SPARC and a number of mostly homogeneous math camps are all looking for pre-college students with strong mathematical ability. Since SPARC’s syllabus is notably different from that of math camps, it seems like a bad idea to compete with these camps for the top students. But competition is inevitable if SPARC runs at the same time as these camps; below I have found and listed the 2012 start and end dates for the most prominent math camps:
SPARC’s starting date this year conflicts with the end dates of three of these seven camps. Perhaps there are other scheduling constraints, but if not, wouldn’t it be a good idea to run SPARC a week later to avoid conflicts? (It is too late to change this year, of course.)
*I know RSI is not a math camp in the spirit of the others, but it’s well-known and attracts some students away from math camps.
ETA: And since SPARC is free and relevant to math students, if it can guarantee that it will not conflict with the other program dates, I think many math programs will be happy to link to or otherwise mention SPARC to current and past students – this should help spread the word to more potential students.
I’m not sure what would be a good metric. But it isn’t obvious to me that having a separate program like this is at all likely to be better than having kids go through other programs that teach a lot of math systematically and then snagging some of the kids up when they get a little older. This is especially the case because the existing programs have very good teaching, lot of long-term institutional knowledge, and much better funding. To really effectively run a summer program that attracts top talent you’ll need a lot more money.
Incidentally, the website could use some work. Obvious things that kids and parents are thinking about when they look at a summer program, costs, dorming, how to apply, dates of the program, should be direct rather than vaguely answered on an FAQ.
We are reworking the website, we just needed to get something up quickly. Also, we already maxed out our capacity for top young talent by mailing written invitations directly to a bunch of the people we wanted to apply.
You guys should have a simple mailing list to sign up for to get reminded about future camps, and maybe even to broadcast camp related materials (e.g. “here are video lectures from the camp you missed”).
Cost, logistics, and how to apply were all discussed on the front page, until the application process closed and they were replaced with “the application process is closed.”
Yeah, those would be good things to keep up in general. They signal careful planning and good design. And it helps for families who are planning out their summers for the next year or something similar. We don’t lose anything by having that data.
Just keep in mind that having application information available can imply that applications are still open. So make it clear that the info is just for reference.
Compare their syllabi. Ross and PROMYS don’t teach what SPARC is teaching, and they don’t put these young students into contact with us.
As for effectiveness… what measure of effectiveness did you have in mind?
SPARC and a number of mostly homogeneous math camps are all looking for pre-college students with strong mathematical ability. Since SPARC’s syllabus is notably different from that of math camps, it seems like a bad idea to compete with these camps for the top students. But competition is inevitable if SPARC runs at the same time as these camps; below I have found and listed the 2012 start and end dates for the most prominent math camps:
Ross: June 18 – July 27
PROMYS: July 1 – August 11
HSMC: June 17 – July 28
Mathcamp: July 1 – August 5
HCSSiM: July 1 – August 11
SUMaC: July 15 – August 11
RSI*: June 24 – August 4
(SPARC: August 6 – August 13)
SPARC’s starting date this year conflicts with the end dates of three of these seven camps. Perhaps there are other scheduling constraints, but if not, wouldn’t it be a good idea to run SPARC a week later to avoid conflicts? (It is too late to change this year, of course.)
*I know RSI is not a math camp in the spirit of the others, but it’s well-known and attracts some students away from math camps.
ETA: And since SPARC is free and relevant to math students, if it can guarantee that it will not conflict with the other program dates, I think many math programs will be happy to link to or otherwise mention SPARC to current and past students – this should help spread the word to more potential students.
I’m not sure what would be a good metric. But it isn’t obvious to me that having a separate program like this is at all likely to be better than having kids go through other programs that teach a lot of math systematically and then snagging some of the kids up when they get a little older. This is especially the case because the existing programs have very good teaching, lot of long-term institutional knowledge, and much better funding. To really effectively run a summer program that attracts top talent you’ll need a lot more money.
Incidentally, the website could use some work. Obvious things that kids and parents are thinking about when they look at a summer program, costs, dorming, how to apply, dates of the program, should be direct rather than vaguely answered on an FAQ.
We are reworking the website, we just needed to get something up quickly. Also, we already maxed out our capacity for top young talent by mailing written invitations directly to a bunch of the people we wanted to apply.
You guys should have a simple mailing list to sign up for to get reminded about future camps, and maybe even to broadcast camp related materials (e.g. “here are video lectures from the camp you missed”).
Yes that will be part of the new CFAR website we’re working on.
Cost, logistics, and how to apply were all discussed on the front page, until the application process closed and they were replaced with “the application process is closed.”
Yeah, those would be good things to keep up in general. They signal careful planning and good design. And it helps for families who are planning out their summers for the next year or something similar. We don’t lose anything by having that data.
Just keep in mind that having application information available can imply that applications are still open. So make it clear that the info is just for reference.