Here’s the truth: Published research is the new flex in college apps. But what does that mean for colleges?
A growing number of high school students are applying to college with research papers in hand—some even published in what look like academic journals. According to a January 2024 article by AI Brilliance, 45 percent of Caltech’s Class of 2027 submitted documentation of prior research.
As research becomes a favored credential in an increasingly competitive and test-optional admissions landscape, educators and admissions officers face a new dilemma: how can we tell the difference between real academic engagement and research as strategy. A 2023 joint investigation by ProPublica and The Chronicle of Higher Education exposed a fast-growing industry that sells publication as an outcome, commodifying what should be a meaningful intellectual journey.
We’ve spent over a decade focused on academically rigorous, ethical high school research. And we see a growing challenge: How can educators and admissions professionals navigate the increasingly complex terrain of high school research publications?
Here are seven things every college should know about student research, including some key questions they need to be asking.
In just a decade, high school research went from being a niche activity to a near expectation for ambitious students. They can hardly be blamed though.
The pandemic normalized online learning and limited access to traditional extracurriculars. At the same time, the move to test-optional policies has encouraged students to seek new ways to demonstrate academic distinction. Research has become one such strategy. Scholars note that as admissions competition has intensified, students have increasingly pursued activities that allow them to differentiate themselves academically (Bound et al., 2009).
As a result, many students now see research (especially published research) as a key differentiator in college admissions. Online research mentorship programs and student journals have expanded rapidly to meet this demand. But here’s the problem. While many of these platforms offer valuable educational experiences, others promote publication as an outcome that can be guaranteed, regardless of academic quality.
“Nowadays, having a publication is kind of a given,” one high school student told ProPublica. “If you don’t have one, you’re going to have to make it up in some other aspect of your application.”
Many journals now cater specifically to high school students. Some maintain academic standards and peer review processes. Others mirror patterns that scholars have identified with deceptive/predatory publishing—rapid acceptance, pay-to-publish models, and lack of transparent editorial oversight—making it hard for readers to judge whether a paper reflects meaningful scholarly effort or just a processing fee (Grudniewicz et al., 2019, Nature). These consensus and empirical studies define core warning signs: false or misleading claims about peer review, deviation from best editorial practices, lack of transparency, aggressive solicitation, and unusually fast decision times inconsistent with rigorous review (Aromataris, 2020, BMC Medicine).
For example, journals like the Journal of Student Research and the Scholarly Review have hosted both peer-reviewed papers and preprints with minimal oversight.
What to ask:
Research mentorship can be powerful. But it’s also something to watch out for. Some programs offer substantive guidance from professors or graduate students. But others use mentors whose involvement may include shaping the research topic, writing or editing the paper, and steering the student through a publication pipeline that rewards speed over rigor.
This raises questions about authorship and originality. Is the paper an example of the student’s thinking, or that of the mentor’s? In a recent case cited in the ProPublica investigation, a paper submitted to a journal was described by an editor as likely “at least partially” the work of the mentor, despite being credited solely to the student.
Most commercial research programs charge thousands of dollars. In some cases, services cost more than $10,000. We’re seeing a clear equity gap: wealthy students may have access to research opportunities, mentorship, and publication pipelines that others don’t
This reality has been acknowledged by many in the admissions field. As MIT Dead of Admissions and Student Financial Services Stuart Schmill noted in the ProPublica investigative report, “Research is one of these activities that we’re very aware [is] not offered equitably.”
The best research projects aren’t just about getting published—they show real curiosity and thought. They connect to what the student actually cares about, reflect effort and initiative, and show they understand how research works. On the flip side, some projects might look impressive on paper but feel shallow or disconnected from the student’s interests.
As one former Ivy League admissions officer told ProPublica, “There are very few actual prodigies. There are a lot of precocious kids who are working hard. A sophomore in high school is not going to be doing high-level neuroscience.”
Scholarly research supports the idea that inquiry-based learning—especially open or guided inquiry where students choose questions, methods, and take real ownership—yields significantly better learning outcomes, engagement, and higher-order thinking skills than more structured or superficial work. Students with higher intrinsic motivation (doing work because they’re genuinely interested) also tend to perform better and engage more deeply.
Most admissions offices face severe volume pressures, making it difficult to examine every supplemental material in depth. Research on holistic admissions shows that officers often rely on contextual indicators—such as recommendation letters, school context, or demonstrated continuity with coursework—when evaluating students under time constraints. These approaches help manage workload but also mean that not all materials, including research papers, receive detailed scrutiny.
Given these time constraints, we believe it’s important to develop shared standards for evaluating high school research. It’s clear that not all publications are equal in value.
In some cases, educators and counselors need to step up.
We all play a key role in helping students find meaningful research opportunities. In the current environment, that means steering students toward programs that prioritize rigor, mentorship, and academic development over mere publication.
Pioneer Academics, for instance, was recognized by ProPublica as a rare example of a program that maintains high academic standards. Founded in 2012, the accredited program accepts only a fraction of its applicants, offers need-based scholarships, and partners with institutions like Oberlin College to ensure academic oversight. Importantly, Pioneer never guarantees publication. The goal is learning, not credentialing.
“The push for publication leads young scholars astray,” said Pioneer co-founder Matthew Jaskol. “The message is that looking like a champion is more important than training to be a great athlete.”
As college applications continue to evolve, high school research doesn’t seem to be going away, and AI is pushing its growth and complexity even further. For educators and admissions professionals, this is an opportunity. Don’t dismiss research outright, but try to build a shared language for evaluating it thoughtfully and fairly.
By focusing on mentorship integrity, peer review transparency, and student-driven inquiry, we can move the conversation from “Was it published?” to “What did the student actually learn from this?”
Key Questions to Ask When Evaluating High School Research:
By asking these questions and supporting programs that prioritize academic integrity, educators and admissions officers can ensure that research remains a meaningful pathway for growth and discovery, and not just a way to stand out in a crowded field.
Doing research is commonplace. How do you choose the research opportunity that makes a difference?
Join us for a free online info session to learn about Pioneer
Check exclusive sharings From directors of prestigious programs
Please complete the below form with any questions or concerns you may have.
Thank you for your interest in Pioneer’s Global Problem-Solving Institute (GPSI). The application for the Fall 2025 terms is now available. Please select your country/region below:
