<p>do those need to be “extraordinary” to impress AO? Like inventing a new theory, or having done researchs that have never been done before
Social researchs vs Science researchs ? Which ones are usually sent?</p>
<p>Btw, anybody here is doing economic researchs?</p>
<p>SHould i send them my short fiction ( 50 pages)? Since they have a lot to read, will that be annoying? I think my fiction is pretty good.</p>
<p>OP, Irrespective of your nationality, impressive research is
quite simply charcterized by the awards (cash and otherwise) that
it has garnered in prestigious* venues (ISEF, National/International
level research competitions). (~400 U.S. nationals get to go to ISEF every
year compared to ~5-25 international contestants per country)</p>
<p>There are fewer venues for recognition on the social and economics side.
One exception is history and the many categories of NHD national awards.</p>
<p>Harvard has explicit instructions on how research is to be submitted
(cover letter, layman explanation etc.). I am not sure that anything
beyond your layman explanation will be read at the admissions office.</p>
<p>Fiction and non-fiction writing which have won awards would be a positive
factor in helping your application stand out. Sending in a 50-page manuscript
is probably not going to be relatively helpful.</p>
<p>Being a member of Mensa is somewhat meaningless given the nature
of your peers accomplishments? If you have done something with it,
for example taken MENSA to inner city children etc it might be worthwhile.</p>
<p>The research is typically not done for competitive purposes but the outcome is entered into
competitions (local/regional/state science fairs and ISEF, Siemens, STS etc.) usually
garnering the researcher a few awards.</p>
<p>Someone who is research oriented will have a history of research going back
to prior years- not a sudden love for it when it is time to apply to
college. Their LOR writers will be singing their praise for the quality of work
and even the ones with real bad luck dodging them will have a few awards to
show related to their research.</p>
<p>Working in a lab does not count as research. You could be fetching someone their
tools or doing assays as directed - simply counting cells. Research is related to
having a hypothesis and systematically arriving at a conclusion about it. There are
people at labs who are there for the only reason they are very good at looking after
the model animals used in the research and in doing the post-research data collection.
One of the big reasons research done sans awards may not be well received
could be the perception (and to some extent reality) of mommy and daddy’s *
contacts taking in the student for research spells they would never have qualified
for. </p>
<p>*(The sheer arrogance of the families involved in trying to pull this off is breathtaking.
More recently I heard of ‘paid mentors’ placing their students with prestigious
research efforts. How long does it take a fact checker to ascertain that
‘Junior the VIIth’ does not have a history of involvement in research/science and
for the confidential-LOR writer to hint at reality?)</p>
<p>^you’re a bit off dude. The REALITY is that the kid with the connected parents usually end up winning the big awards. Again, I’m saying this after plenty of personal experience in dealing with those type of people.</p>