With Nobel Laureate Dr Barry C. Barish attending in person.
Discourse, debate, and analysis
Cambridge
Re:think Essay
Competition 2026
The Cambridge Re:Think Essay Competition has grown rapidly into one of the world’s most competitive international essay competitions for secondary-school students.
In 2025, CCIR received over 13,000 submissions—more than three times the number received in 2024—from students representing over 50 countries worldwide. From these submissions, the jury panel selected approximately 1,300 Honourable Mentions, representing the top 10% of entries, and 33 award winners, representing the top 0.25% of submissions globally.
Building on this growth, the 2026 competition will be offered in two age-based categories:
Junior Division (ages 11–13)
Senior Division (ages 14–18)
These divisions are designed to ensure age-appropriate evaluation while maintaining the same high standards of intellectual rigour, originality, and clarity across the competition.
In 2026, we look forward to another highly competitive round of global participation and are excited to welcome award recipients to the University of Cambridge campus for the Award Ceremony and Dinner this summer.
We welcome talented high school students from diverse educational backgrounds and school systems worldwide to contribute their unique perspectives to the competition.
Entry to the Cambridge Re:Think Essay Competition is free.
Competition Opens
15th January, 2026
Essay Submission Deadline
10th May, 2026
Result Announcement
26th May, 2026
Award Ceremony and Dinner
31st July, 2026
(at the University of Cambridge)
About the Competition
The spirit of the Cambridge Re:think essay competition is to encourage critical thinking and exploration of a wide range of thought-provoking and often controversial topics. The competition covers a diverse array of subjects, from historical and present issues to speculative future scenarios. Participants are invited to engage deeply with these topics, critically analysing their various facets and implications. It promotes intellectual exploration and encourages participants to challenge established norms and beliefs, presenting opportunities to envision alternative futures, consider the consequences of new technologies, and reevaluate longstanding traditions.
Ultimately, our aim is to create a platform for students and scholars to share their perspectives on pressing issues of the past and future, with the hope of broadening our collective understanding and generating innovative solutions to contemporary challenges.
2026 Essay Prompts
This year, the essay prompts are contributed by distinguished professors from Harvard, Stanford, UCLA, Cornell, UPenn, Berkeley, Princeton, Oxford, Columbia, and Cambridge.
Essay Guidelines and Judging Criteria
Review general guidelines, format guidelines, eligibility, judging criteria.
Awards and Award Ceremony
Award winners will be invited to attend the Award Ceremony and Dinner hosted at the King’s College, University of Cambridge. The Dinner is free of charge for select award recipients.
Registration and Submission
Register a participant account today and submit your essay before the deadline.
The Cambridge Re:think Essay Competition is guided by an esteemed Advisory Committee comprising distinguished academics and experts from elite universities worldwide. These committee members, drawn from prestigious institutions, such as Harvard, Cambridge, Oxford, and MIT, bring diverse expertise in various disciplines.
They play a pivotal role in shaping the competition, contributing their insights to curate the themes and framework. Their collective knowledge and scholarly guidance ensure the competition’s relevance, academic rigour, and intellectual depth, setting the stage for aspiring minds to engage with thought-provoking topics and ideas.
We are honoured to invite the following distinguished professors to contribute to this year’s competition.
The judging panel of the competition comprises leading researchers and professors from Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Cambridge, and Oxford, engaging in a strictly double blind review process.
Keynote Speech by Nobel Laureate
We are beyond excited to announce that Dr Barry C. Barish, the Nobel Prize Laureate in Physics 2017, has confirmed to attend and speak in-person at this year's ceremony on 31st July, 2026.
Dr Barry Clark Barish is an American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate. He is a Linde Professor of Physics, emeritus at California Institute of Technology and a leading expert on gravitational waves.
In 2017, Barish was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics along with Rainer Weiss and Kip Thorne “for decisive contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves”. He said, “I didn’t know if I would succeed. I was afraid I would fail, but because I tried, I had a breakthrough.”
In 2018, he joined the faculty at University of California, Riverside, becoming the university’s second Nobel Prize winner on the faculty.
In the fall of 2023, he joined Stony Brook University as the inaugural President’s Distinguished Endowed Chair in Physics.
In 2023, Dr Barish was awarded the National Medal of Science by President Biden in a White House ceremony.
The Official List of Cambridge Re:Think
Essay Competition 2025 Winners
- Sum Yu Cheong, St. Paul’s Convent School, Hong Kong, China
- Emma Tong, University Laboratory High School, United States
- Victoria Khoo Miin-Hsuen, Raffles Girls’ School, Singapore
- Yuchen Yao, Shenzhen Middle School, China
- Qingxiang Liao, Shenzhen College of International Education, China
- Esther Yoo, Bergen County Academies, United States
- Ziqin Han, Raffles Girls’ School, Singapore
- Eugene Lee, Yongsan International School of Seoul, Korea, South
- Qurrat Ul Ain Muhammad Sharif, GEMS Cambridge International School Dubai, United Arab Emirates
- Yuchen Jiang, Beijing Academy, China
- Hon Zhi Yong, Victoria Junior College, Singapore
- Emma Bao, National Cathedral School, United States
- Warren Toh, Raffles Institution, Singapore
- Shareen Patricia Pakpahan, SMAK 7 Penabur, Indonesia
- Riki Mian, St Paul’s school, United Kingdom
- Daniel Chen, Kaohsiung American School, Taiwan, Republic of China
- Annabelle Lee, German Swiss International School, Hong Kong, China
- Katie Kim, Deerfield Academy, United States
- Megan Ulambayar, American School of Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
- Evie Lee, Stony Brook School – Gravitas Extension, Korea, South
- Liu Yicheng, The Experimental High School Attached to Beijing Normal University, China
- Hyunjin Lee, The American School of Kinshasa, Korea, South
- Miriam Lee, Garden International School Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
- Hana He, Westtown School, United States
- Ivan Zheng, Sage Hill School, United States
- Shi-Qi Chen, Taipei American School, Taiwan, Republic of China
- Maria Mann, BHASVIC, United Kingdom
- Hermione Wu, The Hotchkiss School, United States
- Yena Choi, Korea International School, Korea, South
- Caleb Liang, Encinal High School, United States
2026
Essay Prompts - Senior Division (Ages 14 to 18)
The Senior Division invites students to engage deeply with challenging questions across moral, political, scientific, and philosophical fields. These prompts encourage careful consideration of different viewpoints, supported by historical and current examples. The goal is to develop clear, nuanced arguments and foster the kind of independent thinking and intellectual confidence that prepares students for university and beyond.
Is populism inherently a form of radical right-wing politics, or can it also represent a legitimate, alternative democratic expression?
