Chance Me?

Colleges and Universities A-Z Massachusetts Institute of Technology
1

<p>Hey, this is my first post for CC. I came here because I was curious about my chances to a school like MIT. Im African American.</p>

<p>All GPA's listed are weighted</p>

<p>GPA Freshman Year: 3.58
Honors English
Biology
Spanish 1
Geography
Geometry
Sports Studies</p>

<p>GPA Sophomore Year: 4.00
Alegbra 2
Chemistry
English Honors
Spanish 2
World History Honors
Sports Studies</p>

<p>Summer School:4.00
Pre-Calculus</p>

<p>GPA Junior (as of now): 3.8
MCJROTC
AP English
AP US History
Physics
AP Calculus (Wasnt able to take Spanish 3 bc Calc was during the same period)
Sports Studies</p>

<p>Hopefully This Summer
Government/Economics</p>

<p>Hopefully Senior Year
MCJROTC 2
Ap English
AP Art History
Ap Chem
Ap Calc BC
Sports studies?</p>

<p>A question I have is would sports studies hurt my chances? At my school we need 2 years of P.E. and sports studies fulfills that requirement. This year even though I didnt have to I took the class because it was an extra hour that our volleyball coach used to practice with the team. People tell me that colleges will see this as merely dedication to my sport but Im not to sure on if its good for my transcript.</p>

<p>SAT: 680 Math, 550 CR, 510 WR (I plan on taking again during May and fall of my senior year)
Total: 1740 </p>

<p>SAT Subject Tests: Didn't Take any yet</p>

<p>Rank: 6/378</p>

<p>AP Classes (taking currently): AP Calculus, AP English, AP US History, </p>

<p>AP Classes to be taken senior year: AP Calculus BC, AP Art History, AP English, AP Chem</p>

<p>Extra Curricular Activities:
President of Christian Club
Platoon Sergeant for MCJROTC
Leader of MCJROTC Youth Physical Fitness Team
Overseer of Electrical Systems at Church ie: Soundboard, Mics, Projector screen
(Ive been going to church since I was little, not sure if that would help.)
Certified Technician Operator
Varsity Basketball
Captain of Travel Basketball Team
Varsity Volleyball
Chess Club President (Results come back Thursday but its a good chance that Im the president)</p>

<p>Community Service:
For my high school career currently I know I have wayy more than 200 hrs of community service from my church, volunteering at the library, and volunteering to help the cafeteria workers at my school. </p>

<p>I currently attend a high school that has recently been built. My class will be the second to graduate. I say this because our school wasnt able to place AP level classes in our school, this is the first year they did, and I'm taking all of the AP classes thats possible. So, Im not sure if Im missing any information, if I am I wouldnt mind telling you the omitted details.
So thanks in advance. =)</p>

2

<p>You have about a 10% chance of getting in. That may sound bad, but at this point nobody has any higher chance than 10%. You’ll be competative there, but honestly MIT is a crapshoot for anybody.</p>

3

<p>If you want to have a shot you really need to improve your SAT score dramatically, even with your minority status…</p>

4

<p>^I wasn’t, but I do see that it looks that way lol :)</p>

5

<p>

</p>

<p>Not true at all. Only a randomly selected person will have a chance equal to the admit rate if we do not know any information about him or her. Most applicants will fall well below or above the overall rate of admission.</p>

<p>To the OP: it is crucial that you increase your standardized test scores; you have essentially no chance with your current scores.</p>

6

<p>Yeah, you’re chances are extremely low for MIT, but don’t be too hard on yourself because seriously this school is one of the best of the best. Even if you had well above a 4.0 cumulative GPA and 2100 SAT, you could still very well be rejected from that place.</p>

7

<p>Silveturtle, I know few actually reach 10%, but I didn’t want to assign an arbitrary value. However, it is true that nobody has higher than a 10% chance.</p>

8

<p>

</p>

<p>No, that claim is not true. As I said, the chance of a randomly selected person is 10%. If an applicant has 2400 on the SAT (and nothing else is known), his or her chances go up significantly. Similarly, if an applicant has a perfect GPA and rank (and, again, nothing else is known), his or her chances go up significantly.</p>

9

<p>Get the SAT up.</p>

10

<p>I agree silverturtle. The admit rate is across the entire admission pool. Some get LOLed at (0% chance), others are immediate keepers. Assuming solid stats and no personality issues, usa_o camp would probably boost you to over 50% (I don’t know many who don’t go to HYPSM)</p>

11

<p>

Are you saying that MIT admissions officers randomly select applicants to admit out of the pool? O_o</p>

12

<p>MIT’s application pool is incredibly self-selective. There may be some amount of people who really had no hope in applying, but it’s not going to be enough to significantly boost that 10% number.</p>

13

<p>I don’t remember who is the first one to initiate that 10%-chance thing, but I do agree with that. In threads for many other universities, you can look at someone’s stats and judge whether he is in or not; but here in MIT’s place, you can’t. It’s not about the number. The number 10% doesn’t mean you have 90% chance of rejection or 10% chance of getting in. It’s that everyone does have a chance, and they will deserve to be in the place they should be, at MIT, Harvard, or CalTech, whatever. Thus, I believe the number 10% is not arbitrarily chosen. It’s showing that using numbers and chancing has no real meaning to MIT.
Of course, when the result is released, its’ just 100% or 0%; chancing at that time has no meaning.</p>

