<p>Poor CC obsessing class of 2015, they will probably s*** a chicken when they see the RD Decisions thread…</p>
<p>@Rtgrove123 - </p>
<p>We had a ton of great kids apply this year, and a fixed number of students that we could accept. Our applications were up something like 6%, so our admit rate had to drop. It was really, really hard this year.</p>
<p>didnt apply but…</p>
<p>3 kids with 4.0 2400 got rejected?</p>
<p>including soadquake?</p>
<p>yikesss</p>
<p>Didn’t apply but just wanted to check out the results… and… there goes all my hope for April 1st. </p>
<p>but to those who were waitlisted… I think MIT takes its waitlist far more seriously than say… WASHU. so if you were waitlisted, that is truly an accomplishment, not just a throwaway yield protecting rejection. </p>
<p>to those accepted: YOU ARE AMAZING. You’ve done the impossible. Be happy.</p>
<p>to those rejected: it’s only another 18 or so days until April 1st. SO GET EXCITED</p>
<p>MITChris, what do you mean when you say you had to turn away plenty of “qualified” applicants? Qualified as in meeting the requirements, or qualified as in would have been an excellent match for MIT?</p>
<p>Even though I basically screwed myself for MIT in several ways which basically ensure rejection, I find myself more scared then ever about what’s coming April 1. 
My interviewers (HYP, Brown) adored me and seemed strangely confident in me getting in, but I just… I’m having an anxiety surge. I can always go to Wellesley, but… Oh, I’m nervous. I don’t want to let my school down.</p>
<p>Congrats to those that got in, and again, good luck to us all April 1! (Those who are still waiting for results, that is!)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>18 days, 2 hours, 22 minutes, and 25 seconds, if you’re waiting for Ivies.</p>
<p>Come on MIT? What do you want from me?</p>
<p>My friend who has a 2400 just got rejected as well. She didn’t have much EC’s though…</p>
<p>Ok let’s start an Ivies Countdown from now</p>
<p>2400, 4.0 AND… rejected</p>
<p>I think they enjoy doing it, so they can later brag about how they look at “more than just numbers” when deciding who to pick. </p>
<p>There’s a nice balance between academics and everything else that should be considered in admissions, it’s a shame they’ve gone WAY too far in the wrong direction.</p>
<p>Yeah, stix. As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods. They kill us for sport.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It does seem that way.</p>
<p>I agree with the non-academic MIT trend.</p>
<p>It’s the same for Yale’s legacy.</p>
<p>They are rejecting legacy on purpose to lower numbers…it’s ridiculous.</p>
<p>I enjoy how about 5 people’s stats can lead some people to make a conclusion like that. Plus, the don’t even know the stats of those admitted.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Both, really, but especially for academics. 25% of our applicants this year were valedictorians, and somewhere north of 40% had a 800 on the SAT II Math. We accepted 9.7%. </p>
<p>When I say we had to turn away qualified applicants, I mean that many more students apply every year that could DO THE WORK at MIT than we can possibly accept. That’s the academic qualification. The “match” qualification is a smaller subset of the academically qualified applicants, but we still can’t accept all of them. </p>
<p>That’s why I posted what I posted earlier in this thread. If you didn’t get into MIT, it’s not because you did anything wrong, or you weren’t good, or we’re on hallucinogenics. It’s an incredibly, incredibly tough job to select a class from the insanely great students who apply. </p>
<p>It also means that the people who apply to us will do great wherever they go. </p>
<p>That’s hard news to hear - but it’s also true!</p>
<p>
I realize this may not be the time, but keep in mind that nobody is rejected because their stats are “too good” – it’s just that nobody is admitted solely on the basis of their stats being good, either.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And the admissions officers are never rejecting people for fun, or to make some sort of statement. They’re adults who take their jobs very seriously, and if you don’t believe that, you should read Ben Jones’ blog entry [“It’s</a> More Than a Job”](<a href=“http://www.mitadmissions.org/topics/apply/the_selection_process_application_reading_committee_and_decisions/its_more_than_a_job.shtml]"It’s”>http://www.mitadmissions.org/topics/apply/the_selection_process_application_reading_committee_and_decisions/its_more_than_a_job.shtml).</p>
<p>@IvyHopeful2014</p>
<p>Uh, if you are for real and not ■■■■■■■■ at a really bad time, then it might be your difficult background and hard time adjusting in a world filled with racial bias and unequal opportunity. Being top 50% of your class is inspirational, man.
Or yeah, it might just be your essays.</p>
<p>Accepted!!!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>We do not discriminate against legacy. We simply don’t consider it, unlike many of our peer institutions.</p>