<p>Pizzagirl, I think that there are poor choices of words, and then there are <em>poor</em> choices of words. For example, when you accused me of “perseverating,” that was simply a poor choice of words; you meant to write “persevering.” ( Yes, this is a joke.)</p>
<p>Some poor choices of words reveal an underlying mindset that I think is really problematic.</p>
<p>In this particular post, I am not commenting on whether any students should have been admitted or not, what the relative weights of different accomplishments and personal characteristics should be, nor any other element of admissions operations.</p>
<p>I have no relatives who are Asians, nor Asian-American (as of yet). I have no relatives who have Asperger’s syndrome (as of yet); nor have I mentioned anyone ever on CC who has Asperger’s syndrome.</p>
<p>This does not prevent me from being sensitive to very negative comments about people who (I suspect) are in one or both of those categories.</p>
<p>I think that the comment about people being “only vaguely human,” aside from being reprehensible in my ethical system, is a charged term, because I suspect that it has discriminatory impact by national origin or heritage and/or by departure from being “neurotypical,” neither of which is under the control of the applicant.</p>
<p>“Robotic” is another term that gets tossed around a bit. I tried thinking of a “robotic Frenchman” and encountered serious collisions between stereotypes. Then I thought out of the box (so to speak) and came up with a mime! Except that being a mime would probably make someone “interesting” to top school admissions.</p>
<p>"The fact that admissions officers at HYPSM have not requested this shows their deplorable lack of interest in finding the very smartest kids, or at least their desire to do so based on their untested hunches rather than objective instruments. "</p>
<p>You’re right. They aren’t interested in merely the very smartest kids as measured by SAT, IQ, or other objective tests. They want to build a community of smart, interesting people. Why does this need to be repeated numerous times? If you don’t like their mission - well, don’t apply. I find it ironic you dislike what HYPSM do yet at the same time think they should expand to serve more students, as you have expressed on other threads. I needn’t have gotten a 2400 on my SATs to see the inconsistency.</p>
<p>Basically sure that I consider Homo habilis to be fully human. Now reading about Homo erectus–the predecesor of Homo habilis, I think (but if not, I will find out soon enough).</p>
<p>Re comments by Pizzagirl and bovertine: Notwithstanding protestations to the contrary, the way that admissions operates does not necessarily indicate how the faculty operates. There is some influence of course. But I am sorry, generally, if a student loses interest in a university because of some aspect of the admissions operation.</p>
<p>“I think that the comment about people being “only vaguely human,” aside from being reprehensible in my ethical system, is a charged term, because I suspect that it has discriminatory impact by national origin or heritage and/or by departure from being “neurotypical,” neither of which is under the control of the applicant.”</p>
<p>Can you be more specific about how you think it might have discriminatory impact by national origin / heritage? I took the comments to be about a kind of person who interacts only with books and facts and not with humans. Said person could easily be of any nationality or background, of course.</p>
<p>I agree not being neurotypical is not under an applicant’s control, but I see nothing wrong with universities not wanting masses of kids without basic interaction and social skills. I don’t as an employer.</p>
<p>lookingforward, do you think that if I send a letter or email to Stu Schmill, it will be read by him personally? Obviously, this is not the time of year to do that–will wait until the feeding frenzy has died down, presumably some time in mid-June.</p>
<p>QM, MITChris is on this forum. Why not contact him?</p>
<p>It seems that you want MIT to apologize, and that will make you feel better, but nonetheless - as Hunt pointed out, it doesn’t really change the point.</p>
<p>Hmm, robotic Italian? Doesn’t work for me. Can’t conjure up anything.
Robotic Czech? Maybe a teensy resonance there with Czech science fiction writers.