Professor Commentary:
“Populism” is one of those political words that gets used so often it can start to lose meaning—but most scholars agree that at its core, it describes a certain kind of narrative about “the people” rising up against “corrupt elites” who pull the strings in society. In practice, populist rhetoric has often been taken up by authoritarian leaders who combine it with a harsh, exclusionary nationalism. They draw a sharp line between the “true people” of the nation and groups—such as immigrants, religious minorities, or other outsiders—who are also blamed for society’s problems. In any case, populism tends to cast entire categories of people as enemies to be silenced, expelled, or annihilated. Because of this, many observers see populism as inseparable from scapegoating, violence, and abuses of power, citing figures from Hitler and Mussolini to more recent leaders like Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, and Giorgia Meloni.
On the other hand, elite corruption and inequality are real and recurring problems in most democracies around the world. In the United States, today’s era is sometimes compared to a new “Gilded Age,” a time marked by vast wealth at the top, political influence concentrated among elites, and widespread economic hardship below. Populist appeals can expose these injustices and sometimes help spark movements for reform. This question, then, is about both history and political possibility: is the story of “the people versus the elites” — as a simple battle of good versus evil — doomed to turn dark? Or can it be reimagined as a better, fairer, and less violent creative force in democratic politics?
Jan-Werner Müller – What Is Populism? (2016)
We assign this early because it gives students a precise definition that cuts through how loosely the word populism is used in public debate.
Ernesto Laclau – On Populist Reason (2005)
This is a demanding read, but we include it intentionally because it forces students to consider populism as a democratic possibility rather than a political pathology.
Thomas Frank – The People, No: A Brief History of Anti-Populism (2020)
Frank’s book offers a critical perspective on how elites co-opt “the people” rhetoric while undermining democratic participation.
Cas Mudde and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser – Populism A Very Short Introduction (2017)
When students want clarity without oversimplification, this book reliably helps them map the political landscape.
Hannah Arendt – The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951)
Few works better show how mass resentment and ideological certainty can evolve into something far more dangerous than they initially appear.
Federico Finchelstein – From Fascism to Populism in History (2017)
A historical exploration that traces the evolution of populism from earlier authoritarian movements.
Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt – How Democracies Die (2018)
We often recommend this for its concrete historical examples, which help students connect theory to present political realities.
Margaret Canovan – Populism (1981)
A classic text showing how populism has long existed as a tension within democracy itself.
Should the nation-state be abolished in favor of new forms of global or regional governance, or does it remain essential to political identity and stability?
Professor Commentary:
Over the past thirty years, three factors have weakened nation-states and the international global order:
1) The emergence of what anthropologist Arjun Appadurai calls a “cellular order” – accelerated flows of information, people, and finance in our digital age that states are unable to police or control.
2) The impact of climate change, resulting in increasing frequency of extreme climate events and the costs of rebuilding affected regions,
and 3) forced migration caused by war, famine, climate events, or political instability in weak states. The rightward tilt in politics is an extreme reaction to these developments and could in fact weaken nation-states on account of their denial of root causes of their own demise. Only time will tell if the nation-state experiences a revival or if more fluid boundaries emerge to address current world crises.
Benedict Anderson – Imagined Communities (1983)
A seminal argument that nations are socially constructed through shared stories and symbols.
Joseph E. Stiglitz – Globalization and Its Discontents (2002)
A critique of global economic institutions and their impact on national sovereignty.
Arjun Appadurai – Modernity at Large (1996)
An influential account of global cultural flows that destabilize borders and state authority.
Zygmunt Bauman – Globalization The Human Consequences (1998)
A sociological reflection on how globalization reshapes identity, belonging, and power.
David Held – Global Covenant: The Social Democratic Alternative to the Washington Consensus (2004)
An exploration of cosmopolitan democracy as an alternative to nation-state politics.
Kwame Anthony Appiah – Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers (2006)
A moral argument for global citizenship grounded in shared human obligations.
Samuel Moyn – Not Enough: Human Rights in an Unequal World (2018)
A critique of global human rights discourse that questions whether it weakens national redistribution.
Eric Hobsbawm – Nations and Nationalism Since 1780 (1990)
A historical account of how nation-states emerged and how fragile they may be.
Law and Society
Should AI systems be granted legal personhood, or are they tools that must always remain under human accountability?
Professor Commentary:
Legal persons can enter into contracts, sue and be sued. Before we get into the debate of legal personhood of AI systems some of the questions need to be answered? In case of AI systems we have to ensure what it meant to be sued? Can AI systems live the life of their own? Do the AI systems ever go away from the idea of Ownership or an asset with Economic value? Until these questions are answered under the aegis of human ownership without any “fundamental rights to live its own life, exercise its choices and not to be owned by any individual or entity”, they are just tools that must always remain under human accountability. Somebody else’s accountability and property shouldn’t guarantee a legal personhood to a technology with human ability to think, process and act.
Melanie Mitchell – Artificial Intelligence: A Guide for Thinking Humans (2019)
This is usually our first recommendation for students who want to understand what AI actually does, and where its limits still lie.
Cathy O’Neil – Weapons of Math Destruction (2016)
We pair this with more technical readings because it makes the human consequences of algorithmic decisions impossible to ignore.
Lawrence Lessig – Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace (1999)
A foundational work arguing that technology itself functions as a form of law.
Nick Bostrom – Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (2014)
A speculative but influential work on the risks of advanced AI autonomy.
Shoshana Zuboff – The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power (2019)
An analysis of how AI systems reshape power, accountability, and privacy.
Frank Pasquale – The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information (2015)
This book is especially valuable for students interested in law or policy, as it frames opacity itself as an ethical problem.
Max Tegmark – Life 3.0 (2017)
While speculative at points, this book pushes students to think seriously about long term responsibility and human control.
David J. Gunkel – The Machine Question (2012)
This thoughtful book explores one of the core questions in AI ethics: to what extent intelligent machines should be treated as entities with moral or legal significance.
Should colonial-era artifacts in Western museums be repatriated to their countries of origin, or preserved where they are as part of global heritage?
Professor Commentary:
This question highlights the challenges of addressing issues related to past harms to different people groups from the Western colonial era, generally understood to have been from the 16th to the 18th century, and with ongoing effects. Much of the world has changed since the colonial-era, including our current social systems (for example: financial, legal, transportation, trade, etc.) and geographical considerations (e.g., borders, nation states, etc.) along with their relationships to one another. Earlier and more recent social histories are worth considering in order to sufficiently address a question of such magnitude for its importance to both specific groups in particular locations (whether countries of artifact origin or current location) as well as the wider global community. Whether artifacts in Western museums should be repatriated concerns additional matters related to larger historical and ethical questions about reparations, legal and moral obligations, and ideas of solidarity. But it also raises more technical questions ownership, property rights, as well as more practical questions related to capacity for preservation, which often requires modern technologies (e.g., climate-control capabilities, scientific preservation expertise and resources), as well as questions of access. For example, if the British Museum were to repatriate the Easter Island statues, who would transport them, and where precisely would they go, and who decides? For the university Anthropology departments that took Indigenous remains for research purposes, to whom will these artifacts be returned, especially if issues of tribal sovereignty remain contested? What issues are most important here, and who decides?
Dan Hicks – The Brutish Museums: The Benin Bronzes, Colonial Violence and Cultural Restitution (2020)
A powerful critique of museum collections rooted in colonial violence.
James Cuno – Who Owns Antiquity?: Museums and the Battle Over Our Ancient Heritage (2008)
A defense of universal museums and shared global heritage.
Sathnam Sanghera – Empireland: How Imperialism Has Shaped Modern Britain (2021)
A contemporary reckoning with how empire continues to shape public institutions.
Achille Mbembe – On the Postcolony (2001)
A philosophical examination of colonial power and its afterlives.
Bénédicte Savoy – Africa’s Struggle for Its Art: History of a Postcolonial Defeat (2022)
An insider account of restitution debates in European museums.
Edward Said – Culture and Imperialism (1993)
A foundational text on how culture sustains imperial power.
Kwame Anthony Appiah – In my Father’s house: Africa in the philosophy of culture (1992)
A nuanced discussion of identity, heritage, and cultural ownership.
Ariella Azoulay – Potential History: Unlearning Imperialism (2019)
A radical rethinking of archives, museums, and historical repair.
Should meritocracy be considered a fair system that rewards talent and effort, or a myth that disguises structural inequality?
Professor Commentary:
The question is centred around two key concepts, that of meritocracy and that of structural inequality. Thus, in the first instance, any response will depend on the definition for each of these key concepts. Definitions of such socially embedded concepts are never context-independent. Thus, as a second step, it is necessary to decide on (in an informed manner) relevant scenarios to be considered when approaching the question. Finally, a question to consider is how and why the sample meritocracy is implemented as well as whether it is temporary or not.
Michael J. Sandel – The Tyranny of Merit: What’s Become of the Common Good? (2020)
A moral critique of success and failure in modern societies.
Daniel Markovits – The Meritocracy Trap: How America’s Foundational Myth Feeds Inequality, Dismantles the Middle Class, and Devours the Elite (2019)
An argument that meritocracy reproduces inequality rather than eliminating it.
Pierre Bourdieu – Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste (1979)
A sociological study of how taste and education reinforce class hierarchy.
Malcolm Gladwell – Outliers (2008)
A popular examination of the hidden social factors behind success.
John Rawls – A Theory of Justice (1971)
A foundational work on fairness and equality of opportunity.
Elizabeth Anderson – Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and Why We Don’t Talk about It) (2017)
A critique of power and hierarchy in supposedly merit-based workplaces.
Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis – Schooling in Capitalist America (1976)
An analysis of how education reproduces inequality.
Christopher Hayes – Twilight of the Elites (2012)
A critique of elite self-justification in modern democracies.
Should open borders be embraced as a path to justice and freedom, or would they destabilize societies and undermine welfare systems?
Professor Commentary:
Borders are not just lines on maps; they are moral boundaries that define who counts as “us.” As a public health scientist, I’ve seen how these lines determine who gains access to care, safety, and opportunity—and who is excluded from them. The idea of open borders invites us to imagine a world where dignity and mobility are not privileges tied to birthplace, but universal human rights. It also asks us to reimagine what solidarity looks like when resources, jobs, and welfare systems are no longer enclosed by nationality.
In the United States, for example, evidence consistently shows that immigrants strengthen societies economically and culturally, yet myths of scarcity and fear continue to shape policy. The question, then, is not whether open borders would “work,” but whether we have the courage to evolve our institutions—and our sense of solidarity—to reflect the moral truth that every person deserves safety, belonging, and a chance to thrive.
Joseph Carens – The Ethics of Immigration (2013)
Carens makes the most rigorous philosophical case for open borders, asking students to confront whether freedom of movement should be treated as a basic moral right.
David Miller – Strangers in Our Midst: The Political Philosophy of Immigration (2016)
This book offers a principled defense of border controls, grounding limits on immigration in democratic responsibility and social trust.
Paul Collier – Exodus: How Migration Is Changing Our World (2013)
Collier examines how large-scale migration affects both sending and receiving countries, challenging purely moral or purely economic accounts.
Michael Walzer – Spheres of Justice (1983)
Selections allow students to grapple with the idea that political membership itself may be something societies are entitled to regulate.
Bridget Anderson – Us and Them? The Dangerous Politics of Immigration Control (2013)
Anderson interrogates the moral language used to separate citizens from migrants, pushing students to examine who belongs and why.
Saskia Sassen – Guests and Aliens (1999)
A structural analysis of migration that connects border debates to global labor markets and state power.
Aristide Zolberg – A Nation by Design (2006)
A historical reminder that borders and immigration policies are deliberate political constructions, not natural facts.
Hannah Arendt – The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951)
Arendt’s discussion of statelessness remains foundational for understanding what it means to lack political membership entirely.
Should governments fund moonshot scientific projects (like curing aging or interstellar travel) even if they appear speculative, or prioritize incremental improvements with more immediate benefits?
Professor Commentary:
The majority of the world’s research funding is provided by governments, meaning that their priorities guide the direction of scientific research. Governments may choose to bet more on certain fields which they see as promising, whether as a source of revenue or of social benefit. A country’s funding structure often reflects this: while most funds are allocated to small projects aimed at moving scientific progress along, a few large investments into areas identified as strategic are commonly seen. Examples of this are the European Union’s Graphene Flagship initiative, or the US government’s Human Genome Project. But how should these two approaches be balanced? Is one more valuable than the other (to either that particular country, or humanity as a whole)? Who decides (or should decide) what this balance should be and which areas are determined to be strategic?
Mariana Mazzucato – The Entrepreneurial State (2013)
Mazzucato shows how many transformative technologies emerged from high-risk public investment rather than cautious incrementalism.
Vannevar Bush – Science, the Endless Frontier: A Report to the President on a Program for Postwar Scientific Research (1945)
This text established the postwar argument for funding basic research without guaranteed outcomes.
Daniel Sarewitz – Frontiers of Illusion (1996)
A sustained critique of the assumption that ambitious science automatically produces social benefit.
Peter Thiel – Zero to One: Notes on Startups, Or How to Build the Future (2014)
Thiel’s provocation invites debate about whether progress comes from radical breakthroughs or steady optimization.
Richard Feynman – The Pleasure of Finding Things Out: The Best Short Works of Richard Feynman (1999)
Feynman’s reflections help students understand the intellectual value of curiosity-driven research.