<p>@Silverturtle:
“If an applicant has 2400 on the SAT (and nothing else is known), his or her chances go up significantly. Similarly, if an applicant has a perfect GPA and rank (and, again, nothing else is known), his or her chances go up significantly.”</p>

<p>Go up relatively to who? I doubt about this.
There is a difference between those who have too low potential to thrive at MIT (having low class rank in a mediocre school, e.g.) and those who are already at a certain level enough to survive at MIT (having lots of AP, e.g.). And there is also a huge difference between those whose zenith is going home with a gold IMO medal or achieving 2400 SAT and those who can flourish in the far future.
Sorry, I don’t mean to offend you. I know you got 2400 SAT in the last test date. However, frankly, I just want to make it clear.</p>

<p>@the OP: I’m Int’l and not familiar to the US educational background. However I think you should aim for higher SAT score. Though there are rumors that people with low SAT scores did get in, I think you still have to prove that you’re not going to be stressed out at MIT.</p>

14

<p>

</p>

<p>Go up relative to the default 10%. The more we know, the more accurate the prediction can be – 10% (or whatever the admit rate is) is only the default when we know nothing about the applicant.</p>

15

<p>^^ I think the problem here is that silverturtle understands probability theory, and most of the others don’t.</p>

16

<p>Applying the probability theory here is totally wrong. Why? Because that we don’t know anything about the applicant doesn’t mean every applicant is the same, i.e, has the same stats, writes the same essays, etc. This is a wrong assumption, because we all know that applicants are different from each other even if we don’t know anything about them. However that easily leads many people to say that that 10%-thing is a number.
No, it’s not a number! And it’s not about math too! It’s a unique and succinct answer which hides meanings behind it that cannot be seen with math.
And IMO, as I pointed out above, using numbers for chancing is meaningless. It’s all about the attitude.</p>

<p>@MeSsIaH.: Don’t underestimate people here. If they have the courage to post here, that means they have the reasons for doing so, especially when they are either MIT applicants or MIT students.</p>

17

<p>

</p>

<p>No one suggested the presence of homogeneity in the applicant population, nor would such absence render numerical estimates meaningless. The mathematical reality (which is indistinguishable from an unqualified form of reality) is that a randomly selected applicant will have a chance equal to the acceptance rate.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I do not know what attitude you are referring to, but the role of subjective factors in admissions does not render an objective chance invalid. If we randomly select an applicant and learn that he or she is in the top 5% of his or her class, we must now estimate the chance to be 15%. This is not a meaningless and arbitrary number – assuming admissions practices stay somewhat constant year-to-year, the number means that a student with subjective factors of quality similar to that of most similar applicants’ subjective factors will be accepted approximately 15% of the time.</p>

18

<p>Never argue with silverturtle.</p>

19

<p>@silverturtle:
So you mean with all the information posted, you can calculate a percentage of chance to get in? And then, with a good essay and a great interview, you can calculate again and mark it “+30%”, and vice versa?</p>

<p>My point is, to MIT, numbers for chancing are still meaningless. I believe what they are looking for is not numbers, stats, or lines posted here. Can you look inside somebody and say who that is? Can you mark a success, a failure, an acceptance letter or a rejection email by numbers? Now, again, can you calculate the admitted rate of an MIT applicant with only his private message he sends you?</p>

<p>Mathematically when you say “you have 60% chance”, then the number 100% must exist. So who is that 100% guy? 4.0 GPA, 2400 SAT, 2400 SAT II, bunches of ECs that everyone can ever dream of, and handshakes with President Obama? What you are leaving behind, is that the future cannot be evaluated by the past. It is determined by the present - what the applicant owns in his mind, his soul. Many colleges admit people based on only their achievement - what they have achieved. But MIT needs something greater, something that can guarantee that its students can thrive at MIT in the future. That’s personalities. To mention about it, I remember that personalities are the only factor marked “very important” in the collegeboard website.</p>

<p>I don’t refute that the achievements can show one’s potential. It’s just that without the right personalities, or the right attitude as I refer here, those achievements are nothing (not really nothing; they are just the past, and only that). So now what’s the point of chancing? Giving numbers and saying that “you should do this, you must do that” to raise the numbers? So how to achieve 100%? I’m curious :D</p>

<p>P.S.: I’m kind of inclined to subjects like math, physics. But that doesn’t mean I have to use math as an ultimate tool.</p>

<p>P.S. #2: I’m emphasizing again that 10% thing is NOT number. So don’t use that randomly-chosen-applicant-has-10%-chance argument.</p>

20

<p>

</p>

<p>To give perhaps uninformed applicants realistic but approximate conceptions of their chances.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Obviously, no one is guaranteed a spot. The fact that one can have a 60% chance does not mean that someone must have a 100% chance. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I do my best.</p>