Robotic Tunisian? Nope . . . nope.</p>
<p>I think that Mikalye interviews students from Asia. I could be totally wrong about that, of course. He has posted that he is an international interviewer.</p>
<p>Russians? I have to recuse myself on this one, because I went to K-12 school in the era of the “Soviet scare,” and don’t think I have rooted out all possible sources of prejudice stemming from that.</p>
<p>Re #1148–not so much that I want MIT to apologize, as that I would like MIT to clearly dissociate itself institutionally, from that kind of statement about applicants. MIT Chris posted on the same MIT thread, in the original time frame, after the comment to which I object, and said nothing about it. Perhaps he hoped that it would be buried under the sands of time (like the city of Tanis, Raiders of the Lost Ark).</p>
<p>I think “only vaguely human” is the sort of language used to justify slavery, the Holocaust, and other atrocities. I think accepting or protesting this sort of dehumanizing language is an issue that goes way beyond MIT admissions. I think objections should be as public as possible.</p>
<p>I am one of many posters left behind on this thread. I just got caught up on the “vaguely human” discussion, even going so far as to read the other thread and the adcom’s defense of her statement.</p>
<p>It was pretty clear to me that the adcom was using the expression “vaguely human” simply to suggest an antisocial, withdrawn or “closed-off” affect in the applicant. We all know people like this and obviously they are human (some are also brilliant). Of course an MIT adcom does not rate various levels of “humanness” among the people she meets, nor does an admissions interview give sufficient time to connect with those who are, by nature, less outgoing. I don’t see this comment as any more offensive as those about the kids who had never seen a bar of soap. Of course, I am not at all insecure in my humanness. :)</p>
<p>Oh come now, Alh, let’s not jump the shark. The adcom was not suggesting that these students be put into labor camps, just that they were insufficiently adapt at social situations such that they wouldn’t add to the MIT community. No one was suggesting they needed to be life of the party, but that there be a glimmer of something beyond solitary academic pursuits.</p>
<p>I am not coy. You are. The only thing that offends me is your not too subtle distaste for anything Asian. (Remember how you brutalized the Indian girl dreaming of attending an Ivy?) I understand it is in your DNA to protect your young, but I still dont think it very becoming.</p>
<p>What affinity group do I think you belong? The group that sees Asians as a threat to their progenies future well-being, of course. How obvious is that? BTW, wins the lottery was your expression, not mine.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I picked it up from a book review:</p>
<p>“The Chosen is a refreshingly candid account of the admissions madness at elite colleges, where merit often functioned simply as a handmaiden to power”. Lani Guinier, Bennett Boskey Professor at Harvard Law School and coauthor of The Miners Canary </p>
<p>I recommend you write her directly if it bothers you.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, I don’t know whether you have gone back to catch my post #1141, since we were cross-posting.</p>
<p>With regard to your question about whether I think it is appropriate for MIT to keep out people with poor social skills (as opposed to poor character, which I do view as problematic–and I realize that there can be difficulties in discernment):</p>
<p>My current position is that it is inappropriate for an institution to artificially suppress the number of students who have Asperger’s Syndrome below their representation in the group of students going on to college, if the students are otherwise academically and personally qualified. (Actually, perhaps the set of students with 700+ on the SAT M should be the reference group–that may yield a larger percentile.)</p>
<p>FWIW I’ll share my anecdote. My kid has been described as brilliant and it breaks my heart to know that he has been ostracized for his lack of social skills. I could even imagine him being described as “vaguely human” if someone was mean enough. He skipped a couple grades and did not really have many friends throughout his formal education. In 9th grade he was accepted into a math program and for the first time he was surrounded by his intellectual peers. He was finally at a place where other kids really appreciated him and what he had to offer. </p>
<p>I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of these math kids were accused of lacking in communication and collaboration skills by their high school classmates and teachers. But to see them in action with their intellectual peers, nothing could be farther from the truth. They are truly brilliant while also being kind, humble, helpful and many with leadership skills. Just really remarkable kids, but unfortunately, the “average” person may not be able to recognize just how wonderful they are.</p>
<p>I would like to think that my son is a valuable member of the MIT community. He routinely holds “classes” to help his dorm mates with their problems sets; his insights in the classroom add a lot to the discussions; and he is making great strides in his research. So while an average MITer may think that he is awkward and “holes up in his room”, I believe that he contributes a lot to the community and that MIT benefits by having him there.</p>
<p>*I apologize if I am bragging, but I really believe that a lot of these kids are misunderstood and under appreciated.</p>
<p>I know two students who show some of the characteristics associated with Asperger’s Syndrome. (Clearly, I am not a clinician, and don’t know their actual status.)</p>
<p>One was not particularly popular in the local school. Other students were aware that he was somewhat odd. The awareness crossed more grade levels than usual, so he probably stood out a bit. However, he was tremendously popular at MOP. (The U.S. Mathematical Olympiad summer camp.) He is at MIT or has graduated recently–haven’t kept full track–and deservedly so.</p>
<p>The other is a student with whom I am currently working on a research project. I have had to adjust my usual method of communicating with students a bit. Not burdensome at all, though; in fact, probably slightly less time consuming than working with other students. So far, so good.</p>
<p>Do you know anyone with Asperger’s Syndrome, Pizzagirl?</p>
<p>It was an employee with Aspergers at Goldman Sachs that foresaw the collapse of mortgage backed securities that saved Goldman from the 2008 crash in the market.</p>
<p>He was a numbers cruncher who spotted the trend, advised his bosses and they dramatically reduced their exposure before the fall. It was brilliant. We need these folks. They aren’t going to joke and play at the water cooler a whole lot and they won’t follow conventional wisdom or tolerate stupid traditions but they will see the details and innovate new methods, techniques, etc.</p>
<p>Just a quick addendum to #1156: Please note that I am not saying that the percentages of people with Asperger’s syndrome need to be equal among MIT admits and in the relevant population–I realize that people fall into many categories, and that it is not possible to achieve equality of representation (relative to the population) across all of them, when the number of admitted students is about 1500. Just that the numbers should not be <em>artificially suppressed</em> below the representation in the relevant population.</p>
Yes, this is a joke.)</p>