<p>OP, you seem to be under the belief that there is a collection of data phase
followed by an ‘innovative thinking’ phase. This is topsy turvy.</p>
<p>A key idea which is simple forms the basis for posing the central question. The
research is done to prove (or disprove) the hypothesis. The paper documents
your thinking formally with a little bit of data etc.</p>
<p>My paper was on research done since my sophomore year through Junior year.
The key idea was simple and the work could have been carried out in a garage if
necessary.</p>
<p>Innovative findings have very little to do with the quality of the paper. The
systematic way the key hypothesis is set up and proved tends to be the
major contribution. </p>
<p>* Doing research for the sake of competing is a very bad idea. * Yes, I know
enough Juniors and Seniors at my public HS who are engaged in exactly
this. It is interesting that the admissions officers at top 5 colleges seem to
know which one of these are not genuinely interested as evidenced by
their admittance outcomes.</p>
<p>It is exhilarating to win at both Siemens and Intel STS but requires significant
effort in terms of the supplementary essays and material that has to be
put together (especially when your college apps are due). This is why those
who start early and have accrued significant momentum in their research are
rewarded. Using the ScienceBuddies site can be a great starting point. </p>
<p>;) Also spending less time talking about doing something (like on CC) and doing
it might be helpful…?</p>