Skyway STEM Poster Competition:

Designed for students in the Skyway Collegiate Conference.

Projects evaluated student’s ability to use the process of science. Poster must pose a question and/or use knowledge gained through the scientific process to address the problem or question. Posters must be in a science, technology, engineering, or math.

Competition here at …April 21st 2017!

2017 Timelines

March 8th, 2017 Application and abstract due online…site to be determined. 10 projects selected to represent the institution. Students have until April 5th to finish research and create poster. April 5, 2017, 5 p.m. Posters and papers due. April 21st, 2017 Competition held at Elgin Community College

Arrival, set-up, and breakfast 8:30 a.m. – 9:15 a.m. Judging and workshops (3 rounds) 9:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. Lunch and awards 12:30 p.m. – 2:00 p.m.

Past Winners:

April 25, 2014 Event Held at

Biology

First Place: Ammar_Elmajdoub and Julia Prieto of Oakton Community College The Allelopathic Properties of the Invasive Species Rhamnus cathartica and its Inhibitory Effects on Tomato Seed Germination

Second Place: Alan_Mitchell of Genetic Variances Accountable for Increased Pathogenicity of the Human Influenza Virus

Third Place: Eric_Johnston / Marisa Ascencio of Waubonsee Community College Bacterial Resistance to Antibiotics

Chemistry

First Place: Michael Nazario and Arianna Bello of McHenry County College An Investigation of the 2012 Fish Depopulation in Wildflower Lake

Second Place (tie): Dustin Dunigan of Prairie State College The Use of Emission Spectrophotometer to Test the Purity of Household Drinks and Substances

Daniel Eichler and Diana Demarchi:Prairie State College Spectroscopic Characterization of Metal Binding to Animo Acids and Proteins

Engineering

First Place: A_Rodriguez, Leno Neri, Gerald Healy: Moraine Valley Community College The Effects of Angles of Incidence of Solar Rays on the Performance of Solar Panels

Second Place: Andrew_Meyer and Aaron Gonzalez of Waubonsee Community College Maximizing Solar Energy Output

Physics/Earth Science/Mathematics/Computers

First Place: Angelo Niqula, Yousef Abdulla, Sungjun Park, Timothy Szymanski and Anthony Dudlo of Moraine Valley Community College Principles of Acoustic Fire Suppression Accounting for Variable Frequency, Intensity and Distance

Second Place: Eliza Ikiz and Szymon Koszarek of Moraine Valley Comm College Testing Sympathetic Vibration Frequency on a Guitar

Third Place: Osvaldo Arroyo of Waubonsee Community College Hydrogeology of Waubonsee Community College Wetland

April 12, 2013 Event Held at Oakton Community College

Chemistry

1st Place Preparation and Development of Novel Diaminomaleonitrile-Derived Porpyrazine Photosensitizers

Oakton Community College Kenneth Gore, Hyun Lee, and Elina Golsteyn 2nd Place Preparation of Biodiesel Surrogates by Stereoselective Hydrogenation of 3 Alkynoates

Oakton Community College Miae Lee, An Lam and Min Ho Lee

3rd Place The Reactions of Sucralose in the Presence of Emulsifiers

McHenry County College Alejandra Hernandez

PHYSICAL SCIENCE, PHYSICS, ENGINEERING AND MATHEMATICS

1st Place Lovie Smith, NFL and Separating Hyperplanes (Mathematics)

Prairie State College Timothy Colin Dannels

2nd Place Environmental Sensor (Engineering)

Oakton Community College Hsiang-Yi Tseng

3rd Place The Effects of Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic Interactions on Melting (Physical Science)

Moraine Valley Community College Matt Dixon, Leah Stankus, Sara Dunn, David Dunn

Life Sciences and Earth Sciences

Tie 1st Place Development of 3 Dimensional Microarray Comparisons of Male Alginate Culture System for A549 and Female Brains Lung Cancer Cell Line

Oakton Community College Prairie State College Nicholas Sielski, Leandro Brahimaj, Vikki Jones Mariya Radkevich, Razina Hakimiyan

2nd Place Extinguishing Your Heartburn or Your Wallet?

Waubonsee Community College Jonathan Richards

3rd Place Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing in Staphylococcus aureus isolates from McHenry County College Employees

McHenry County College Patricia Kusek and Tara Nathan

April 20, 2012 Event Held at Moraine Valley Community College

Best in Show:

Biological Sciences / Life Sciences Category:

McHenry County College Carla Scholpp and Dave Degrassi Nasal Carriage of Staphylococcus aureus and MRSA in the McHenry County College Biology Student Population

Waubonsee Community College

1st Place: Melissa Walker, Herbal Remedies: Using the Scientific Method to Uncover Truth in the Myth

2nd Place: Lisa Booker, Bird Size vs. Seed Size

3rd Place: Katheryn E. Billing, Vermicompost: Eisenia fetida vs. Lumbrcus terrestris

Earth Science / Physical Science / Chemistry Category:

Waubonsee Community College 1st Place: Hannah Dorn Mastodont Enviornments? : Answers Beneath the Surface

Moraine Valley Community College 2nd Place: Carla McLaurin, Kaleb Elam, and Belissa Beltran Bottoms Up: Safety and Health Awareness Against Human Pathogen Residue During Toilet Use

3rd Place: Ashley Morris and Tiwana S. Morrison Can a Common Food Additive Assist Coastal Communities During Environmental Disasters?

Technology / Physical / Computer Science / Math / Engineering

Moraine Valley Community College 1st Place: Alexander Papak, Ivan Chow, Johnson Chan, Kyriakos Anastasopoulos, Patrycja Guza, and Rohail Kidwai Sparking Simplicity: Constructing and Testing the Effects of Several Variables on the Performance of Lord Kelvin's Water Generator

College of Lake County: 2nd Place: Lori Brandon How Do You Improve Video Streaming Performance?

Poster Details and Process

Abstracts • Each college will select up to 10 student projects to represent their college. • The method of selecting these projects is at the discretion of the college. • Abstracts are to be limited to 100 words and are to describe the question or problem being studied, a rationale for the question/problem and the hypothesis being tested. • Abstracts for each submission are due Mar. 8, 2017, 5pm through the competition web site. • The host college may accept late abstract submissions (submitted through the website) until it is no longer feasible to do so. This extension must be available to all colleges and be applied equally. The cutoff date for late submissions is to be determined at the discretion of the host college as they see fit. • Abstracts submitted by the Mar. 8, 2017, 5pm deadline will be awarded 5 points.

Poster Construction • Posters must be self-supporting poster board that is no larger than 48 x 36 inches. • All elements of the poster shall be contained within this space. Three dimensional items are not permitted. • The poster may not have any attachments (i.e. layers). • Posters may include photographs, graphs, charts, or diagrams that explain or portray research elements or study conclusions. • Posters may include original drawing or computer created visuals designed to explain or portray research or study conclusions. • Poster template programs are available online or via Microsoft Power Point. An example can be found at http://www.posterpresentations.com/html/free_poster_templates.html. The competition website may have format requirements and specific information will be available in January 2017.

Project Research Paper Expectations A paper describing the project research and findings is required. This paper must be prepared in Word and is limited to two pages. The purpose of the paper is to discourage excess text on the posters and to aid judges in the evaluation process.

Electronic Poster and Paper Submission The electronic version of the poster and the explanatory project paper must be submitted no later than April 5, 2017, 5 pm via the Competition web site. Entries received by this deadline will be awarded 5 points. Selection of Judges Judges will be provided by Argonne Labs. The selection of post-doctoral students in the Fellowship program will be made by the administration of Argonne Labs based on the disciplines of the abstracts submitted, matching fields of study and expertise. Judges shall not have affiliation with any participating college.

Categories Projects will be evaluated on the student or team’s ability to use the process of science, as well as rational and logical thinking to answer a question related to a STEM discipline. The poster must pose a question and use knowledge gained through the scientific process to address the problem or question. Categories are: biological science, chemistry, physical science, computer science, earth science, technology, engineering, physics or math related disciplines. A guide to the rubric is included below.

Event Participation The day of the Poster Competition posters will be assigned a judging time. There will be three judging cycles. Projects will be judged in one of those cycles.

