This comes directly from someone who has a friend that goes there and knows the admission council very well. They have a criteria of 5 things, and if you achieve 2 of the 5 you are in.
USAMO
ISEF
1600
4.0 (unweighted)
I forgot what the last one was, but it was some weird national award.
So if any of you think getting the perfect score isn’t important, it is, you’re half way there. My friend acheived all 5 things, and he’s mad as hell because he didn’t need to waste 2 months on ISEF research and he could’ve already gotten in with his 1600 and USAMO qualification. They told him AFTER he was admitted.
<p>woohoo, if I had applied I would have gotten in...</p>
<p>That's extraordinarily interesting. It basically means that even if you're not a science superstar, you can still get in if you have a 1600 and a 4.0. </p>
<p>Those are some good criteria, but it's also kinda disappointing to think that essays and recs apparently don't play that great of a role.</p>
<p>Essays and Recs play a role, but those criteria are given second consideration after the initial acceptance/rejection screening based on these factors.</p>
<p>well, I know a kid who would get in based on those criteria, but he's an absolutely horrible and repulsive person (seriously not joking), which I hope would reflected in the character assessment part of his recs. So would this not be taken in account at all?</p>
<p>he's a junior so he's actually not applying this year, but he has a 4.0 and ISEF. I'm pretty sure he'll apply though, because one of his parents got a PhD there.</p>
<p>I'll make a guarentee to you that she didn't have either a 1600 or USAMO. Tell me her name, since these names are published in a USAMO newsletter sitting in front of me. Also, a 4.0 doesn't refer to a grading scale out of 4.3, it's only for a 4.0/4.0 grading scale. The girl at your school would need a 4.3/4.3. Don't try and lie about her achievements, you knew what you were talking about.</p>
<p>MIT admissions is so much more than that. They really look at the person you are: not the numbers or awards listing. Ask the EA admits about having any of the above 5 credentials. I can assure you that most of them don't even have one of them. You want a gaurenteed admissions secret?
you ready for it?
....
...
..
.
THERE IS NONE!</p>
<p>As the dean of admissions says herself, there's no easy way into MIT...</p>
<p>You're saying that someone with a 1600 and a 4.0 unweighted has guaranteed admission to MIT?</p>
<p>Grades and scores don't alone make a person a good match for MIT. If you're the top winner of ISEF or you made USAMO, I could see you being quite competitive for MIT on academic strength alone. Additionally, students who get into RSI (Research Science Institute) also have a very good chance of getting in. But there are very, very few people who qualify and get into these programs. I believe the RSI program takes something like fifty students per year. How many USAMO people are there? Top ISEF winners?</p>
<p>Ok thanks for the reminder. Number 5 on the list was RSI, if you have that you are guarenteed admission, alone by itself. My friend went there in the summer of 2003.</p>
<p>USAMO Qualifers per year, 250.
ISEF Winners, 10.</p>
<p>Obviously there is no easy way unless you have achieved either number 5 on the list or 2 of the other 4. I actually know because my friend goes there right now, unlike you waiting to get rejected from MIT because you have no inside connection. Tell me how things go in March, and then feel free to reply.</p>
<p>I think there has been a very limited number (e.g., count on one hand) of RSI alumni who weren't admitted to MIT. But RSI is a special case.</p>
<p>MIT aims for a class size of 1,000 and last year had a two-thirds yield. So, they have to accept many more than that. If they accepted all the RSI people, the ten ISEF people ... anyway, I'm not disagreeing that these academic "superstars", if you will, have a great shot at MIT. It's clear that they do.</p>
<p>I'm simply asking about your "pick two from the list" criteria of a 1600 SAT and 4.0 unweighted. Why do you think anyone with those two very readily attainable credentials has an admission guarantee? The oft-repeated statistic about Harvard is that they reject half of all 1600 scorers. A 4.0uw is pretty easy to get at a lot of high schools. Do these two credentials, alone, make someone a good fit for MIT? Of course not.</p>
<p>This has already been defeated by counterexample alone. We don't even need to argue about the merits of the admissions office since we know this magic formula is false.</p>
<p>Well I cold wait to tell you how things go in March, but since I already know (as an EA admit), I can tell you now. </p>
<p>You should go read Matt McGanns blog about the admissions process
blogs.mit.edu/madmatt</p>
<p>Also, since I'm the "idiot" that got in, you must not think much of acceptees to MIT.</p>
<p>RSI is more selective than MIT. As an MIT program, admitting you to that program means they think you can succeed at an MIT-esque setting. Therefore, when they accept you to RSI, they are accepting you to MIT too. Why do you think the program is even there? To recruit future talent to MIT.</p>
<p>Sure, RSI might be a push, but if you have nothing else...and failed your second semester junior year, I highly doubt you would still be admitted.
When were you accepted by the way?</p>
<p>By the way, I know a 1600 4.0 who did not get into MIT...</p>
<p>Very very very few people have two of the things on the above list, as this is a very rare case. To have one of them makes you in the top 10%, and to have two would put you in the top .5% of applicants. A 4.0 implies that you made straight As in high school, which is uncommon even with regards to correlation with 1600s. As for your comment on the research, understand what RSI is first. RSI is a program people go to and research to compete in the ISEF and ITS program, hence you have overlap, plus the majority of RSI alumni, have participated in USAMO which is how they got into RSI in the first place, and finally, not everyone who did USAMO applied to MIT.</p>