Nature vs. nurture. Scientists have long debated which factor is most responsible for the persona, and most importantly, the intelligence of an individual. Was Einstein simply born brilliant? Or were there other factors, such as his schooling, that allowed him to become one of the most intelligent individuals in history? The results from the latest Intel Science Talent Search competition seem like a strong argument for the latter.

All of the finalists from California attended either magnet schools, private schools or public schools known for their high standards in science education, such as the Henry M. Gunn High School and Saratoga High.

This leads to the question of whether these competitions are actually fair. Students in high-achieving schools have a multitude of advantages. Their high schools, often from areas with higher incomes, provide them with a better education, and these students also have better access to resources.

For students competing in high-level science fairs, such as the Intel Science Talent Search and the Siemens Competition, securing such mentors is essential to victory. These experts provide students with a laboratory, aid them with research and help with testing theories.

For outstanding students in lower-achieving high schools, it is a struggle to obtain all of the necessary tools to retain a competitive edge against students with better equipped schools and external resources.

In order to minimize this disparity , companies that sponsor science fairs should institute a new type of competition.

Rather than submitting projects done with the support of a college professor mentor, students should only be allowed to submit work done completely individually. While it is reasonable for students to work in college laboratory, the work done should be wholly their own and not with the assistance of a professor.

There should be a strict accounting system of what percentage of work is actually done by the student and what is done by their mentors. Ideally, students will be honest in logging and recording their work, but this will continue to remain an issue of academic integrity.

Additionally, judges should factor in where students go to school and have done their projects.
Depending on the quality of laboratory equipment and the presence of a mentor, a
sophistication of a project is capable of gaining a competitive advantage over those not so well equipped.

It is more difficult for a student in a low-income family living in poorer areas to submit a research project than for a student working with a world-class professor.

Either socio-economic status should be included among the factors considered in the judging process or a separate type of science fair should be created for those who do their work at home rather than in large laboratories.

This would allow students who do most of their projects at home to enter in competitions just as prestigious, but with no disadvantage in terms of resources.

Regardless, major science competitions will still be mostly dominated by students in higher-achieving high schools because they have access to better resources, but by implementing changes, it gives those in less fortunate circumstances a better chance at prizes and recognition.