Hello everyone,
I’m a rising senior and looking to apply to MIT, however, so far no one from my high school has ever been admitted to MIT. I go to a decent high school, with past admits to places like Brown, Duke, Dartmouth, Berkley, UPenn, but not MIT. I’ve also been hearing a lot of buzz lately from people about how I shouldn’t be focusing so hard on MIT (although it’s my dream school) and it’s been unclear why, but my parents brought up a point, that no one from my school has ever been admitted, so MIT won’t really consider me.
My question is, how much weight, do past admits, or past non-admits, have on your application? Are you more likely to get in if students of the past have gotten in?
I completely understand that there is by no means one way or aspect to get into MIT, or any top school for that matter; I would just like to know how much influence past admits have on your application, or if it’s just something I’m overthinking and over worrying about.
Thank you, everyone, for your answers; I greatly and sincerely appreciate them.
Tbxsh123
It’s an interesting question. No one from my DD’s school ever was admitted to Stanford. Can’t explain why. We had plenty of other impressive acceptances, but not Stanford. And she attended school in CA. So maybe colleges do blacklist schools.
Sometimes what works for one college doesn’t work for another.
Help your school do the best job possible with their part of your application, for example by printing out MIT’s “what we like to see in a recommendation” article when asking teachers to write your letters.
There’s no reason to be concerned. Very few students get into MIT as a percentage so it’s not reasonable to draw conclusions. If you’ve spent the time to understand the kind of students that appeal to MIT and worked hard both academically and extracurricularly, you’ve maximized your chances. You will be judged independently of your predecessors.
Zero. You will be judged on your credentials, not anyone else’s.
No. Neither MIT, nor any of its peers, has a min/max/quota per HS.
Don’t buy into the conspiracy theories. It’s exceedingly rare that a HS is blackballed. Instead, it’s simple math. There are 37K HS’s in the US, plus a number of international applicants and home schooled applicants. Stanford accepts approx 2000 kids per year and MIT accepts 1500. So many many HS’s will have no students accepted to those schools.
Some high school counselors DO have special relationships with admission officers at some highly-selective universities, including Stanford. So, some high schools are indeed considered feeders for some tippy top universities. (I’m not saying that this holds for MIT though.) Want proof? Read The Gatekeepers:
Some high schools are on their radar, for various reasons. Sometimes, it’s that the admits do tend to enroll and then do well at that college. But at any time, there could also be another hs in the area that adcoms want to pay attention to. Maybe their kids are leaping ahead in quality, doing interesting things, and presenting better than before in their applications.
No, it’s not quota. But as in any important decision, sometimes we all lean toward the “tried and true.” But those kids still have to meet standards.
And it’s the college’s “wants” that OP should focus on. It’s not just what you dream of. Know what you can about what MIT looks for, what they say, the sorts of kids they brag about. It’s not just stats and some ECs. To have a savvy strategy, to even assess your match, you have to be informed.
The Gatekeepers is now 14 admissions cycles old. Things can change a lot, even from year to year. That’s the issue with relying on something that was once said, once in effect. And written by someone not working in admissions- or whose experience as an admissions officer is decades past (Hernandez.)
OP, have you been reading what MIT says about all this, dug into what they value? Do you have an idea of how you match, in all the ways they like?
The OP is not attending one of those schools. However, even at the Andover/Exeter/Stuyvesant tier of HS, the number of applicants admitted to any particular college is most likely less than it was 14 years ago.
Indeed. Compared to how glacially slow other areas of academia move, the changes in admissions processes move at warp speed. I’ve said before on this site, Michele Hernandez has not set foot in an admissions office since my dad was a college applicant. I’m fairly sure that his experiences in the process a generation ago was dramatically different than mine.
LF seems to be saying that some of the revelations in The Gatekeepers are still valid… I don’t understand why Ms. Hernandez was introduced to this discussion.
Since college admissions move at warp speed, what’s needed are new books that “pull back the curtain” – books with authors whose identity, university affiliation, and experience are explicitly declared. The only verifiable information that students and parents receive now, about holistic admissions, is that extracted from universities via lawsuits.
Anonymous posts on CC about holistic admissions have the same reliability as data reported by PayScale and Niche. Many of us want to believe (because there’s nothing else available) but others, perhaps justifiably, question the validity of anything reported anonymously. There is clearly a market for new books on holistic admissions.
“…same reliability as …” Ironic, isn’t it, how many are more inclined to believe hearsay and assumptions, some old observation, some media hype…and then spread that like gospel. If you want to be wary, at least do it wisely.
OP needs a better reaf on what MIT wants to see or he’s shooting in the dark.
There isn’t anything recent that can be cited. One can only reference what is available, but acknowledge that the information is not current. (I dutifully reported that The Gatekeepers was published in 2003.)
I’m not spreading anything “like gospel.” People question PayScale data all of the time. I do too, but I still use it “with a grain of salt” because there isn’t anything else out there that is reliable. Anonymous sources are always questionable.
There is a void. Why don’t you write a book about the vagaries of holistic admission, as practiced today? I’d buy it.
Regardless, with few exceptions, everybody here is expressing an opinion based upon having been through the process. If one wants answers that are ex cathedra, one won’t find it anywhere, IMO.
Look for my new book on Amazon in the Fall. Just kidding.
Ask yourself if you have anything that sets you apart from the students at your high school that have been unsuccessful applicants. If no, then you probably won’t be admitted either, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try.
I do think that some high schools have developed a relationship with MIT, like many high schools who develop relationships with Admissions from other colleges. Some schools may be considered feeder schools. If no one from your high school has gotten into MIT, I think you hope for the best, but its clear that there isn’t a track record that indicates MIT knows your high school well and the rigor of its curriculum.
And my feeling is, if kids and adults can’t research sufficiently, want to believe all sorts of random crap, first things their eyes fall on or they “heard,” why should it be spoon fed to them? Tippy tops need kids with the energy and critical thinking.
Once in a while, you run into a kid who just needs a suggestion and runs with it. Usually, though, they’re focused on stats and hs standing, titles, whether they have awards. MIT is one if the more transparent. Beats me how often kids miss it.
Adding: we’re OT a bit and if we shouldn’t continue this here, I’ll defer to that.
One thing to keep in mind is that which high school you attended is out of your control at this point – the best you can do is focus on the parts of your application you have at least some control over.