Nicholas Agar – Humanity’s End: Why We Should Reject Radical Enhancement (2010)
A philosophical examination of whether some scientific ambitions outpace our ethical readiness.
Sheila Jasanoff – The Ethics of Invention: Technology and the Human Future (2016)
Jasanoff emphasizes the political and moral responsibility involved in choosing which futures to pursue.
J. D. Bernal – The Social Function of Science (1939)
A classic argument that scientific ambition should be consciously aligned with social need.
Should scientific research on potentially catastrophic technologies (such as gain-of-function experiments or advanced AI models) be restricted, even at the cost of slowing progress?
Professor Commentary:
The significance of this topic is that It broadly questions the extent to which we should use new technologies that interface with human life. In other words, just because we can, should we? One excellent example of a potentially innovative technology that the scientific community has agreed to restrict is the use of genome editing tools in human embryos. Specifically, genome editing is a new biotechnology that could be used to genetically cure inherited diseases like Huntington’s disease or Alzheimer’s. We know the genes that cause these diseases, and now we have a technology that allows us to modify those genes in human embryos, which could allow us to wipe out these conditions from the human population. However, technologies like genome editing are not error proof and we have decided as a community that the potential unintended consequences of human embryo editing don’t outweigh the (admittedly large) potential benefits of eliminating heritable diseases from our gene pool. Another consideration is that these technologies are irreversible: once we genetically edit the human gene pool, there’s no going back. As the technology improves, and as new incurable diseases emerge that have a genetic basis, the scientific community will continuously have to consider whether restrictions on human genome editing continue to ethically prevent translation of the technology to the human population.
Nick Bostrom – Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (2014)
This book forces students to take existential risk seriously rather than dismissing it as speculative fear.
Cass Sunstein – Laws of Fear (2005)
Sunstein provides a framework for thinking rationally about low-probability but high-impact risks.
Langdon Winner – The Whale and the Reactor (1986)
Winner challenges the belief that technology is neutral, emphasizing embedded political consequences.
Paul Virilio – The Original Accident (2007)
Virilio argues that every technological advance invents a new form of catastrophe.
Sheila Jasanoff – The Ethics of Invention: Technology and the Human Future (2016)
A crucial text for examining governance failures in emerging science.
Mary Shelley – Frankenstein (1818)
Still unmatched as a literary exploration of scientific ambition without responsibility.
Yuval Noah Harari – Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow (2016)
Useful for examining how narratives of progress can obscure ethical limits.
James R. Clapper – Facts and Fears: Hard Truths from a Life in Intelligence (2018)
Selections introduce national security perspectives on emerging technological threats.
Can healing ever be “complete,” or is it always an ongoing negotiation with pain, memory, and identity?
Professor Commentary:
In 2025, we like quick fixes. Whether it’s through commercial advertising, or the way national health policies and services are communicated to us, in modern society the expectation is placed on us to maintain high levels of physical and mental wellness – a kind of personal wholeness. At the same time, there’s far greater openness today about the long-lasting effects of trauma, the psychological aspects of pain, the importance of therapy, and rehabilitation medicine. How do these approaches sit side by side? This question is an opportunity to reflect on the importance of healing in human life, identity, and culture – a word which comes from the Old English hǣlan ‘to make whole, cure, or save’. You might compare traditions and ideas of healing in different parts of the world, across different times, consider representations or discussions of healing in visual and written sources – and you may talk about what it means to you.
Viktor E. Frankl – Man’s Search for Meaning (1946)
A essential meditation on suffering, meaning, and survival.
Elaine Scarry – The Body in Pain (1985)
A philosophical exploration of pain and its resistance to language.
Bessel van der Kolk – The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma (2014)
Analysis of trauma and embodied memory.
Susan Sontag – Illness as Metaphor (1978)
A critique of how illness shapes identity and moral judgment.
Atul Gawande – Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End (2014)
A reflection on medicine, aging, and the limits of cure.
Judith Herman – Trauma and Recovery: The Aftermath of Violence—From Domestic Abuse to Political Terror (1992)
A foundational work on the psychological effects of trauma.
Paul Ricoeur – Memory, History, Forgetting (2000)
A philosophical inquiry into how memory shapes identity.
Anne Boyer – The Undying (2019)
A literary meditation on illness, endurance, and selfhood.
2026
Essay Prompts - Junior Division (Ages 11 to 13)
The Junior Division encourages younger students to explore important ideas through everyday experiences and ethical questions about fairness, responsibility, and community. These prompts help students build strong reasoning skills, appreciate different perspectives, and express their thoughts with clarity and care. They provide a solid foundation for thoughtful reflection and curiosity about the world.
Why is it okay for us to eat certain animals and not others?
Professor Commentary:
This question asks students to think about sentience and hierarchies, and the value that cultures place upon life. It opens up questions about what defines an animal, and why do we cast different animals with different roles in our societies. It also asks students to think culturally: what is an animal in one country is not considered so in another place, and what is ‘normal’ to eat varies around the world. Students may consider whether or not it is ever ok to eat animals, drawing on arguments by vegans and vegetarians. They may also like to think about religion in relation to food practices.
Melanie Joy – Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs, and Wear Cows (2010)
This book helps students notice how society treats different animals in very different ways — encouraging them to think about the stories behind those choices without judgment.
Philip Hoose – The Race to Save the Lord God Bird (2004)
This nonfiction work blends history and environmental science to tell the story of the extinction of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker, prompting thoughtful reflection on humanity’s impact on animals and ecosystems.
What a Fish Knows: The Inner Lives of Our Underwater Cousins
This accessible book introduces young readers to the surprising feelings and intelligence of animals often overlooked.
Should people always tell the truth, even if it might hurt someone’s feelings?
Professor Commentary:
Sharing the truth with people can be difficult, but it is the right thing to do. We should not allow lies to come between us and the people we love, because honesty is the foundation of trust. Still, not everyone wants or needs to hear everything we think — sometimes people aren’t ready or don’t care to know. That’s why wisdom lies in knowing when and how to tell the truth. When someone asks for my opinion, I always tell them the truth, but I try to do it with kindness and respect. True honesty should strengthen relationships, not break them.
Kat Yeh – The Truth About Twinkie Pie (2013)
This heartfelt story follows a young girl navigating the tricky balance between telling the truth and protecting her friendships. It encourages readers to think about honesty with kindness and the complexities of speaking up in everyday life.
Rebecca Stead – When You Reach Me (2009)
This novel explores how honesty and secrets affect relationships in unexpected ways.
Julia Galef – The Scout Mindset (2021)
This nonfiction book explores what it means to face reality honestly, how bias can distort our thinking, and why embracing curiosity and accuracy leads to better decisions and more ethical behavior.
