<p>With an SAT score of 1340 I only have a 33% chance of gaining admission into MIT, since I'm Indian. While I have lots of extracurriculars, inventions patented, research papers, botball 2nd place national, science olympiad 1st place state, etc. I was told by my essay editor (after he finished editing) that although my essay would be in to top 5%, I would only stand a 1 in 3 chance of admission to MIT, so I should plan to go eleswhere. I have always dreamed of attending MIT, so I'm wondering if his figures are correct, and whether I do in fact have a chance. My SAT II scores include 700 ush 670 bio (retaking) and math iic taking in nov. I have class rank of 2/480.</p>
<p>here are his figures:
"25th percentile sat score among all applicants...among Indian applicants, 10th percentile sat score"</p>
<p>One question arises here, I'm Pakistani--am I in the same disadvantaged bracket?</p>
<p>i got in with a 1410. That's not much different from 1340! Focus on other parts of your app, particularly your essays. MIT looks for students with genuine passion, initiative, motivation...and of course those who best portray the above stuff in their app.
PM me if you need help with anything =)
Goodluck!</p>
<p>But, the problem is most people who get in have some sort of passion or interest and have somehow pursued it. I'm assuming those who don't have a passion or an interest usually don't get in. The thing is, with my strong interest, my chances are 1 in 3 (as opposed to almost guaranteed if I had a good SAT score). The problem is, Indians usually get a higher score "among indian applicants, 10th percentile" Isn't this too low! If I wasn't indian, wouldn't I have a 50-66% chance (according to his stats, which are suspect).</p>
<p>First, I don't think it's possible to assign an exact numerical value to an applicant's chances, no matter how much data you do or don't have. </p>
<p>Second, I don't think any applicant has the luxury of believing he or she is almost guaranteed admission to MIT until he or she is clutching a letter of acceptance, regardless of their stats/passion/what have you. Not very many people are admitted each year, so everyone ought to hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.</p>
<p>I would completely agree with you...However, the person who told me this said they had 10 years of experience and could deduct the provided statistics.</p>
<p>IMNSHO = In My Not So Humble Opinion. (Old Usenet newsgroup abbreviation, sorry for the confusion! :) )</p>
<p>I personally don't do the "chances" guessing game. As the Admissions folks have said, after a certain point it's clear that a student is academically qualified to attend, it depends on what they would bring to and get out of the MIT community that makes the difference. (And with international applicants it is even more difficult to predict, since there are so many applicants for so few spaces.) Rather than worrying about the numerical chances for acceptance, I'd recommend concentrating on making your application as clear and distinctive as you can, presenting yourself most honestly and most positively. Showing them your best self and your best fit with MIT is the best way to use your energies in this matter, I believe.</p>
<p>Thanks, I never get a clear answer! Also, to clarify my situation I'm applying as a domestic applicant, as I'm a US citizen (but a temporary bangalore resident).</p>
<p>Also, the only problem with being clear and distinctive is the writing is generally bland. It "tells" the reader instead of "showing" them. If I'm missing something please let me know. Also, what if my essays don't have as much personal information and emotion, instead they focus on more scientific data and tangible information. Is this an unwise decision, I've tried to interweve as much emotion as possible, but they still speak more of my contributions and my desires to contribute. These desires are, likewise, depicted in a fairly tangible, direct, and passive voice. While they are clear, they don't necessarily evoke the emotion. Is this what MIT is looking for? I'm sure no applicant is perfect (ie. exceptional writer, researcher, and passionate contributor), or am I wrong =) ?</p>
<p>There isn't really a clear answer to give. Essays can be written in many ways: some will be effective and some will not. And there are no statistics that will tell you what your chances are ahead of time, once you've passed the general "could handle the academic work" scrutiny.</p>
<p>I think MIT is looking for your essays to give them a strong and clear idea of who you are, what is important to you, how you have pursued your goals and interests, and what excites you in your life and studies. The essays are your chance to show them who you are and have you-as-a-prospective-MIT-student leap off the page to them in some way. (Well, that's perhaps a little overstated, but you probably get the picture.)</p>
<p>If I were writing, I probably wouldn't use passive voice in my essays, but I'm sure the Admissions folks get essays written in all forms and voices, and some give a very clear picture of the applicant while some do not. You want them to have a real idea of who you are when they're done reading your application: what would you like them to remember about you? </p>
<p>So I'll stop giving advice on this now and just wish you further best luck!</p>
<p>haha I love the numbers - I mean what does 33% mean? If anything, I think having a 33% chance is absolutely disheartening. So what? In theory, if you applied three times, you'd get in once? But you only get one try. I think in reality, your (speaking in general) chances are either 100% or 0%, and no one knows the final score until the very end. Unless you are some prodigy or the protege of Yoga.</p>
<p>I'd rather have either a 100% and 0% and not know until the very end than having a 33% pasted on my forehead. Wouldn't it be great to be a fly on a wall in the admissions room? This guy has a 33% chance of getting in! Okay, defer him until regular. This guy 94.5319%! Nope, sorry deferred. This guy is at 100%! Admit! Admit!</p>
In theory, if you applied three times, you'd get in once? But you only get one try. I think in reality, your (speaking in general) chances are either 100% or 0%, and no one knows the final score until the very end.
