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.
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.