<p>It’s a question in writing on the MIT application, though. I didn’t debrief QMP about college interviews to know whether the question was asked then–but I think that’s somewhat different from asking on the formal application.</p>
<p>I am in favor of fun! And I am not excessively devoted to the Protestant work ethic, or any other work ethic. Nevertheless, including the question on the application itself suggests to me that people are being assessed in part on the quality of the fun they have.</p>
<p>Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory is a unique character, and not like anyone I have actually known who appears to be on the autism spectrum.</p>
<p>Well, I think in some way that could be true, but I think it’s primarily an opportunity for kids to showcase their passion, especially if it’s for something not shown on their application. It could be something like making silicates, learning Chinese, independent design/build projects – or it could be dance, music, art, something that is considered mainstream “fun.” I don’t think it’s an evaluation of how much fun the applicant is/has – rather, it’s a chance for them to reveal a passion that otherwise might go unnoticed.</p>
<p>At MIT’s CPW, there was an opening ceremony where the director of admissions talked briefly about what we wrote for that question. Apparently one of the most popular answers was “volunteering for charity,” so he jokingly told us that those kids would be put on a bus to do community service for the entire weekend ;)</p>
<p>That aside, apparently a lot of the answers were somewhat expected stuff – community service, music, art, even video games. I personally put studying Chinese. A lot of students who were accepted put “boring” or academic answers to that question. I think it’s honestly supposed to be an opportunity to make the application more human, not a way to weed out bores.</p>
<p>Btw, I put studying Chinese (我喜欢学中文!), because it is something I do for fun…I didn’t think about making myself seem more interesting or anything like that. And looking back, it was definitely a nerdy/academic choice, but it all worked out so I wouldn’t change it anyway!</p>
<p>shravas, I really do not know what MIT is looking for. I am trying to refrain from comments about the recent form of the MIT admissions website–but will depart from that momentarily to remark that one of the highlighted blog posts under the Selection Process advises students that admission to MIT is “about who you are . . . and how you embrace life.” (This is reasonably close to the exact phrasing–sorry if I have misquoted slightly.) That seems pretty inextricably connected to personality to me.</p>
<p>And–oh, yeah, lidusha, I am very long-winded. Practically every thread winds up running to quite a few pages, if I contribute to it. :)</p>
<p>I guess the whole question is how high the “fun scale” is measured. I mean, if you rated how fun a person is from 0-10, is everybody above a 1 treated the same (which would weed out 3togo’s unfortunate interviewee at zero), or does the difference between a 6 (regular nice person) and a 9 matter?</p>
<p>I don’t know the answer to that question.</p>
<p>It is nice to hear that people who gave boring answers to the “what do you do for fun” question still got in.</p>
<p>When I visited MIT I spoke to many students. I always asked, “Which dorm do you live in, why did you choose it, and are you happy?” It was amazing to see how many eyes lit up as students explained the different cultures in each dorm, how they chose their dorm, and how accepted and understood they felt. Many admitted to having had this feeling for the first time in their lives. It seems to me that MIT works very hard to find the students that will contribute not only academic brilliance, but also something to the community that will help it to be an environment where the students can thrive. Because of the difficult course load this is probably very important to the psychological well being of many students.</p>
<p>Also from many sources it is obvious that MIT is very collaborative and non competitive. Students that seem more competitive might be more likely to find another one of the schools a better fit for them. The school evaluating their application may sense this competitive personality. One might reject a student for this quality while another might feel that this is exactly what they are seeking and accept this particular student.</p>
<p>There are quite a few good schools out there. Why is MIT the one expected to auto admit all of USAMO. I don’t know why Mathnerd1 did not get accepted to quite a few top schools that his stats sure seem to prove that he is qualified to attend. Are there other threads on CC that are asking Harvard, Princeton, Stanford or other top schools to auto admit students such as him? Just wondering.</p>
<p>I also think that we shouldn’t jump to conclusions that MIT is discriminating against people on the autism spectrum. I don’t think there is evidence to suggest that this is the case. Maybe we should start a thread asking MIT students if any of them consider themselves to be on the Autism spectrum. I personally have no guess as to what we might find out.</p>
<p>Of course, I don’t know how MIT handles applications from those on the autism spectrum, because I have a very limited view of MIT admissions. I am not saying that they do discriminate. However, selection criteria that are based on “building community” and “fitting in” would seem to me to have a differentially negative impact on those with Asperger’s syndrome. But perhaps these students are considered under different criteria.</p>
<p>I would imagine that a place like MIT humbles a lot of people. Students who may have had a competitive streak may soon learn that there are inevitably other students who are smarter; hence, competing may seem futile. I agree that the collaborative spirit is a positive one.</p>
<p>Yes, that is my son’s experience to a “T”. He loves MIT very much and for all the reasons you mentioned and so much more. (<em>I</em> don’t love the fact that he doesn’t sleep enough; it drives me crazy but he’s an adult and can make that choice)</p>
<p>QM, </p>
<p>I will ask my son about his experience with kids on the spectrum at MIT. I think people like my son, a very extroverted leader-type, tend to be the glue that binds kinds who are more likely to hide away in their rooms. In fact, I have talked to a couple like that. These kids are brilliant and highly respected by my son and they, in turn, are glad to have him draw them out into dorm social life.</p>
<p>But I think there are just challenges inherent to anyone with special needs as I well know, being the parent of three sons with a range of special needs including ADHD, depression, and a whole lot more.</p>
<p>While some students at MIT may live in and enjoy very active dorm communities/living groups I would strongly disagree with the suggestion that participating in living groups is essential to the MIT experience. I live in one of the “less social” entries in Macgregor which is one of the “less social” dorms yet students in my entry seem to do well. If students want to collaborate that’s seems fine but I don’t see what’s wrong with working by yourself on problem sets either.</p>
<p>On the other hand while I think MIT admissions should be slightly more favorable towards students with excellent academic and mediocre social skills, I recognize that MIT admissions is currently much more favorable to this group than most other top schools like Harvard. I think this is a big reason why MIT has a lot more really strong math students at the undergraduate level than anywhere else because 1) MIT is more likely to accept them and 2) top math students like to cluster.</p>
<p>My picture is that the goal of many schools is they go in wanting to build a class full of a lot of different students with a lot of different kinds of tangible to intangible qualities.
Whence I don’t think they’d follow a strict rating system so much as intuitively {rather than strictly quantitatively perhaps - although perhaps I’m being naive here} factor in what sort of profile is being added to the class. </p>
<p>Now I personally have always favored letting in people like that “one smart individual” if such a thing exists, with consistency. The model I see at work is that the top of the top of the top talent does get captured, but that a lot of extraordinary students who might work well alongside those truly at the top of the pack even at a place like MIT, might get scattered to various locations.</p>
<p>UMTYMP Student
I am definitely not suggesting that there is something wrong with people who work better (learn better) on their own. My daughter says that she learns much better by self teaching. She rarely pays attention in class and prefers to work out the problems on her own. (I wonder if that will change out of necessity when she confronts psets harder than she’s ever seen before) But she is completely uncompetitive. After she has grasped the material on her own she will gladly help anyone she can, sometimes to the detriment of her own grades. This is why she chose to apply to certain schools and not others. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not judging anyone with a very competitive nature, I just think that it’s usually not the type that MIT is seeking.</p>
<p>Do you really think that MIT is not favorable enough to students with mediocre social skills? I’ve heard quite a few students say that they are socially awkward but in MIT finally feel comfortable because they found people to live with that are as socially awkward as they are. My daughter felt that she would be extremely comfortable in MIT as soon as she saw our quirky and slightly awkward tour guide this past summer. Quite different than the lovely polished and fashionable tour guide we had met the day before at another great school. </p>
<p>In my opinion I think that participating in living groups is VERY essential to the MIT experience for most students. I believe that most people crave some sort of a social life but for the socially awkward it may have in the past been difficult to come by. This experience is especially important for the many students that are away from home for the first time in their lives. Depression and feelings of isolation are real risks in a stressful school environment for the student that craves attention but feels alone. Of course it is good to know that for the person that genuinely prefers to be alone there are less social entries such as in Macgregor for them to feel comfortable in as well. MIT might have chosen these loners only for their brilliance but I see why they might want to limit how many they admit.</p>
<p>I think being really competitive can be a bad thing but I also think most of the students who work alone do not do so because they are competitive. There is also a continuum from social to less social but still likes to occasionally spend time with the other people in their entry to hardly ever talks to people. I think being socially awkward and enjoying lots of time alone are also somewhat distinct. I agree the former will do quite well at MIT and I think the latter do as well although the focus on leadership and non-academic extracurriculars may hurt the latter group’s admissions a little bit. Right now my impression is that admissions would prefer joining an extracurricular organization with other people than studying math or some subject by themselves in high school and I would like to see that changed. Either earlier in this thread or in some other thread, some admissions officer said that self-studying APs doesn’t help with admissions which is what I disagree with. I think that self-study is 1) a productive use of time in many cases and 2) actually helps equalize preparation.</p>
<p>^But do you think that’s true (that self-studying APs doesn’t help for MIT admission)? I would be surprised if that’s true. I think it’s a pretty common thing to do, and I don’t think it’s the hook to end all hooks, but I can’t imagine it doesn’t help at all.</p>
<p>I guess you could possibly draw several conclusions from that post but I don’t think it supports any view where self-studying APs is a major boost in admissions.</p>
<p>I wonder what makes MIT so collaborative. Are the assignments such that group work is required or is it out of necessity that sudents collaborate (as alluded to by UglyMom)? If a USAMO winner can easily finish a problem set on his own, why exactly does he need to work with others? I would like to think that such a kid would offer help if it is asked of him, but initially choosing not to collaborate doesn’t seem like a negative on his part. And I don’t think it’s a forgone conclusion that students who like to study on their own wouldn’t contribute to group work if it is asked of them. I just think these are learning style differences which should be respected.</p>
<p>I think STEM fields are generally more collaborative at the undergraduate level and that largely explains why MIT is more collaborative. Collaboration on readings or essays aren’t really possible while it’s easy to work together on problem sets.</p>
<p>I think there are three really great things about MIT in the following order:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Awesome classmates.</p></li>
<li><p>Unbelievable extracurriculars on campus and in Cambridge/Boston.</p></li>
<li><p>Amazing classes/professors.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>When you collaborate you get to experience more of 1 and 2 and will probably enjoy 3 a lot more.</p>
<p>If that’s the case (the easily part) throughout the college experience {surely it can be true in some classes, but hopefully not all} then he/she might not be taking the right path through MIT in the first place – I think there should be stuff to challenge everyone, and as it’s far from unheard of to have a stellar performer as such in the school, presumably it offers enough to keep them busy.</p>
<p>Working alone is probably fine. But there is a place for brilliant people to work together and come up with more than what a single individual could have {and there is ALSO a place for an individual to do something that involves very little teamwork, and produces astonishing results}. It would depend on the sort of achievement I guess.
Fostering an atmosphere where that is encouraged is one way to put together a class. Among many others.</p>