[/quote]
I definitely tried to write a blog entry on this topic once, and it wasn't particularly successful. I'm glad someone understands me, harumph.</p>
<p>Man, no kidding. I tried to write a big long post about how even though I love attaching numbers to things, percent-chance-of-admission is a worthless pursuit. In the end, I just gave up. I realized it's a very difficult point to try and say succinctly, but Mr. Galt has summed it up nicely. You either have 100% or 0%. It basically comes down to (and I know this sounds wrong, but it makes sense): having an interview (or whatever factor) does not give you a better shot at getting in, we just know it's correlated with it. A higher admit rate for interviewees is not neccessarily because of the interview, it's just correlated with it. That's all we know! Statistics can tell us correlation, but we'd need an experiment to find causation. The admissions crew knows the rest, and if we knew it too, we wouldn't have to attach these silly numbers to an all-or-nothing attempt when it's not accurate to represent the attempt wiht numbers.</p>
<p>Man, that doesn't read well. Props to Molly and Galt.</p>
<p>I got props! Holy Molly (Mollie)! That must increase my chances at MIT by 2%. w00t w00t - either 102% or 2% now!</p>
<p>CH121S, hah, it seems like I posted on two threads, and within minutes of both, you caught blatant typos. Clearly, I am not a big Star Wars fan, but that still isn't enough of an excuse to mispell Yoda. As for the 2 1/2 month error, well, if I was playing chess, I would have just dropped my queen, king and everything else. D'oh!</p>
<p>Mognoose, I know how you feel when you can really express something succintly. Kind of like college essays, eh? Mumble mumble mumble and at the end... wah?! 0_o?</p>
<p>Anyway, to make this post slightly more credible, I have a question about how much MIT considers each part of the application. I shy away from saying "holistically," but I know the easiest answer is to say that MIT's application is considered as a whole. MIT claims the essay is "considered," but that seems like it is downplaying the essay quite a bit. Is there ever a case where an essay can carry an applicant with par scores and par ecs? Also, typically how strong are the essays? I know that math/science people are not usually the best writers - you don't see many people at MIT primarily majoring in liberal arts obviously, but I imagine some people can write. Not like a Fitzgerald, a Murakami or a Frost (maybe a Hemingway impersonator) but would an extremely eloquent essay eclipse egregious ecs <-- that was some intense alliteration! Ironically, I find it easier to "alliterate" with e's than some other letters such as p. </p>
<p>The reason I ask this is that about a week ago I really, really liked my essays, but now that they have been ever-so-polished (and sent), I am somewhat less confident. Psh, somewhat. Much less confident, though not inconsolable so.</p>
<p>So John Galt can't be QUITE fully rejected?...they'll have to take one of his ears, and plaster it to a dorm room, or something...and if he gets in?...well, then :D He'll have to compromise the sovereignty of someone else's ear.</p>
<p>Oh man, I've just realized, my Essay B...is...ugh. It's about "my world," but not really about "my aspirations." x<em>x I decided to switch from one essay candidate to another in the last week, and I guess I missed that part. <</em>< At least I think it's fairly well written. Post app stress o.o</p>
<p>The whole statistics thing is very slippery, I think. I have a pretty good intuitive understanding of the problems inherent in giving a "chances" percentage, but I agree with mognoose that it's very hard to express that intuitive understanding in writing.</p>
<p>Some of the parents in the parents forum are quite fond of jumping on people who refer to elite college admissions as a "crapshoot" -- it's not really random, we just don't have all the information, which is of course why we model it as random. But if we model it as random, we can't give specific "chances" numbers to everyone who asks for them... and round and round we go. </p>
<p>(Note that as a molecular biologist, I itch to get my hands on all the MIT admit data and create amazing spreadsheets and multicolored graphs. "And here we see that applicants with a first name beginning with 'M' were 21% less likely to be admitted than applicants with a first name beginning with 'R'"... sigh.)</p>