<p>Aren’t people who win USAMO or Siemens, attend RSI, or become Presidential Scholars almost guaranteed spots at MIT or equivalent schools? I’d say if you are one of those, you probably can make a pretty good estimate of your position relative to the pack and your chances at admission. Doesn’t guarantee anything, but pretty close. Our high school school had Pres Scholars back to back, and they both got in pretty much everywhere they applied, if not everywhere. </p>
<p>Of course even these are not the scientific or academic equivalent of a LeBron James in basketball. James was pretty much regarded as the number one player in the country from the time he was in middle school. Not only coaches, but anybody with a passing interest in basketball knew who LeBron James was well before he even entered high school. He’s fairly unique. Even among the top athletes you can often never tell who will be drafted first, and more importantly, who will be drafted exactly where further down the list. Teams draft based on their salary strucutre and “institutional needs.” </p>
<p>Probably the closest thing to James academically was Evan O’Dorney who won the National Spelling Bee then basically said it was really just a hobby and he preferred math. Maybe Terrence Tao as well.</p>
<p>I will say I am glad this thread introduced me to the snowflake concept. Finally I understand why my parents always called me flaky. It means “special.” :)</p>
<p>CA, how does one really assess they are in the top 500? By looking at CB stats? By getting to national level in some contest?</p>
<p>No, ime, Siemens et al are not guarantees. They get the attention. It will be flagged. Then they read the rest of the app. Ime, outliers (those grinds who are distinctly unilateral,) run a risk of not matching more than the academic needs at a U. </p>
<p>Music is a good example. You can be local, All-State, City or Regional Youth Orchestra, play Carnegie Hall, sing before the President, name it. And congratulate yourself, be proud. But not assume it offers a guarantee. As for athletes, one sort of comment I see, when they have super academics and other activities is: let’s see if the coach really wants him/her.</p>
<p>@lookingforward: I’m glad it appears we are having a dialogue of some kind, rather than going back and forth with opposite views. I will respond later. I have some things I need to finish up.</p>
<p>@bovertine: I agree with much of what you wrote, except I think those awards aren’t so strong that they are or should be shoe-ins in themselves.</p>
<p>Both, though the latter more than the former. I find it arrogant to say that you know more than a private institution what their mission “should” be. It really matters not what <em>I</em> think Harvard’s or Yale’s or MIT’s mission “should” be, or whether <em>I</em> think these institutions should admit based solely on stats / GPA’s / admit no legacies / admit only legacies / admit no athletes / admit only athletes / auto-admit USAMO winners / blah blah blah. The great thing about America is that if I don’t care for a particular college’s policies or mission, I don’t have to apply there. Half of you act as though you are somehow obligated to apply to Harvard, Yale, MIT, etc. so that it’s of vital interest to you that they owe you an explanation of exactly-who-they-admit-and-why so you can have a prediction. As long as they are not discriminatory in their intent (e.g., not admitting black females or whatever), they can choose whatever criteria they like. Sorry. This Ivy / MIT / whatever obsession is unsophisticated and frankly embarrassing. That doesn’t mean they aren’t great schools, but you guys give far more power to them than they deserve.</p>
<p>Do you think, therefore, that demonstrated success in those areas (winning an Academy Award, winning an Olympic medal, etc.) means that said person is “owed” admissions by an elite school?</p>
Yeah, I don’t know if they should be shoe-ins. I just always heard that they pretty much were. Not guarantees but very helpful. Especially RSI. But my knowledge on all this is admittedly very limited.</p>
<p>I think some grossly underestimate what many hs kids are capable of. Some call it a quasi-tragedy that they push so hard, but the fact is, they push. And it can be extrordinarily impressive. And, these same kids can seem happy and secure. Many many snowflakes in a snowstorm of apps.</p>
<p>A friend recently asked me if it’s ok her (probably val) son drop football (he’s co-capt in a football crazy region,) in order to keep another less popular sport and fit in some college classes. Truth is, many kids would keep football, the club responsibilities, solid comm service, still have an internship or something like that outside, have some role in their cultural or religious group, dance, sing or play an instument (or all,) have hobbies- plus get grades and scores and live a life- Plus take coll classes- and seem to be just fine, as kids.</p>
About as close as I ever was, which is to say, friendly, but not possessed of any secret knowledge. I email one of the admissions officers every so often, if something important comes up or some important question is asked on the MIT forum to which I don’t know the answer, but I’m not in the loop in any substantive way. Most of my knowledge of the admissions process derives from having read all 1500 blog entries in existence at the time that I helped migrate them from the old admissions site to mitadmissions.org.</p>
<p>
Thanks! Somebody from my high school class dug that up recently and posted it on my class’ Facebook page, which was slightly mortifying, but I am happy to share it with my internet friends. :)</p>
<p>I did meet a Presidential Scholar a few years back who thought he was something of a snowflake (not an arrogant kid-- but the tippy top of a well regarded magnet HS which sends a slew of kids to the “special colleges”). He was disappointed to be deferred and then rejected from his top choice college-- got over it, went to a school further down on the list.</p>
<p>He said that he thought he was something of a top dog who had been wronged until he got to college and started meeting kids who were REALLY gifted. That’s when he realized that a high GPA from a top magnet school and a perfect single sitting SAT is terrific-- but the global talent pool is really deep, and you only realize that when you get up close. And he felt so lucky to be at his third choice college surrounded by so many gifted kids.</p>
<p>I love that kid. To have the humility to realize that Cornell, Yale, Stanford, Chicago, MIT, Harvard-- none of these schools owes you a seat. That while you’re busy with your HS stuff and being BMOC and acing AP Physics and having teachers rave that you’re the best student they’ve taught in five years- there’s a kid in a village somewhere around the world who’ll be taking AP Physics in 9th grade and acing that, and by the time they’ve gotten to college they’ll be two years ahead of you and speaking 5 languages fluently and playing in their countries equivalent of the national orchestra.</p>
<p>Mollie, loved it.
