<p>@ The Visionary: Are you saying that Amherst and Willaims are only "small teaching colleges"?</p>
<p>Well, they are small and they really emphasized teaching over research. What do you mean actually? IMO, MIT applicants who want this qualities will in addition apply and ultimately choose one of these colleges (which include MIT of course!) instead of the state school. It is a no brainer for them to pick the state schools over the aforementioned choices (provided they get great finaid)...</p>
<p>CalAlum? .............................................</p>
<p>Nothing? Anyone else?..........................</p>
<p>You just said:
MIT applicants who want this qualities will in addition apply and ultimately choose one of these colleges instead of the state school
then:
It is a no brainer for them to pick the state schools over the aforementioned choices</p>
<p>what is one of "these colleges"</p>
<p>MIT has more graduate students than undergrad, and many many professors who are doing cutting-edge research. There will be a lot more opportunity for students here to do a larger variety of research than at school without all the facilities aimed for graduate students.
State schools just can't compare at all because of the sheer size of the student body and lack of opportunities in the first place. They gotta save the money for their graduate programs.</p>
<p>so what is your point? You weren't being very clear and you totally just like killed this thread roar!</p>
<p>So back to whether you love it or hate it!</p>
<p>
[quote]
The 90% admission rate from Ivy League schools is misleading because Ivy League schools "screen" their applicants who are pre-med
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uh, really? I am not aware of this practice. Which Ivies screen their premeds? </p>
<p>Now, granted, there are some prominent non-Ivies who do screen their premeds (notably JHU). But Ivies? Which ones?<br>
[quote]
Grad schools and top companies know MIT has grade deflation... they aren't clueless
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I wish that were true. Yet the fact is, many companies do institute GPA screens, and it's not as if you will have the opportunity to explain the fact that MIT is a difficult school. If you can't get past the screens, you won't even get the interview in the first place. </p>
<p>...70 percent of hiring managers said they screen applicants based on their GPA, but the largest group said they use 3.0 as their cutoff.</p>
<p>GPA</a> may count toward job placement - University</p>
<p>Now, to be sure, I don't think this is a serious problem because MIT students do quite well on the job market. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, it can be a legitimate concern for some people. For example, I know a girl who got a lucrative outside scholarship which would be renewed every year if she maintains certain grades (I think a 'B' average). But that requirement isn't relaxed if she goes to a more difficult school. If she goes to MIT, majors in EECS, and gets straight C's (or worse), she is going to lose the scholarship. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I believe around 89% of MIT undergrad applicants who had pre-med advisors were admitted to med-school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This actually leads to another subtopic, which is why exactly doesn't every MIT premed not have an advisor? Surely MIT isn't resource-constrained?</p>
<p>From the article "Woes of a Premed - The Tech."</p>
<p>"But, then again, when was the last time my $46,000 a year bought me anything other than a lot of homework and a whole lot of misery?"</p>
<p>Since when has MIT turned into a daycare? What are you expecting, a silver platter with gourmet options handed down to you in every direction? If you want something, even at MIT, you need to fight for it and pursue it yourself. </p>
<p>Personally I feel that if you want to be a premed student, you should carefully consider whether you want to come to MIT. There are many other schools out there which cater specifically to premed students, and life will likely be less stressful there. But if you come to an engineering/science oriented institute of technology, decide in your third year that you want to become a premed student, and suddenly realize the institute does not revolve around, nobody is going to pity your *****ing. </p>
<p>I have plenty of premed friends, and many of them have told me that the only extra thing to worry about being a premed is making careful rational choices. You can't expect to make a series of idiotic choices and then have everyone undo them for you just because you pay $46,000 a year. </p>
<p>Finally, if you are really worried about $46,000 a year (which the vast majority of MIT does not actually pay in full), calculate the consulting fee's for one-on-one time with professors, and then figure out how much time you need to spend with the professors to get $46,000 out of it? Remember to factor in that many of these profs are at the top of their field.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Since when has MIT turned into a daycare? What are you expecting, a silver platter with gourmet options handed down to you in every direction?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, yeah, why not? What's wrong with that? After all, students at other (top-ranked) schools are getting that. Why shouldn't MIT students get it too? </p>
<p>
[quote]
Finally, if you are really worried about $46,000 a year (which the vast majority of MIT does not actually pay in full), calculate the consulting fee's for one-on-one time with professors, and then figure out how much time you need to spend with the professors to get $46,000 out of it? Remember to factor in that many of these profs are at the top of their field.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't find this to be a relevant point. After all, other top-ranked schools have professors at the top of their field too. Yet those schools don't ration out premed advising. </p>
