From a Finished Project to a Defensible One: Four Months of Coaching With Matthew Casavant

Where the Student Started

This student started with ScienceFair with complete research, a developed poster, and was technically ready for ISEF. 

However, when their coach, Matthew, asked them to present, the student would expand into methods, acronyms, and supporting detail before the central claim was ever stated plainly, so a judge would have to wait to find out what the project was actually arguing.

Matthew worked with the student to improve their communication and presentation. Together, they edited the student’s poster and practised mock judging so that the student would be fully prepared for standard questions, and any off-the-cuff ones that judges may ask.

The Coach

Matthew Casavant studies Biomedical Engineering at Vanderbilt University. He is a 3rd Place Grand Award winner in Behavioral and Social Science at the International Science and Engineering Fair, where he also received the American Psychological Association Special Award, and he won a 2nd Place Silver Medal in Science Innovation at the International Genius Olympiad.

Why the First Fix Was Structure, Not Content

At first, the student could recount the entire project, but too much of the clock went to technical method detail, claims were repeated, and almost no margin was left for limitations, implications, or questions. 

So Matthew stopped polishing and gave the student a repeatable way to order the talk, one that puts the claim in front and lets the detail follow it instead of precede it, and that leaves deliberate room for the questions a judge will want to ask. Then he had the student rehearse it against a clock rather than against a feeling.

Teaching the Explanation to Meet Its Audience

Once they had a structure for the presentation, Matthew and the student began matching an explanation to the person receiving it, and about staying inside the evidence when questioned.

Matthew retaught the technical concepts in plain language and pressed for the reason behind each design choice rather than the description of it. Then he raised the difficulty of the mock questions, moving into comparisons, failure cases, limitations, and what future validation would require. When longer presentation formats exposed new weak points, he adapted rather than repeating the earlier fix, shifting the goal from cutting material to protecting the central argument and leaving room for follow-up.

The change showed in the later mock rounds. Faced with unfamiliar prompts, the student explained what a given choice was testing, named the point where the evidence stopped, and kept a current result distinct from a proposed next step.

Making the Between-Session Work Do the Teaching

The student now had a concise script, revised the poster and the digital materials, prepared accessible figures and supporting documents, and arrived with new run-throughs instead of waiting for line-by-line edits.

They had gained flexibility, were able to adjust their explanations based on the audience, and could confidently answer difficult follow-up questions. The student went on to win a grand award at ISEF.

What This Looks Like for Your Project

A strong project does not defend itself. This student came in with the research already done and still needed four months of structured rehearsal to state the claim first, translate it for whoever was standing in front of the poster, and hold the line under questions nobody had rehearsed.

That is what coaching with a past science fair winner is for. If your project is built but you are not yet sure it can survive twenty minutes with a judge, book a free consultation with an academic advisor, and we will look at where it stands.