So, what is your take on hs B grades? Post-Jones? What I see includes very few, to begin with. Some are just not showstoppers. The super stem kid with a B in French? But a B in physics for an engg wannabe can raise questions. I know the whole is what matters- and that it’s critical not to officially discourage kids from applying just because they have a B or two. Can you shed light on this?</p>
<p>Thank you all for all the excellent advice. I see the error of my ways and repent immediately. No more whining for me, no more boring friends, or damaging my poor children.</p>
<p>Unless I meet up with Gourmetdad. Then all bets are off. ;)</p>
<p>“One day, a few years ago (so you know it was a long while,) it smacked me. I was fixated on that school, but had never a) applied, b) visited, or c) even so much as written, asking for info. Yeah. And now I work for that school and the irony is that people assume I went there, I guess becase they think I fit their image of grads. So be it. Life is life.”</p>
<p>It is interesting to check out the faculty at tippytop schools and see where they went to school. I take fun in pointing out to my kid that the chem prof went to my master’s almamater 15 years after me where she did not even think about applying. </p>
<p>The provost of Stanford remarked recently that he was not smart enough to be admitted 40 years ago when the admit rate was close to 50% (not sure if it ever was that high).</p>
<p>Just goes to show it does not matter where you go to school.</p>
<p>Question: In a few years, maybe three or four, five at the outside - when you open your morning paper and read the headline</p>
<p>YOUNGEST NOBLE PRIZE WINNER EVER
MOTHER SAYS MIT ****ED UP</p>
<p>And you log into CC and see I’ve pulled this thread up to brag. Will you say, “Wow, alh, you were right. MIT really ****ed up.” Or will you say “nooooo - don’t you get it yet? MIT could have all the Nobel Prize winners if they wanted them, a class full every year. They want something else.”</p>
<p>It is also interesting to check out the faculty of NON-tippytop schools to see how many of them got their PhDs from the tippytops. I found numerous examples at each of the mid-range LACs my son applied to.</p>
<p>ALH-- you do realize that hundreds of scientists are doing “Nobel Quality” work every single day and only a handful of them will actually win a Nobel prize? That’s the point about how deep the bench is. Not that your kid isn’t phenomenal. Not that someone else’s kid was more phenomenal. But even within academia there is sniping and handicapping and snide commenting on whose work was passed over- sometimes for decades and sometimes forever- in favor of someone else.</p>
<p>I don’t believe that MIT claims to be able to predict who among its students or applicants or even its faculty will win a Nobel prize. And for sure there are MIT “not admitteds” who win every year or every other year. But my point is those kids aren’t rejected by MIT and going on to graduate from the Waffle House management training program. They get rejected by MIT and go to CMU or Caltech or JHU or Harvard or Chicago-- and then they go to grad school- and thirty years later when they win their Nobel I presume (and hope) that they have managed to contain their disappointment at having been “robbed” of their seat at MIT. Somehow. Their life went on pretty much as planned.</p>
<p>"I found numerous examples at each of the mid-range LACs my son applied to. "</p>
<p>My alma mater I referred to which is a midsize public in the south had two PhDs from MIT in my graduate school only engineering department out of 10 tenured faculty at that time. Both attended mid tier undergraduate schools. :D</p>
<p>My department has about 10 tenure track faculty younnger than 50. All but one have PhDs frm top ten programs in the field…Michigan, Georgia Tech, Stanford, MIT, Northwestern, Wisconsin, etc.</p>
<p>Only one has an undergraduate degree from an Ivy…Dartmouth. One is undergrad from Rice and one from Grinnell. Other undergrads schools include Drake, Iowa State (2), Georgia, Purdue, and Nebraska.</p>
At this point, it isn’t about whether you were “right” or “wrong”, but about how long you nurture bad feelings about it. Sure, they “should have” admitted your snowflake. But they didn’t. Maybe he will win the Nobel Prize in spite of that. :)</p>
<p>Presidential scholars are announced very late in the admissions cycle (Early to late May?)which means most schools don’t have a clue that they are going to win. I heard that 20 people who did RSI applied early to Harvard and 17 made it in 2016 class. I assume MIT most probably admits them if they apply.</p>