<p>While the seniors are in suspense about regular round admission results, I have a question relevant to the applicants for next year and beyond. The MIT application recommendation form </p>
<p>On another forum here on CC, I've seen the statement made that "by consistent hard work" being checked off would actually constitute a bad recommendation (the theory being that the best checkbox is "by brilliance of mind"). I would have thought that the best recommendation (and I almost had occasion last year to write a recommendation, except that the student decided to stay in-state at our state university's honors program) would include BOTH "brilliance of mind" and "consistent hard work." What's so disreputable about hard work? </p>
<p>What do you hear about this? If a recommender is simply trying to honestly describe a student who would be a good fit for MIT (in that recommender's opinion), would the recommender be giving the kiss of death to say that the student works hard? I thought everyone at MIT works hard.</p>
<p>My gut feeling (based on zero inside information) is that "consistent hard work" alone would be bad, but "consistent hard work" together with "brilliance of mind" would be really good.</p>
<p>i think that in the rest of the world, teachers actually think that "consistent hard work" is a good thing. and so they would think that they're actually helping the applicant if they check that box off. however, i don't understand how any teacher WOULDN'T check off brilliance of mind...the expectations of many teachers are very low (wow you get Bs...you must be "smart") and the majority of people applying to MIT would have above-average intelligence...</p>
<p>I think the best recommendations would include many of those- I wouldn't be surprised if my teachers had checked all but the "grade consciousness" one, simply because they know I don't care enough nor am I ever in a situation where I'd have to worry about it. It's one thing to be brilliant and have a phenomenal memory, but using those talents to go above and beyond the call of duty through hard work is what makes a kid really stand out, and is the type of kid who would just fall in love with MIT.</p>
<p>Yeah, I think NOT having "consistent hard work" would be bad in MIT admissions, because though it's not so hard to get good grades in high school without consistent hard work, having a habit of working hard is most likely necessary at MIT except for a very small percentage of VERY BRILLIANT students.</p>
<p>^yes, but perhaps if said student does not have anything spectacular, A's in school and good scores, but nothing actually outstanding. wouldn't "consistent hard work" imply that the student is actually reaching the limits of his/her potential, considering that he is working very hard but does not have much to show for it outside of grades, scores, and ECs?</p>
<p>^^ Well, first of all, spectacular is all in context of a person's opportunities. But if a student does not have achievements in ECs and/or other very intense ways of showing passion, I don't think it will matter whether the student's teachers have checked "consistent hard work" or not; if there isn't evidence of passion (usually in the form of achievements in ECs, I think...; the sort of "spectacular" you are talking about), that little box probably won't matter.</p>
<p>In my experience, "consistent hard work" is most definitely necessary to succeed at MIT itself. The idea that an MIT student shouldn't need to work hard to succeed in high school - that "brilliance of mind" is the only "correct" answer - in my personal opinion, just silly.</p>
<p>I think lalaloo has the right idea. The boxes themselves are not that important: there are only 2^4=16 total combinations anyway, whereas the possibilities of what teachers can say in the actual recommendations are literally infinite. What's interesting is how the actual recommendation letter backs up and supports the boxes checked.</p>
<p>Thanks for the comments. I hope I have occasion in the next few years to write a few of those recommendations for young people in my math competition coaching program.</p>
<p>I had a somewhat different reaction to the question. There's currently a debate among top Bay Area high schools as to whether students are under too much pressure, or are working too hard. Denise Pope, a Stanford lecturer, is conducting research on the number of hours students study outside of class, and she and others have concluded that students are swamped. But from my perspective, a student who would succeed at MIT is not the sort of student who has to put in 7 hours a night on high-school homework to maintain high grades. </p>
<p>The students who went to schools like MIT from my daughter's school spent perhaps 1-2 hours a night on homework. I think my daughter spent between 30 minutes and 1 hour per night on homework, and some days, she didn't have any, because she'd finished it during class. On the other hand, the same students logged hours on other kinds of activities: community service; math competitions and math circle groups; independent science research projects; art; athletics; etc.</p>
<p>The recommendation asks how the student has achieved high grades. In my opinion, if I had to say it was done through consistent hard work, I'd have some reservations about recommending that individual to MIT, where the amount of consistent hard work required for classes is double....or more.</p>
<p>maybe its just me but i think consistent hard work shows real value. if you don't put in the effort, it wont matter how brilliant you are. at some point that becomes a static intelligence. no dynamic action going on</p>
<p>
[quote]
lmao....but being lazy and having straight As, 2400, USAMO, and a heck load of ECs = irresitable
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Eh. If you don't know how to work hard, you probably won't make it through MIT. Even the "lazy" students generally work quite hard by normal college standards. And your straight As, 2400, USAMO, and high school ECs? None of them count for anything once you're actually in college.</p>
<p>I don't know if my son's teachers would have checked off that he was a hard worker in the context of their classes. He doesn't study night and day, and the coursework he's taken, especially the challenging stuff, comes pretty easy. Where they <em>would</em> say he's a hard worker is in his ECs and research. That's the place where he "hit the wall" and learned to plow through.</p>
<p>Tokenadult, I didn't even worry about what DS's teachers would say and how to "game" it. I absolutely agree with Paul -- it's those boxes taken together in context of the teacher's written comments. And I can just imagine the kind of thoughtful rec letters you'll write -- your young charges will be quite fortunate!</p>
<p>
[quote]
i bet most of my teachers think that checking the "consistent hard work" box is good for the student and the rec.</p>
<p>and many teachers THINK that to get high scores that student must have done work.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And this brings us back to the point that always seems to come up regarding picking people who know you well for writing recommendations- my APUSH teacher junior year knew full well that all I did to study for her [notoriously masochistic] class was read the chapter, and as she's also my quiz bowl coach, we still joke a bit this year about things that I can still remember down to their location on the page. And when I hit this strange fascination with the effects of Truman-era foreign policy (basically, everything is his fault. seriously.), she was there to loan me books and to bounce theories off of. A person who knows you like that is the type of person you want- someone who's seen you at your worst (yeah, ran out of time to read the chapters a few times...) and at your best. </p>
<p>/soapbox</p>
<p>
[quote]
lmao....but being lazy and having straight As, 2400, USAMO, and a heck load of ECs = irresitable
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'd definitely argue against that for the reasons that everyone else has cited.</p>
<p>^^ Wow. That sounds EXACTLY like my experience in APUSH, omg. My teacher's tests were often almost impossible, and required a lot of memorization of the book, heh. Except I know my french teacher even better, so I had her write my rec.</p>