At least one member from a poster team must be present to respond to the judges questions. All team members are encouraged to attend and should be prepared to respond to judges’ questions.

Only student team members may participate in the judging discussion. Faculty advisors, coaches, family members and others will be asked to step out of the area (at the discretion of the judge) during the judging conversation.

Awards

Award categories will be determined based upon the abstracts topics received to best reflect submissions to provide a fair and equitable of those student projects submitted, There will be no more than four award categories, with each category providing a first, second and third place. One poster may also receive the Best of Show award at the discretion of the judges.

Categories

Projects will be evaluated on the student or team’s ability to use the process of science, as well as rational and logical thinking to answer a question related to a STEM discipline. The poster must pose a question and use knowledge gained through the scientific process to address the problem or question. Categories are: biological science, chemistry, physical science, computer science, earth science, technology, engineering, physics or math related disciplines. Guide to the STEM Poster Competition Rubric

Problem:

Every project has a starting point, whether it is a desire to find a solution, the drive to help the members of our community or ecosystem, or the need to gain a greater understanding of how our universe operates. The project should be designed around some problem to solve, and students are expected to explain what that problem is. What is it that led to this project being created? Expected Outcome: In what way does the student(s) believe that the project has the ability to help mitigate or solve the problem? Are they trying to engineer a solution, or are they taking the first steps toward a bigger picture? What is the expected impact of the project upon completion?

Design:

The project needs to be shaped to address the problem. Students are expected to explain why the design of their project does so.

Methodology:

Every design needs something built into it to ensure the data gained is of high quality. The types of controls and variables built in are going to be based on the projects methodology. This could be a foundation of theorems used to derive a mathematical proof, a control group in a biology experiment, a constant in the experiment to test the other variables around, or a control flow statement in software development.

Data Collection:

The type and amount of data is going to be based on the methodology of the project. The key is not to gather vast amounts of data, but enough data to support your conclusion. A project in physics is likely to collect a lot of data in support of the system being studied, whereas a mathematical proof is itself a single data point. The amount of data can range from a single point to a rather large amount. Be sure the amount of data is appropriate to justify the conclusion, and be sure it is presented in a proper format (single statement, data table, graph, etc.) based on the amount of data.

Data Presentation and Analysis:

The way you present the data is going to be based on the methodology of the project, and the amount of data you have. A software development project that is simply a “did or did not” work project can likely discuss their data in a statement. A science project that gathers a large amount of data will need to decide if it is better to format it as a data table or graphically. Be sure to do some sort of error analysis as well (discuss sources, quantify error, etc.)

Rubric for Scoring: Rate project presentation on a scale of 1 to 5 points, with 1 the lowest score and 5 being highest. PROJECT SCORING

Question 1 2 3 4 5 Problem: To what degree is the problem innovative, original, important, and well-expressed? Expected Outcome: To what degree does the work demonstrate a high degree of novelty and potential for positive impact? Design: How well is the design clearly planned and explained? Methodology: To what degree is a methodology designed for ensuring the project is successfully executed? Data Collection: To what degree is the quality and quantity of the data appropriate? The key isn’t to have a lot of data, but to have the right amount of data to justify your conclusion. This could be a single point or statement. Data Presentation and Analysis: How clearly is the data presented on the poster? How appropriate was the analysis of the information, including possible sources of error? Data could be presented in any number of ways; data table, graph, explanation points, etc. Conclusion: How appropriate is the conclusion? Applications: How significant are the outcomes of this project? References: How relevant were the outside references listed on the presentation? How knowledgeable was the student regarding these references? Was the format of the references appropriate?

PRESENTATION SCORING Question 1 2 3 4 5 Visual Display: How well organized is the presentation? Are the spelling and grammar correct? Is it visually appealing and easy to comprehend? Professionalism: How professionally did the student conduct himself/herself during the interview? Knowledge of Design: How well did the student express his or her understanding of the details of the design itself? Knowledge of Topic: How well did the student express his or her understanding of the subject matter addressed by the problem? Knowledge of the Methodology: How well did the student express his or her understanding of the methodology? Ability to Communicate: How clearly was the student able to answer questions?