Scioly.org

I’ve been having a few thoughts about Computer Science events in Science Olympiad, and I’d like to share them here.

Computer science is one of the most quickly growing fields in the 21st century - the importance of computer and information science jobs has never been in a higher demand ever before. With the industry growing extremely quickly, it is extremely important that Science Olympiad steps up to promote this field of science, which is arguably just as important as more traditional fields, such as biology, chemistry, physics, and the earth sciences. Computer science is fundamentally an extremely life-changing field - it is the only reason that I am able to type this post on a computer likely hundreds, if not thousands of miles away from anybody who is reading this post. It is a foundational field that teaches problem solving, logic, and is also a life skill in an era where technology will only become more prevalent over time.

However, official computer science events in Science Olympiad have historically been extremely lacking, and when run, are always somewhat disappointing. To my knowledge, only two computer science events have become part of the National event slate: Game On and Computer Programming, last held in 1992.

Game On is, at the top level, all about following a rubric. While Scratch is an incredible resource for learning introductory computer programming and video game design, it is repetitive and extremely oversimplified. This event ultimately teaches very little, and while fun, is not an event that demonstrates the importance of computer science, nor does it capture the spirit of “Computer Science”.

On the other hand, several trials have been successfully run at many invitationals across the country. Data Science has been run at the UT and Princeton Invitationals, What the Function has been run at the MIT Invitational, Cybersecurity has been run at BEARSO, and Code Analysis has been run at many State tournaments. All of these events take a far more hands-on approach, incorporating “real” programming into the event itself, exposing students to code that they might encounter in real life. These events demonstrate that there is continued interest for these events, as many similar computer science events have been developed independently by many groups of people for many competitions.

Yes, there can be a steep learning curve for many of these events. However, when run well, they can be extremely good at having a variety of easy and more difficult questions, allowing beginners an easier path into this subject without the need to oversimplify the subject, as Game On currently does. Funding is also not an issue for computer science events; just like Game On, events could be run on borrowed computers.

There is an incredible amount of potential that computer science events have in the future, spanning a diverse set of topics such as data science, algorithms, cybersecurity, machine learning, networking, cryptography, and reverse engineering.

Please leave your thoughts below! I’d love to hear other opinions about this.

I agree, from a state that competes in code analysis regularly I believe that creating a computer science event or taking a CS trial event and making it a national event is a good idea. The problem is: what does it rotate with and what does the schedule look like now for the national rotation. I am biased in saying that events like Amazing Mechatronics need to be incorporated more in the list of events. It would be interesting to see how a CS event could be run and if there are builds or not. Wifi lab was an event competed in Wisconsin about 3 years ago and it was loved by the people who knew it and disliked by the rest.

Overall, a wider spread of sciences, especially CS, could be incorporated and would be fun to do.

I'd definitely align that they'd be good to have for the olympiad, definitely in place of a certain robotics event we won't talk about. Overall I think I like Code Analysis and Sourcecode, and I don't see why Scioly couldn't move forward with either of those.

BennyTheJett wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2021, 8:08 am I'd definitely align that they'd be good to have for the olympiad, definitely in place of a certain robotics event we won't talk about. Overall I think I like Code Analysis and Sourcecode, and I don't see why Scioly couldn't move forward with either of those.

Robot events are alright if done properly, I think Arduino stuff would be better due to cost-effectiveness.

ZachMUHS wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2021, 9:01 am

BennyTheJett wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2021, 8:08 am I'd definitely align that they'd be good to have for the olympiad, definitely in place of a certain robotics event we won't talk about. Overall I think I like Code Analysis and Sourcecode, and I don't see why Scioly couldn't move forward with either of those.

Robot events are alright if done properly, I think Arduino stuff would be better due to cost-effectiveness.

"Robot events are alright if done properly"
Lol have there been any robot events done properly?

amk578 wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2021, 9:13 am

ZachMUHS wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2021, 9:01 am

BennyTheJett wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2021, 8:08 am I'd definitely align that they'd be good to have for the olympiad, definitely in place of a certain robotics event we won't talk about. Overall I think I like Code Analysis and Sourcecode, and I don't see why Scioly couldn't move forward with either of those.

Robot events are alright if done properly, I think Arduino stuff would be better due to cost-effectiveness.

"Robot events are alright if done properly"
Lol have there been any robot events done properly?

I enjoyed robocross, I thought that was fun and well planned.

ZachMUHS wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2021, 9:39 am

amk578 wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2021, 9:13 am

ZachMUHS wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2021, 9:01 am

Robot events are alright if done properly, I think Arduino stuff would be better due to cost-effectiveness.

"Robot events are alright if done properly"
Lol have there been any robot events done properly?

I enjoyed robocross, I thought that was fun and well planned.

Clearly you're forgetting how scuffed the scoring rubric was my guy. RoboTour isn't cost effective either. Definitely game for Am-Mech though.

BennyTheJett wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2021, 10:39 am

ZachMUHS wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2021, 9:39 am

amk578 wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2021, 9:13 am
"Robot events are alright if done properly"
Lol have there been any robot events done properly?

I enjoyed robocross, I thought that was fun and well planned.

Clearly you're forgetting how scuffed the scoring rubric was my guy. RoboTour isn't cost effective either. Definitely game for Am-Mech though.

I agree with Benny. Am-Mech seems like an interesting event that could translate well even to underfunded teams. I feel like we've already talked much about Robot Tour, however -- the discussion can be found here.

While robot events are computer science events, I have clearly stated my opinion before that they are just too expensive, especially to many underfunded or disadvantaged teams. Yes, robotics is extremely important, but it is far better to do an event such as Am-Mech, especially since it can be somewhat similar to robotics events in content. The purely computer programming events that I put in the original post also highlights computer science in a way that is much more accessible to all teams, not just the ones who are rich.

That being said, it's probably best if the discussion about robot events is moved to another thread.

See also this post: viewtopic.php?f=334&t=16614&start=90#p410904

I don't think it's a question of if computer science should be integrated into Science Olympiad properly, but rather when it should be added.

Obviously, we've seen this attempted before, like you were saying, but either the events are dumbed down too much (Game On), claimed to be pay-to-win by some individuals (the robot events), or run forever ago. The newer computer science events have just been trials.

I think the best event to fill this gap right now would be an event solely based on programming, and programming alone. No data science, no cybersecurity, nothing specific like that. For a few reasons:

1. Programming is more known to people than "data science" or "machine learning." I know for some of us, those are everyday terms - we are working on projects involving them or know others who are working on projects involving the concepts or we hear them in the news, etc. But for more rural schools, these concepts can be completely foreign. Programming provides an easier entryway for these sorts of schools.
2. The more specific events do not cater to everyone's interests. Speaking for myself, I found the Data Science test I took at Princeton last year very fun and interesting, whereas I found the Cybersecurity test at BEARSO to be less interesting. I didn't think Cybersecurity was run bad, I just personally was not interested in how hashing or cryptography works. I currently don't have an interest in cybersecurity/plan to pursue it as a career, unlike data science, which I might hope to advance into as a career one day. And there are people who are like me, but in the reverse direction. I think an event that removes all of these interests can cater to more people. Programming is common to both data science and cybersecurity, along with code analysis, etc.
3. Science Olympiad has never had a formal programming event, and I feel that an event solely based on programming would provide a good transition into the topic.
4. Setup for this event will be simple for schools who may have less access to resources. A constant concern with these events in Science Olympiad is how schools with lower budgets will be able to integrate technology events into their programs. Programming languages are completely free to download, and can run on almost any machine.

So in the end, I hope a programming event can one day be implemented into the national Science Olympiad program for all to take advantage of!