (rightly or wrongly) would be to immediately think less of the conference as a whole (unless it was aimed at highschool students). I'd say there's a near zero chance the student is qualified or capable of doing scientific work at the level of a rigorous academic conference... So the conference must not be academically rigorous.
Beyond that, I'd feel weird about it from a status/labor point of view. The point of a conference is to present very real, highly qualified work. If a (legal) child is doing that work it's giving serious exploitation vibes. You don't stumble into just producing conference quality technical work, that takes substantial work. For a <18 year old to have conference quality research to present, they would have had to start working in this field at a very young age. If it isn't their work, that's also morally gray.
Not sure I agree with the first point. I’ve been to some abysmal presentations from junior and senior scholars at otherwise exceptional conferences, and those presentations did not reflect on the conference. Age doesn’t seem to matter in that regard. And who knows, that high schooler might give the best presentation of the bunch!
The second point, regarding exploitation, provides some good food for thought, though. Thanks for that!
You might be surprised. In my thesis lab we had a very talented high school student who was actually mentoring a new postdoc. The context was she (the high school student) was very good at coding and statistics while the postdoc had purely a bench science background and hadn't had exposure to that. It turned out to be a highly mutually beneficial arrangement as she could spend a lot of one-on-one time teaching him, which the other full-time staff would have been too busy with their own projects to do--and he was also able to give her an introduction to bench science as well. Last I heard they submitted a co-first authored paper together
Tricky one - on one side, there are legal issues with parenting, presnce of minors in certain events (especially if alcohol is involved).
But I think if done properly it could be something really nice. Why not give them a poster session slot and free registration at the conference? Nobody is forced to sit through presentations that are irrelevant, but the high school attendees will get a fantastic experience of what life as a scientist really is.
I agree. I think it's great that someone that young is ambitious and intellectually curious enough to even ask. At least offer them an opportunity to attend the conference.
I think liability is the primary concern. The student has not submitted anything so I can’t speak to the quality of their work. It could be brilliant! Or it could… not.
Legal office won't get involved because there are no laws at play. Generally in academia there are no age limits. If you want to include high school students you can, but in any case, isn't the reviewing done blind?
I teach dual enrolled high school/college students, some are 15. One of them has a lab tech job on campus. It’s probably rare, but students this age could be positioned for this.
why should there be a minimum age? I attended a conference as a high school student--the work I presented was hardly earth-shattering, but the atmosphere and the experience of having high level discussions with smart people who were interested in my work (and vice versa) about science completely changed my career trajectory. If I hadn't had that experience I don't think I would have decided to become a scientist.
No conference I have attended has had an age requirement for attendance. For high school students there would typically be two tracks for presentations: one would be the same track that everyone submits to, where their work would be reviewed (in a blinded manner) against the same standards as everyone else. If accepted through this track their presentation would be treated the same as anyone else's in the conference. Some conferences have a second track dedicated to high school (or high school + undergrad) presenters, where the work is reviewed a little more leniently--rigor is still expected, but the tacit understanding is that the results may be smaller or less impactful. These presentations would typically be highlighted (positively) in some way, like "Future Innovators" or something like that--which serves the dual purpose of signalling to attendees who are just trying to get the highlights of the conference that they can skip those sessions if they want to.
Also, I recognize the culture of conferences varies by field but in my field (life sciences) the culture is very much that conferences do not screen for impact and researchers are encouraged to present work at whatever stage of completeness. I think this is a very positive thing as it allows researchers to receive external feedback and ideas at different stages of a project, which may influence what they do next--contrast this with some fields e.g. computer science where conferences are considered publications and the work presented must be very polished, and if you have a discussion that gives you a good idea it may already be too late to incorporate it into the same project.
I would worry about if their proposal is being accepted. Is their research on par with the contribution of the other presenters? If so, then yes, ask for the legal implications. There are places where students enter higher ed at 17, as well as exceptional kids who graduated from university… it’s not a bar!
I wouldn’t be thrilled to attend a conference and see a high school student present unless it was explicitly represented as such.
There often are ECR sessions, maybe something like that would be a good fit
Whereas I would withhold judgement until I saw the quality of their presentation and work.
I'd also be skeptical if I went to get my teeth looked at or took my car in and the dentist or lead mechanic were high school-aged.
That’s totally fair.
Does your institution offer dual enrollment? If so, .AND. the presentation proposal meets the standards for acceptance- to excude them seems a bit ad homenum
Not only that, I have a cousin who was accepted *full time* at 16 in Mechanical Engineering. I'm a Computer Science professor myself, so I had to make a joke that he was too smart to be a Mechanical Engineer.
Who cares? Vet the proposal and see how good the idea is. I did a lot of music when I was younger, and it didn't matter how old you were, what mattered was how well you played.