<p>
[quote]
[quote]
There are many other schools out there which cater specifically to premed students, and life will likely be less stressful there. But if you come to an engineering/science oriented institute of technology, decide in your third year that you want to become a premed student, and suddenly realize the institute does not revolve around, nobody is going to pity your *****ing.</p>
<p>I have plenty of premed friends, and many of them have told me that the only extra thing to worry about being a premed is making careful rational choices. You can't expect to make a series of idiotic choices and then have everyone undo them for you just because you pay $46,000 a year.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And right there, I think you just highlighted the problem. I don't think the guy in the article is asking for much. He's just asking for MIT to have more premed advising. Honestly, how much does that really cost? Are advisors really so expensive that MIT can't afford them? Really?</p>
<p>Honestly, I don't know which is worse, the fact that some students can't get advising, or that it is the attitude among at least some that those students shouldn't get that advising. Seriously, what's up with that? </p>
<p>
[quote]
Personally I feel that if you want to be a premed student, you should carefully consider whether you want to come to MIT.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yep, and I think that's (unfortunately) the take-home message here. Let's face it. MIT students are some of the best students in the world, meaning that they're good enough to get into other top-ranked schools. Hence, if med school is what you want, then why go to a school where you not only may not get advising, but where the attitude of some of the people is that you don't even deserve to get advising, when instead of putting up with that, you can just simply go to another school? </p>
<p>Look, don't get me wrong. I like MIT. I think it does many great things. But unfortunately premed placement isn't one of them, with the limits on advising resources being one component. MIT can simply acknowledge that this is a problem, as after all, all schools have problems with resource allocation. But to argue that that lack of advising resources is not even a problem at all - and indeed to argue that students don't even deserve advising resources - well, that's an entirely different matter altogether.</p>
<p>The way advisors are dished out is that faculty are asked if they are comfortable advising students towards going to Medical School. At least for course 6, specifically some of the profs indicated that they are comfortable doing premed advising. Many profs would simply say: "I have no clue about doctor-ing, I have no clue about premed, my entire philosophy towards education is completely different from what a premed probably wants."</p>
<p>There are a finite number of faculty at MIT. Not all of them advise (they don't have to all the time, they have other responsibilities instead). </p>
<p>I'm not saying students don't "deserve" advising for premed, but I am saying that don't be shocked to find out that MIT might not have the same priorities as you do. MIT seems to make a good effort in getting everyone who indicated they want a pre-med advisor in their first two years a premed advisor. The person in the article complains that she should get priority over the sophomores. But she shouldn't. It's a queue. She had her chance, now they are getting theirs. Now she has to wait in line just like everyone else.</p>
<p>Also just like you said, every school has a limited budget, and has a set of things to allocate it's resources towards. </p>
<p>"Well, yeah, why not? What's wrong with that? After all, students at other (top-ranked) schools are getting that. Why shouldn't MIT students get it too?"</p>
<p>Perhaps it is part of the culture? Perhaps students don't want to live in an environment where they subsist on low-hanging fruit? Maybe the students are all douche-bag masochist hardcore-major-wankers that want to make life as hard as possible for themselves and others? Who knows?!?</p>
<p>"Finally, if you are really worried about $46,000 a year (which the vast majority of MIT does not actually pay in full), calculate the consulting fee's for one-on-one time with professors, and then figure out how much time you need to spend with the professors to get $46,000 out of it? Remember to factor in that many of these profs are at the top of their field."</p>
<p>How many of the profs in many of these schools will spend as much time one-on-one with students on research projects and such? You have to admit, MIT's UROP program is truly one of its gems. </p>
<p>Perhaps my arguments so far are all non-sensical (I feel they are myself!). So instead I'll just say what my advisor said on my first day of MIT: "We like to let people who know what they are doing just take off and blow us away. Everyone else better learn to sit tight and get through the ride."</p>
<p>Collegealum, do you have any idea why the 2002 details are missing? That was the year my son took part and it seems odd that the information is missing for that year (other than for the winner).</p>
<p>
[quote]
The way advisors are dished out is that faculty are asked if they are comfortable advising students towards going to Medical School. At least for course 6, specifically some of the profs indicated that they are comfortable doing premed advising. Many profs would simply say: "I have no clue about doctor-ing, I have no clue about premed, my entire philosophy towards education is completely different from what a premed probably wants."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And maybe that's precisely part of the problem: why exactly does that advisor need to come from your major. Now, granted, if you match all premeds to advisors within their major, then that's great. But if you can't, I would argue that it's a heck of a lot better to get an advisor who's not in your major than to not even get an advisor at all, which is precisely the problem that I'm talking about. </p>
