<p>Hello! I'm doing research with a biochemistry professor at a university this summer and I was wondering if I should enter my work into Siemens/whether I even have a chance to get at least semifinalist?</p>
<p>My project is largely empirical (no one has done what I'm doing before), and a large part of my research is trying to find the ideal conditions in which to conduct my experiments (which takes a while). While I have made progress, there is a still a long way to go in my project. (By the way, I'm a rising senior, so it's not like I can wait until next year to do the competition.)</p>
<p>I was wondering if my lack of revolutionary results is still enough to enter into Siemens (there is a lot of potential future experimentation though)? Do the judges mainly look at the abstract (which I guess I can make look good?) during the initial phase or the report (doubt they have time to read so many 18-page papers in 18 days?)?</p>
<p>Sorry, I am planning on asking my mentor his opinion as well, but any feedback is greatly appreciated!</p>
<p>if you’re asking this, you’re probably not going to be a sf.</p>
<p>haha, you’re lucky you got a professor to work with, My research is by no means revolutionary although it is original and fairly advanced. It’s looking like it’s headed toward a failed hypothesis at the moment, I will still submit it lol.</p>
<p>Really?
You think I should still admit?
I’m thinking that even though my project isn’t exactly super advanced, it has potential to be, and I think I can make my abstract seem very good.</p>
<p>I don’t know though. Not sure if I should spend the time on an 18-page paper if my chances don’t look good. :p</p>
<p>I’m still going to write it, and not expecting to get SF. Research has been really interesting so far, even with all of it’s ups an downs. Personally, I figure you should go through with it, but I’m not you. Not all of the submitted papers can be groundbreaking, not all published papers are groundbreaking either.</p>
<p>Submit it. If you don’t place, you at least got some experience in writing a research paper and abstract. Give it a go, you never know.</p>
<p>For any future applicants considering the same question in the first post.</p>
<p>You should certainly submit regardless of your perceived “chances”. Personally, I spent around two intense months to crank out my paper. This may be unattractive to seniors, especially those applying ED/EA, as I too contemplated the investment. But in the end, I have completely no regrets.</p>
<p>You’ll probably spend many late nights chatting your professor and grad students and emailing drafts to be proofread at like 3 AM. You’ll probably be frustrated by the respective citation system you use. But hey, finishing such a piece in itself is commendable and is an experience few high school students can claim.</p>
<p>Best wishes to all future Siemens/INTEL participants. :D</p>
<p>Well, you can still submit. It doesn’t necessarily matter if you win anything. You can always submit an abstract or something to colleges as “proof” that you did some kind of research if you really want it on your college app.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>that’s not uncommon; i went through the same</p>
<p>and since it’s truly new, then those things need to be worked out anyway. those would still be considered significant results</p>
<p>quidditchcat, PIE17831: exactly how does original scientific research come into play during the admissions process? i was kind of an idiot and did not take many advanced classes in high school or do too many extracurriculars, but i’m getting really involved in research with a ph.d. student at my local uni. i do have top grades, and i’m already scoring well on practice SATs i’ve been self-proctoring so my app will at least be decent. if without the research i’m looking at a school like BU or BC, if i pull together a decent Intel application for next year, how much can that help my app?</p>