Mentoring & feedback

Choose one contribution

• Question and methods review: help define a measurable question, a comparison, units, sampling and a feasible next step.
• Data and code review: reproduce one calculation, inspect missing values and exclusions, and separate a useful pattern from an unsupported explanation.
• Figure or presentation review: check labels, citations and limitations; ask the learner to explain what each figure supports.
• Engineering or competition coaching: support a team through its school or an established program, following that program’s rules.
• Resource contribution: prepare a sourced worked example, correction or template. Keep the editable file and source record for editorial review when an SME intake owner is assigned.

Researchers, technicians, engineers, teachers and industry practitioners can bring relevant expertise. A .edu address is not a qualification or a youth-safety check. Verify the person’s relevant work, references and role with the host program.

For young scientists and the adults supporting them

1. Start with a responsible adult. Ask a parent/guardian, teacher or established program coordinator to arrange and oversee contact. Use the host program’s approved communication channels.
2. Ask for a bounded review. State the question, the stage of the work and one decision you need help with. Share a de-identified plan or figure, not a student’s personal records.
3. Confirm the arrangement before meeting. The host should establish consent, supervision, volunteer checks/training and a route to raise concerns. Keep meetings observable and interruptible, with responsible adults included; avoid private adult–child messaging.
4. Check project rules first. A mentor cannot replace required school or fair approval. Do not begin work that requires preapproval until it is granted.
5. Keep student ownership. The learner makes and explains the work. Record the mentor’s assistance; agree on credit and permissions. Coaching is not a promise of publication, admission or an award.

Run a 30-minute review

1. 5 minutes: learner explains the question, current evidence and the decision they face.
2. 10 minutes: examine the method or one figure. Identify an assumption, missing observation and plausible alternative explanation.
3. 10 minutes: choose one feasible calculation, measurement or revision. The learner explains why it would help.
4. 5 minutes: record the action, who will do it and what result would change the conclusion.

Download the review worksheet (.txt) Use planning and presentation templates

Approach an established route

• FIRST’s coach and mentor checklist explains roles, screening and training. Its U.S./Canada adult screening and two-screened-lead-coach requirements provide a concrete program model; check the current rules before volunteering. A listing here is not a local vacancy.
• UT Space Institute’s outreach coordinator accepts inquiries about school/group activities. Ask about a suitable activity and availability; individual research mentoring is not promised.
• MTSEF’s teacher guide explains adult-sponsor responsibilities. Confirm your school’s eligibility and approvals with the fair.

Official routes checked October 28, 2026. These external programs are independent of SME.

Prepare a contribution for SME

Bring a concrete task, a reproducible method or editable template, sources that support each claim, and clear limits. State relevant expertise, permissions and any conflicts. Remove student identifiers and unpublished work you do not have permission to share.

There is no SME submission form or public posting at present. Use the contribution packet and publishing guide; a working contact route will be listed when an editor and process are assigned. In the meantime, use the worksheet within your own authorized school or program.