How can we make sure schools are fair for all students?
Professor Commentary:
While schools may be spaces to learn about equality and fairness, students arrive at schools from a wide variety of backgrounds. What they get to learn, how they learn, and why they learn what they are taught will be different based on their backgrounds. Especially when we take into consideration various inequalities that exist in our societies based on social categories such as class, gender, ‘race’, and disability/abled-bodiedness, it is almost inevitable that these inequalities are reproduced in educational contexts. An essay exploring fairness in schools should thus discuss educational inequalities alongside other inequalities, emphasizing how they interact with each other.
Another approach can be looking at the roles of various actors in ensuring fairness in schools. Some examples are policymakers, teachers, students, and parents. What we can and should expect from each of these actors to reach towards fairness, especially regarding a fair allocation of economic and other resources would be important to explore.
Kelly Yang – Front Desk (2018)
A story about fairness and courage that shows how one young person can challenge injustice in her community.
Lynda Mullaly Hunt – Fish in a Tree (2015)
This book helps students understand that everyone learns differently and fairness means recognizing those differences.
Cece Bell – El Deafo (2014)
Using humor and heart, this graphic novel teaches empathy and the importance of accessibility in schools.
Should people be punished for breaking rules online?
Professor Commentary:
It is common for people to assume that the Internet is a lawless land, given its seemingly immaterial and virtual character. However, what happens in virtual spaces directly shapes daily reality in very concrete ways. From cases of bullying to transnational cyberattacks, the question of whether to punish people who break rules in online spaces is more relevant than ever. But what forms of punishment, if any, would be appropriate for online infractions? Since new laws and forms of punishment fundamentally limit the freedom we, as individuals, can enjoy in society, this question warrants careful examination.
Are there any key differences between the rules that govern online and offline life, and if so, where do these differences lie? Answering this question is a crucial step toward understanding how fair and legitimate punishment for online behavior can be.
Sarah Jeong – The Internet of Garbage (2015)
Jeong’s insightful analysis helps us understand why online actions matter, how digital culture shapes interactions, and what responsible participation in online spaces looks like.
Gretchen McCulloch – Because Internet: Understanding the New Rules of Language (2019)
A playful but serious nonfiction look at how internet communication changes the way we write, talk, and interact.
Patricia Lockwood – No One Is Talking About This (2021)
Exploration of the fragmented experience of living online and the emotional weight of digital communities.
Is it better to work together or do things on your own?
Professor Commentary:
Independent work is often where real growth begins. By developing our own discipline, focus, and curiosity, we learn to think clearly and take responsibility for ideas. Collaboration then builds on that foundation — combining individual strengths, perspectives, and creativity to achieve far more than anyone could alone. The two aren’t opposites but parts of the same process: progress needs both moments of quiet reflection and moments of shared effort. Many of the world’s best ideas have emerged this way — starting with one person’s insight and growing through collaboration. This question encourages us to see the two not as opposites, but as stages in a cycle of growth — with balance, case by case, being the key to lasting success.
Rebecca Stead – When You Reach Me (2009)
This novel shows how independence often depends on unseen networks of support.
Kwame Alexander – The Crossover (2014)
A fast-moving story that foregrounds teamwork, competition, and mutual reliance.
Gary D. Schmidt – Okay for Now (2011)
A powerful portrayal of personal growth shaped through mentorship and community.
Linda Sue Park – A Single Shard (2001)
A story that makes clear how mastery is learned through guidance as well as effort.
Should getting vaccines be a matter of individual freedom or community responsibility?
Professor Commentary:
Vaccines can protect individuals, but their effectiveness is greater when community-wide immunity is achieved. However, any medication carries a risk of side effects or allergic reactions. That risk depends on the person’s condition, such as health, location, and environment. First, consider a contagious disease you want to reduce, like COVID-19, influenza, measles, chickenpox, poliomyelitis, and others, and learn how it spreads and who is most vulnerable. Next, research the effectiveness and possible side effects of available vaccines against those diseases. Finally, use this information to decide on a rule you’d like to implement in your community, such as your school, city, state, or country. In each case, weigh the benefits and risks for both individuals and the community, and decide how much vaccination should be a personal choice versus a community responsibility, depending on the situation. For example, consider the percentage of vaccination needed to achieve herd immunity, simulate scenarios where herd immunity is reached or not, and analyze how those outcomes align with historical events.
Eula Biss – On Immunity: An Inoculation (2014)
An accessible and reflective exploration of fear, trust, and shared responsibility.
Sonia Shah – Pandemic: Tracking Contagions, from Cholera to Ebola and Beyond (2016)
Helps students understand why individual choices matter in interconnected systems.
Paul Offit – Deadly Choices: How the Anti-Vaccine Movement Threatens Us All (2010)
A clear explanation of vaccine resistance and its public consequences.
If an AI makes a mistake, who should be responsible?
Professor Commentary:
As AI become part of everyday life, questions about responsibility are becoming more important. When something goes wrong, should responsibility rest with the companies that design and deploy AI systems, the governments that regulate them, or the people who use them? Essays responding to this prompt should consider the ethical, legal, and social dimensions of AI accountability. Students may also wish to explore how the severity or consequences of a mistake made by an AI system might influence our perception of responsibility, whether current frameworks for liability are enough, and how AI systems often make decisions that their creators cannot fully explain (frequently referred to as the “black box” problem).
Melanie Mitchell – Artificial Intelligence A Guide for Thinking Humans (2019)
Clarifies what AI systems can and cannot do, grounding responsibility in human design choices.
Kazuo Ishiguro – Klara and the Sun (2021)
A novel that raises questions about care, agency, and responsibility without technical jargon.
Ted Chiang – Exhalation (2019)
Selected stories allow students to explore accountability through speculative scenarios.
Is resilience something individuals must build, or should schools and families do more to reduce the causes of stress?
Professor Commentary:
Resilience, or the ability to withstand or recover from difficulties, can be an empowering skill to learn, and give an individual agency in the face of uncontrollable circumstances. However, the expectation that individuals must personally “build resilience” is a fairly recent idea. Early discussions of stress framed it as a societal problem linked to poor working conditions, poverty, and familial trauma. In this lens, the response was a collective strategy through labor reforms, public health programs, and community support. It wasn’t until later in the 20th century that self-help culture popularized resilience as an individual character trait that people need to develop on their own through “grit” and “mental toughness.” Understanding this historical context makes us rethink whether personal stress should really be handled at the individual level or not.
Sharon Draper – Out of My Mind (2010)
A powerful work on overcoming challenges, building resilience, and finding one’s voice.
Jacqueline Woodson – Brown Girl Dreaming (2014)
A poetic memoir that beautifully captures growing up and finding strength through family and self-expression.
Linda Sue Park – A Long Walk to Water (2010)
A gripping story inspired by real events, showing courage and perseverance amid hardship.
2026
Essay Guidelines & Judging Criteria
General Guidelines
No Entry Fee
There are no fees required to enter this essay competition. It is open to all eligible participants without any cost.
Academic Integrity
This essay competition upholds the highest level of academic integrity. Participants are expected to adhere strictly to these standards.
Original Work
Each essay must be the original work of the participant. The use of AI tools for assistance in writing is strictly prohibited. Essays must reflect the participant’s own ideas, analysis, and expression.
Plagiarism
Plagiarism is not tolerated in any form. Any essay found to involve plagiarism will be immediately disqualified from the competition. Participants must ensure that all sources are appropriately cited and that the essay is composed of their unique thoughts and words.
Sole authorship required
The essay you submit must be entirely your own work. Collaboration with others or co-authorship is not permitted. You are allowed to seek advice and discuss topics with others, but no one else should be involved in the actual writing of the essay. It must be your own work.
One Essay Submission & Single Question Focus
Participants are allowed to submit only one essay. Furthermore, each essay must address only one of the provided essay prompts.
Referee Contact
Participants are required to submit the email of an adult academic reference (such as your school teacher or counsellor). In the event that further academic verification is needed, we will reach out to the referee for more information. The referee will also receive the outcome of the competition.
Eligibility
Students from around the world are welcome to participate.
The Cambridge Re:Think Essay Competition 2026 is open to students aged 11 to 18 who have not yet commenced undergraduate studies at the time of submission.
For the 2026 cycle, submissions are accepted in two divisions (participants must fall within the relevant age range on the date they submit their essay):
Junior Division: Ages 11–13
Senior Division: Ages 14–18
Format Guidelines
Please ensure that your essay does not exceed 2000 words; this word count excludes footnotes and bibliography.
Please use a consistent font format and set the line spacing to 1.5 space.
All submissions will be routed through plagiarism and an AI checker. As such, we expect all submissions to be properly cited. The format of citation for this competition is MLA 8, the 8th edition of the Modern Language Association style. To find out more about MLA 8, please refer to this guide here.
The essay must be submitted in PDF format. In the PDF document, please remove your name, affiliation, or any personal information to ensure a blind review. You will be asked to provide personal information in the submission system.
Judging Criteria
All submissions will be reviewed by a judging panel with scholars drawn from prestigious institutions, including Harvard, Cambridge, Oxford, and MIT.
Double-Blind Review
Double-blind essay review is a process used in academic or scholarly publishing where both the reviewers and the authors are anonymous to each other. In this system, the identities of the authors are kept confidential from the reviewers, and vice versa. This approach aims to minimise biases that could arise from knowledge of the author’s identity, academic affiliation, or reputation.
Original and interesting ideas
The competition aims to motivate students to deeply reassess and contemplate the interconnections of science, society, and the global environment. Original thoughts and perspectives are greatly encouraged.
Quality of Argument and Writing
Clear writing and well-supported arguments are crucial. This means that essays should be well-structured, with each claim or argument supported by evidence or logical reasoning. Additionally, the judges will consider the style of writing, which includes language use, idea flow, and overall engagement with the topics.
Plagiarism and AI Assistance
The competition has a strict policy against plagiarism and the use of AI writing assistance. Essays found to have such content will be disqualified. This means students must ensure their work is entirely their own.
The Official Cambridge Re:Think Writing Workshop
The Cambridge Re:Think Writing Workshop is a monthly online Zoom session designed to support prospective essay writers as they get started on their essays.
Led by experienced PhD writing mentors from Stanford University and University of Cambridge.
These sessions offer participants valuable guidance on both the structure and substance of their essays. Writers have the opportunity to engage in interactive discussions, receive personalised advice, and explore various approaches to enhance the form, style, and content of their work.
The Workshop is open for free for all registered participants. Applicants could find a link to sign up for one of the workshops on the Essay Competition Submission Portal.
The Think Tank
Official Essay Guide
To help participants gain insights and take a better approach to the essay prompts designed by the professors, CCIR has created an Official Essay Guide for this year’s competition.
In the guide, participants will find guidelines on how to write an essay for the competition. This guideline aims to help participants become better thinkers – engaging with the essay prompt at a deeper level – and to improve their writing skills.
The Official Essay Guide is available for all registered participants on the Submission Portal.
Awards
(Awards are offered separately for the Junior and Senior Divisions)
Division Awards (Per Division)
Gold – 10 Global Recipients (per division)
150 USD Cash Award, 500 USD CCIR Academy scholarship, digital award certificate, invitation for a feature interview on CCIR podcast and website, invitation to the Award Ceremony and Dinner at the University of Cambridge (free of charge).
Silver – 10 Global Recipients (per division)
100 USD Cash Award, 300 USD CCIR Academy scholarship, digital award certificate, invitation for a feature interview on CCIR podcast and website, invitation to the Award Ceremony and Dinner at the University of Cambridge (free of charge).
Bronze – 10 Global Recipients (per division)
50 USD Cash Award, 200 USD CCIR Academy scholarship, digital award certificate, invitation for a feature interview on CCIR podcast and website, invitation to the Award Ceremony and Dinner at the University of Cambridge (free of charge).
In addition, we will offer three special prizes, which we have named after Aristotle’s classical distinctions between the three essential modes of persuasion from his Rhetoric:
The Logos Prize for Best Argument: For Aristotle, logos is a matter of rational or logical appeal, the adeptness at using reasoning in a work. This prize will be awarded to the essay which is deemed by the judges to be the most rationally, logically, and philosophically compelling.
The Pathos Prize for Best Writing: Pathos is understood as the capacity for a work to appeal to emotions, spark sympathy, empathy, or passion. This prize will be awarded to the essay which is deemed by the judged to be the most emotionally, aesthetically, and artistically compelling.
The Ethos Prize for Best Research: Ethos is a matter of convincing the audience of the presenter’s credibility on a subject. This prize will be awarded to the essay which is deemed by the judged to be the most thoroughly researched and well-grounded in the existing academic literature.
Each special prize will be awarded to 1 recipient globally. The winner will receive 150 USD Cash Prize, 500 USD CCIR Academy scholarship, digital award certificate, an invitation for a feature interview on CCIR podcast and website, and an invitation to the Award Ceremony and Dinner at the University of Cambridge (free of charge).
Honourable Mention – Around 10% of the total participants that are shortlisted but do not receive the aforementioned awards will receive a digital certificate recognizing their Honourable Mention, and invitations to the Award Ceremony and Dinner at the University of Cambridge.
All participants successfully submitted their essays will receive a digital certificate of participation issued by CCIR.