<p>
[quote]
There are a finite number of faculty at MIT. Not all of them advise (they don't have to all the time, they have other responsibilities instead).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>All of MIT's competitor schools have a finite amount of resources also. Yet you don't hear Harvard or Yale premeds complaining that they can't even get advisors. </p>
<p>
[quote]
MIT seems to make a good effort in getting everyone who indicated they want a pre-med advisor in their first two years a premed advisor. The person in the article complains that she should get priority over the sophomores. But she shouldn't. It's a queue. She had her chance, now they are getting theirs. Now she has to wait in line just like everyone else.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But the question then is, why should there be a queue? Why aren't there enough resources for all of the premeds so that nobody has to queue? Again, other schools provide that, so why can't MIT? </p>
<p>
[quote]
How many of the profs in many of these schools will spend as much time one-on-one with students on research projects and such? You have to admit, MIT's UROP program is truly one of its gems.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yet at the end of the day, that's not an excuse for not having enough premed resources. After all, not every MIT student wants to participate in UROP. Not every MIT student wants to work on research projects. I agree that the majority do, but not all. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm not saying students don't "deserve" advising for premed, but I am saying that don't be shocked to find out that MIT might not have the same priorities as you do.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Perhaps it is part of the culture? Perhaps students don't want to live in an environment where they subsist on low-hanging fruit? Maybe the students are all douche-bag masochist hardcore-major-wankers that want to make life as hard as possible for themselves and others? Who knows?!?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Perhaps my arguments so far are all non-sensical (I feel they are myself!). So instead I'll just say what my advisor said on my first day of MIT: "We like to let people who know what they are doing just take off and blow us away. Everyone else better learn to sit tight and get through the ride."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You see what you just did right there in those last 3 quotes? All you're doing is simply reinforcing the point that I made earlier, which is that if you want to be a premed, MIT may not be the best place for you to go, and that you may be better served by going to one of MIT's peer schools like Harvard or Yale. It's sad; I wish it wasn't true, but unfortunately, it's true. Look, you said it yourself, and I'm just going to paraphrase what you said. If you're a premed, why go to a school that doesn't have the same priorities that you do? Why go to a school where the student culture is not entirely conducive to premeds? Why go to a school where the faculty attitude is that you have to "sit tight and get through the ride."? Why put up with any of that if you can go to one of MIT's competitors that are more accommodating to premeds? </p>
<p>Look, the bottom line is this. If MIT wants to be a more welcoming place for premeds, then MIT will need to make certain changes (i.e. get more advisors). Now, if MIT just doesn't want to do those things, that's perfectly fine, but then we have to agree that MIT may not be the best place to go for premeds. You can't have it both ways.</p>
<p>Nor do I think this is shocking revelation. Let me put it to you this way. MIT and Caltech are basically 'cousins' to each other. Yet Ben Golub - who is one of the biggest Caltech boosters on CC - freely concedes that Caltech is probably not the greatest place for premeds, and that premeds would probably be better off elsewhere. Hence, I don't think it's shocking to state that MIT is also probably not the greatest place for premeds and that they may be better off elsewhere.</p>
<p>MIT does have premed advisors that are separate from your major advisor.</p>
<p>MIT and Caltech are harder than their peer elite schools--in grading curve, competition (inasmuch as it affects the curve, I'm not saying its cutthroat), as well as the rigor of the classes. It is not a myth as some have suggested. However, by making smart decisions there are ways to get through it so that you are competitive for medical school.</p>
<p>I just finished my first year, and i loved it. That said, some classmates did start growing white hairs.</p>
<p>
[quote]
MIT does have premed advisors that are separate from your major advisor.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, clearly something is missing. </p>
<p>Woes</a> of a Premed - The Tech</p>
<p>Look. Whatever specific type of advisor that the author of the article couldn't get, it's a problem. Like I said, I don't think the author is asking for anything unreasonable.</p>
<p>My faculty advisor tells me the first thing she does every time her pre-med students come in for a meeting is ask them why they haven't dropped being pre-med yet. She thinks anything short of working at the CDC or having a life like House's makes for an un-fulfilling career as a doctor, compared to the excitement of making discoveries as a researcher.</p>
<p>Maybe a disproportionate number of MIT faculty share her opinions.</p>
<p>Hahaha! This will make me love MIT even more!!!</p>
<p>As per the topic: Both</p>
<p>Love: Some people (winner), work, professors (winner), research, opportunities
Hate: Some people, work (winner), professors, feeling stupid :-P</p>
<p>winner denotes whether hate or love triumphs, :-P</p>