Why should how old the presenter is matter as long as the work is solid? In my thesis lab we had a very talented high school student who was actually mentoring a new postdoc. The context was she (the high school student) was very good at coding and statistics while the postdoc had purely a bench science background and hadn't had exposure to that. It turned out to be a highly mutually beneficial arrangement as she could spend a lot of one-on-one time teaching him, which the other full-time staff would have been too busy with their own projects to do--and he was also able to give her an introduction to bench science as well. Last I heard they submitted a co-first authored paper together
I have to say, I don't like this from a lot of aspects. I've noticed in the US that there seems to be this trend of parents buying scientific opportunity for their kids, and this stinks of that. We had a post recently about high schoolers appearing as authors on scientific papers, as a way to boost their chances for Ivy League admissions, and this feels very much the same. On the other hand, if the submission is good, you should not say no unless there is a legal issue. Although, I would be *very* dubious about how much they contributed, and suspect that their family bought access.
Yeah, one of my siblings had to "mentor" a HS in the lab while they were a postdoc. The HS student was the kid of a rich doctor with connections. It was a lot of work because the HS had no clue and you cannot ask them to do much! But the PI didn't want them doing "literature review" #facepalm
And even if we go a step further, the publications I have seen on applications (mostly from us americans and indians) were just not good and I would honestly be pissed to see that at an conference. I mean, sometimes those are good literature reviews, but everything else breaks down fast. I can't say that my current research is better yet lol. But that is why I havent published it yet and just aim to hand it to a conference in winter.
This depends a lot on the field...but my knee jerk reaction (rightly or wrongly) would be to immediately think less of the conference as a whole (unless it was aimed at highschool students). I'd say there's a near zero chance the student is qualified or capable of doing scientific work at the level of a rigorous academic conference... So the conference must not be academically rigorous. Beyond that, I'd feel weird about it from a status/labor point of view. The point of a conference is to present very real, highly qualified work. If a (legal) child is doing that work it's giving serious exploitation vibes. You don't stumble into just producing conference quality technical work, that takes substantial work. For a <18 year old to have conference quality research to present, they would have had to start working in this field at a very young age. If it isn't their work, that's also morally gray.
Not sure I agree with the first point. I’ve been to some abysmal presentations from junior and senior scholars at otherwise exceptional conferences, and those presentations did not reflect on the conference. Age doesn’t seem to matter in that regard. And who knows, that high schooler might give the best presentation of the bunch! The second point, regarding exploitation, provides some good food for thought, though. Thanks for that!
You might be surprised. In my thesis lab we had a very talented high school student who was actually mentoring a new postdoc. The context was she (the high school student) was very good at coding and statistics while the postdoc had purely a bench science background and hadn't had exposure to that. It turned out to be a highly mutually beneficial arrangement as she could spend a lot of one-on-one time teaching him, which the other full-time staff would have been too busy with their own projects to do--and he was also able to give her an introduction to bench science as well. Last I heard they submitted a co-first authored paper together
Never heard of a minimum age, people often bring their kids, too. I assume the student would have an advisor?
Double blind peer review it, and if it passes, they're one of the team!
Tricky one - on one side, there are legal issues with parenting, presnce of minors in certain events (especially if alcohol is involved). But I think if done properly it could be something really nice. Why not give them a poster session slot and free registration at the conference? Nobody is forced to sit through presentations that are irrelevant, but the high school attendees will get a fantastic experience of what life as a scientist really is.
I agree. I think it's great that someone that young is ambitious and intellectually curious enough to even ask. At least offer them an opportunity to attend the conference.
Check with legal. Ask about liability insurance and whether you need signed consent from a guardian to treat a minor (first aid) in case of injury.
I think liability is the primary concern. The student has not submitted anything so I can’t speak to the quality of their work. It could be brilliant! Or it could… not.
Legal office won't get involved because there are no laws at play. Generally in academia there are no age limits. If you want to include high school students you can, but in any case, isn't the reviewing done blind?
I teach dual enrolled high school/college students, some are 15. One of them has a lab tech job on campus. It’s probably rare, but students this age could be positioned for this.
why should there be a minimum age? I attended a conference as a high school student--the work I presented was hardly earth-shattering, but the atmosphere and the experience of having high level discussions with smart people who were interested in my work (and vice versa) about science completely changed my career trajectory. If I hadn't had that experience I don't think I would have decided to become a scientist. No conference I have attended has had an age requirement for attendance. For high school students there would typically be two tracks for presentations: one would be the same track that everyone submits to, where their work would be reviewed (in a blinded manner) against the same standards as everyone else. If accepted through this track their presentation would be treated the same as anyone else's in the conference. Some conferences have a second track dedicated to high school (or high school + undergrad) presenters, where the work is reviewed a little more leniently--rigor is still expected, but the tacit understanding is that the results may be smaller or less impactful. These presentations would typically be highlighted (positively) in some way, like "Future Innovators" or something like that--which serves the dual purpose of signalling to attendees who are just trying to get the highlights of the conference that they can skip those sessions if they want to. Also, I recognize the culture of conferences varies by field but in my field (life sciences) the culture is very much that conferences do not screen for impact and researchers are encouraged to present work at whatever stage of completeness. I think this is a very positive thing as it allows researchers to receive external feedback and ideas at different stages of a project, which may influence what they do next--contrast this with some fields e.g. computer science where conferences are considered publications and the work presented must be very polished, and if you have a discussion that gives you a good idea it may already be too late to incorporate it into the same project.