Award Ceremony and Dinner at the University of Cambridge
Award winners will be invited to attend the Award Ceremony and Dinner hosted at the King’s College, University of Cambridge on 31st July, 2026
The Dinner is free of charge for the recipients of Gold, Silver, Bronze, Logos, Pathos, and Ethos prizes.
Honourable Mention recipients are also invited to the dinner for a 195 GBP per person ticket.
Tickets for additional attendees accompanying recipients are also available at 195 GBP per person in limited quantity.
The Dinner is by invitation and only open for CCIR Cambridge Re:think Essay Competition award recipients and CCIR Research Symposium presenters, and their companies. The Dinner is not open for the general public.
The Hall at King’s College, Cambridge
The Hall was designed by William Wilkins in the 1820s and is considered one of the most magnificent halls of its era. The first High Table dinner in the Hall was held in February 1828, and ever since then, the splendid Hall has been where members of the college eat and where formal dinners have been held for centuries.
The Award Ceremony and Dinner will be held in the Hall in the evening of 31st July, 2026.
Back Lawn
Stretching out down to the River Cam, the Back Lawn has one of the most iconic backdrop of King’s College Chapel.
The early evening reception will be hosted on the Back Lawn with the iconic Chapel in the background (weather permitting).
King’s College Chapel
With construction started in 1446 by Henry VI and took over a century to build, King’s College Chapel is one of the most iconic buildings in the world, and is a splendid example of late Gothic architecture.
Attendees are also granted complimentary access to the King’s College Chapel before and during the event.
Nobel Laureates Attended
We are beyond excited to announce that ten Nobel laureates have attended and spoke at previous years' research symposium. They have each delivered a keynote speech to the attendees and shared their insights with students during the live sessions and in-person at the University of Cambridge.
Dr David Baltimore
The Nobel Prize in Medicine 1975 for the discovery on the interaction between tumour viruses and the genetic material
of the cell
Dr David Baltimore is an American biologist, university administrator, and 1975 Nobel laureate in Physiology or Medicine. He is a professor of biology at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), where he served as president from 1997 to 2006. He founded the Whitehead Institute and directed it from 1982 to 1990. In 2008, he served as president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 2008.
At age 37, Baltimore won the Nobel Prize with Renato Dulbecco and Howard M. Temin “for their discoveries concerning the interaction between tumour viruses and the genetic material of the cell”, specifically the discovery of the enzyme reverse transcriptase. He has contributed to immunology, virology, cancer research, biotechnology, and recombinant DNA research. He has also trained many doctoral students and postdoctoral fellows, several of whom have gone on to notable and distinguished research careers. In addition to the Nobel Prize, he has received a number of awards, including the U.S. National Medal of Science in 1999 and the Lasker Award in 2021.
Dr Thomas R. Cech
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1989 for the discovery of catalytic properties of RNA
Thomas Robert Cech is an American chemist who shared the 1989 Nobel Prize in Chemistry with Sidney Altman, for their discovery of the catalytic properties of RNA. Cech discovered that RNA could itself cut strands of RNA, suggesting that life might have started as RNA. He found that RNA can not only transmit instructions, but also that it can speed up the necessary reactions.
He also studied telomeres, and his lab discovered an enzyme, TERT (telomerase reverse transcriptase), which is part of the process of restoring telomeres after they are shortened during cell division.
As president of Howard Hughes Medical Institute, he promoted science education, and he teaches an undergraduate chemistry course at the University of Colorado
Sir Richard J. Roberts
The Nobel Prize in Medicine 1993 for the discovery of split genes
During 1969–1972, Sir Richard J. Roberts did postdoctoral research at Harvard University before moving to Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, where he was hired by James Dewey Watson, a co-discoverer of the structure of DNA and a fellow Nobel laureate. In this period he also visited the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology for the first time, working alongside Fred Sanger. In 1977, he published his discovery of RNA splicing. In 1992, he moved to New England Biolabs. The following year, he shared a Nobel Prize with his former colleague at Cold Spring Harbor Phillip Allen Sharp.
His discovery of the alternative splicing of genes, in particular, has had a profound impact on the study and applications of molecular biology. The realisation that individual genes could exist as separate, disconnected segments within longer strands of DNA first arose in his 1977 study of adenovirus, one of the viruses responsible for causing the common cold. Robert’s research in this field resulted in a fundamental shift in our understanding of genetics, and has led to the discovery of split genes in higher organisms, including human beings.
Dr William Daniel Phillips
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2004 for the discovery of ubiquitin-mediated protein degradation
In 1996, Dr William Daniel Phillips received the Albert A. Michelson Medal from The Franklin Institute. His doctoral thesis concerned the magnetic moment of the proton in H2O. He later did some work with Bose–Einstein condensates. In 1997 he won the Nobel Prize in Physics together with Claude Cohen-Tannoudji and Steven Chu for his contributions to laser cooling, a technique to slow the movement of gaseous atoms in order to better study them, at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and especially for his invention of the Zeeman slower.
Dr Phillips is one of the 20 American recipients of the Nobel Prize in Physics to sign a letter addressed to President George W. Bush in May 2008, urging him to “reverse the damage done to basic science research in the Fiscal Year 2008 Omnibus Appropriations Bill” by requesting additional emergency funding for the Department of Energy’s Office of Science, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
He was one of the 35 Nobel laureates who signed a letter urging President Obama to provide a stable $15 billion per year support for clean energy research, technology and demonstration.
He is also one of three well-known scientists and Methodist laity who have involved themselves in the religion and science dialogue. The other two scientists and fellow Methodists are chemist Charles Coulson and 1981 Nobel laureate Arthur Leonard Schawlow.
His discovery of the alternative splicing of genes, in particular, has had a profound impact on the study and applications of molecular biology. The realisation that individual genes could exist as separate, disconnected segments within longer strands of DNA first arose in his 1977 study of adenovirus, one of the viruses responsible for causing the common cold. Robert’s research in this field resulted in a fundamental shift in our understanding of genetics, and has led to the discovery of split genes in higher organisms, including human beings.
Dr Aaron Ciechanover
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2004 for the discovery of ubiquitin-mediated protein degradation
In 2004, Dr Aaron Ciechanover was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry together with Avram Hershko and Irwin Rose for their discovery of ubiquitin-mediated protein degradation, a fundamental cellular process by which proteins are selectively broken down and recycled. His doctoral research in biochemistry was completed at the Technion – Israel Institute of Technology, following medical and scientific training at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. His work established the molecular mechanisms by which cells regulate protein turnover, providing a foundation for understanding a wide range of physiological and pathological processes.
Dr Ciechanover is one of Israel’s first Nobel laureates in science and has played a central role in the scientific history of the Technion and in the development of modern molecular biology. His early studies, conducted in collaboration with Avram Hershko, identified ubiquitin as a key polypeptide required for ATP-dependent proteolysis, leading to the formulation of the ubiquitin–proteasome pathway. This discovery resulted in a fundamental shift in the understanding of intracellular regulation and revealed a new principle governing cellular homeostasis.
Dr Robert Lefkowitz
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2012 for the discovery of G protein-coupled receptors
Robert Joseph Lefkowitz is an American physician (internist and cardiologist) and biochemist. He is best known for his discoveries that reveal the inner workings of an important family G protein-coupled receptors, for which he was awarded the 2012 Nobel Prize for Chemistry with Brian Kobilka. He is currently an Investigator with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute as well as a James B. Duke Professor of Medicine and Professor of Biochemistry and Chemistry at Duke University.
Dr Lefkowitz made a remarkable contribution in the mid-1980s when he and his colleagues cloned the gene first for the β-adrenergic receptor, and then rapidly thereafter, for a total of 8 adrenergic receptors (receptors for adrenaline and noradrenaline). This led to the seminal discovery that all GPCRs (which include the β-adrenergic receptor) have a very similar molecular structure. The structure is defined by an amino acid sequence which weaves its way back and forth across the plasma membrane seven times. Today we know that about 1,000 receptors in the human body belong to this same family. The importance of this is that all of these receptors use the same basic mechanisms so that pharmaceutical researchers now understand how to effectively target the largest receptor family in the human body. Today, as many as 30 to 50 percent of all prescription drugs are designed to “fit” like keys into the similarly structured locks of Dr Lefkowitz’ receptors—everything from anti-histamines to ulcer drugs to beta blockers that help relieve hypertension, angina and coronary disease.
Dr Lefkowitz is among the most highly cited researchers in the fields of biology, biochemistry, pharmacology, toxicology, and clinical medicine according to Thomson-ISI.
Dr Joachim Frank
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2017 for developing cryo-electron microscopy
Joachim Frank is a German-American biophysicist at Columbia University and a Nobel laureate. He is regarded as the founder of single-particle cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM), for which he shared the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2017 with Jacques Dubochet and Richard Henderson. He also made significant contributions to structure and function of the ribosome from bacteria and eukaryotes.
In 1975, Dr Frank was offered a position of senior research scientist in the Division of Laboratories and Research (now Wadsworth Center), New York State Department of Health,where he started working on single-particle approaches in electron microscopy. In 1985 he was appointed associate and then (1986) full professor at the newly formed Department of Biomedical Sciences of the University at Albany, State University of New York. In 1987 and 1994, he went on sabbaticals in Europe, one to work with Richard Henderson, Laboratory of Molecular Biology Medical Research Council in Cambridge and the other as a Humboldt Research Award winner with Kenneth C. Holmes, Max Planck Institute for Medical Research in Heidelberg. In 1998, Dr Frank was appointed investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI). Since 2003 he was also lecturer at Columbia University, and he joined Columbia University in 2008 as professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics and of biological sciences.
Dr Barry C. Barish
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2017 for the decisive contributions to the detection of gravitational waves
Dr Barry Clark Barish is an American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate. He is a Linde Professor of Physics, emeritus at California Institute of Technology and a leading expert on gravitational waves.
In 2017, Barish was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics along with Rainer Weiss and Kip Thorne “for decisive contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves”. He said, “I didn’t know if I would succeed. I was afraid I would fail, but because I tried, I had a breakthrough.”
In 2018, he joined the faculty at University of California, Riverside, becoming the university’s second Nobel Prize winner on the faculty.
In the fall of 2023, he joined Stony Brook University as the inaugural President’s Distinguished Endowed Chair in Physics.
In 2023, Dr Barish was awarded the National Medal of Science by President Biden in a White House ceremony.
Dr Harvey J. Alter
The Nobel Prize in Medicine 2020 for the discovery of Hepatitis C virus
Dr Harvey J. Alter is an American medical researcher, virologist, physician and Nobel Prize laureate, who is best known for his work that led to the discovery of the hepatitis C virus. Alter is the former chief of the infectious disease section and the associate director for research of the Department of Transfusion Medicine at the Warren Grant Magnuson Clinical Center in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland. In the mid-1970s, Alter and his research team demonstrated that most post-transfusion hepatitis cases were not due to hepatitis A or hepatitis B viruses. Working independently, Alter and Edward Tabor, a scientist at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, proved through transmission studies in chimpanzees that a new form of hepatitis, initially called “non-A, non-B hepatitis” caused the infections, and that the causative agent was probably a virus. This work eventually led to the discovery of the hepatitis C virus in 1988, for which he shared the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2020 along with Michael Houghton and Charles M. Rice.
Dr Alter has received recognition for the research leading to the discovery of the virus that causes hepatitis C. He was awarded the Distinguished Service Medal, the highest award conferred to civilians in United States government public health service, and the 2000 Albert Lasker Award for Clinical Medical Research.
Dr Ardem Patapoutian
The Nobel Prize in Medicine 2021 for discovering how pressure is translated into nerve impulses
Dr Ardem Patapoutian is an Lebanese-American molecular biologist, neuroscientist, and Nobel Prize laureate of Armenian descent. He is known for his work in characterising the PIEZO1, PIEZO2, and TRPM8 receptors that detect pressure, menthol, and temperature. Dr Patapoutian is a neuroscience professor and Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator at Scripps Research in La Jolla, California. In 2021, he won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine jointly with David Julius.
Frequently Asked Questions
The Cambridge Re:think Essay competition is meant to serve as fertile ground for honing writing skills, fostering critical thinking, and refining communication abilities. Winning or participating in reputable contests can lead to recognition, awards, scholarships, or even publication opportunities, elevating your academic profile for college applications and future endeavours. Moreover, these competitions facilitate intellectual growth by encouraging exploration of diverse topics, while also providing networking opportunities and exposure to peers, educators, and professionals. Beyond accolades, they instil confidence, prepare for higher education demands, and often allow you to contribute meaningfully to societal conversations or causes, making an impact with your ideas.
As long as you’re currently age 11 to 18 at the time of your submission, regardless of your location or background, you’re eligible to participate. We welcome students from diverse educational settings worldwide to contribute their unique perspectives to the competition.
There is no entry fee for the competition. Waiving the entry fee for our essay competition demonstrates CCIR’s dedication to equity. CCIR believes everyone should have an equal chance to participate and showcase their talents, regardless of financial circumstances. Removing this barrier ensures a diverse pool of participants and emphasises merit and creativity over economic capacity, fostering a fair and inclusive environment for all contributors.
Subscribe for Competition Updates
If you are interested to receive latest information and updates of this year’s competition, please sign up here.