<p>You are correct in saying that you aren’t qualified for MIT because you attribute your rejection to race.</p>
<p>And for the record, I was rejected as well, but I can maintain the oh-so difficult task of staying composed on an internet forum.</p>
<p>It’s ironic, because I’ve met some black people who think that everything bad that happens to them happens to them because they’re black. Now everyone wants to jump on that bandwagon.</p>
<p>
I haven’t – the post I quoted in #13 was deleted by Handala92 with the reason “nm”.</p>
<p>I’m nervous about saying something here, but maybe it’s worthwhile.</p>
<p>As an Asian American, I also used to think that affirmative action was grossly unfair and a ridiculous idea. That’s because I thought it worked sort of like the now-banned point system that UofM used to use, ie: “Well, it’s a choice between a 2380 SAT Asian and a 2200 SAT African American, and SOLELY because the applicant’s black, we’ll let him/her in.” That didn’t (and still doesn’t) make a lot of sense to me. I then started reading a lot of admissions blogs about diversity and the way they explained it makes a lot more sense to me. Ergo, MIT’s looking for people will make the most of MIT’s resources, and that could mean a well-off white applicant who has had the discipline to study for and do well in USAMO and other such things, or someone from a lower socioeconomic background who might be a URM who likes math but hasn’t been able to pursue due to other obligations (think taking care of younger siblings, working, etc.) The latter person, given other parts of the application are all sound, may be able to take just as much advantage of MIT’s resources as an IMO medalist, given the opportunity, and it makes sense to admit both applicants, so it would depend on a lot of other factors.</p>
<p>I also used to think there was a lot of anti-Asian bias but I don’t think that’s the case anymore. Some of these arguments are just really old, but the problem with a lot of Asian parents pushing their children to aim for top colleges is that they all do similar activities, and it doesn’ t make sense to admit fifty people who play X sport, X instrument, and are really good at math/sci when you could admit a greater variety.</p>
<p>I guess what I’m saying is I don’t think anyone’s given an unfair advantage in the admissions process based on race, if you believe everything MIT is saying, which I do. I hope that makes the affirmative action system less nonsensical to some people, coming from someone who used to think the same way a lot of people here seem to. If not, well, I’m sorry for typing that out.</p>
<p>I am a transfer but I am already feeling guilty!</p>
<p>I think MIT makes their decisions fairly and I don’t believe race plays a significant role, but this statement has always bothered me:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[AN</a> INSIDE LOOK AT MIT ADMISSIONS: A student’s own initiative takes top priority in selection process - The Tech](<a href=“http://tech.mit.edu/V119/N13/admissions.13f.html]AN”>http://tech.mit.edu/V119/N13/admissions.13f.html)</p>
<p>MITChris, if you could comment on that statement, I would appreciate it. That has never made sense to me. Although “qualified” is a vague term, this policy doesn’t exist for all qualified whites/asians.</p>
<p>The entire affirmative action debate is a legitimate issue to talk about. Not everyone is making a race-based complaint on their rejections. Economics status is an appropriate way of judging someone’s situation, not race. Assuming a URM and an ORM come from economically similar or equivalent backgrounds, what is the reasoning behind allowing the URM to have an advantage over the ORM? Do people think that certain races are naturally disadvantaged? Do they think some races have some sort of intellectual or societal superiority? What are we trying to account for here? That’s what I’m trying to understand.</p>
<p>MIT has discriminated certain races (slightly or strongly I don’t know) by its non-discrimination policy.</p>
<p>look obviously im going to be biased because im Hispanic but I was rejected and I had pretty good stats and great essays and recommendations but regardless of anything when it comes down to it, none of us are ever going to know why they rejected us and there is nothing we can do to change that and once you are denied, you ARE denied</p>
<p>It’s worth noting that this is from the same article (just after the previous quote, actually):</p>
<p>
I agree that economics should be taken into account as well, but this might clash with MIT’s need-blind policy. That said, URM and ORM are not equally affected by economics. But you seem to be missing the fact that there’s a race disadvantage even among people of equal economic status. Minorities and women are typically not pushed in the same way white males are.</p>
<p>An0maly - </p>
<p>The first thing that pops out at me is that article is 11 years old. Most present MIT applicants were in kindergarten when it was written. </p>
<p>The best way I can comment on that is to say that when we’re in committee, we don’t look at the applicant’s race and go “oh hey! This person is black/brown so they’re an automatic admit!” </p>
<p>I never worked with Jones, so I can’t ask her what she meant specifically, or whether it was taken out of context, or if the policy has changed in the 11 years since that article was written. </p>
<p>I think the best explanation, to be perfectly honest, is what we say on our website nowadays: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[MIT</a> Admissions: Affirmative Action](<a href=“http://mitadmissions.org/topics/apply/affirmative_action/index.shtml]MIT”>http://mitadmissions.org/topics/apply/affirmative_action/index.shtml)</p>
<p>Please say it straightly. The difference is not 2400 and 2200, rather is 2400 and around 1800-1900.</p>
<p>““Well, it’s a choice between a 2380 SAT Asian and a 2200 SAT African American, and SOLELY because the applicant’s black, we’ll let him/her in.” That didn’t (and still doesn’t) make a lot of sense to me.”</p>
<p>The facts are many African American admitted to MIT or other top colleges are very rich. Many whites or Asian American from middle class or bottom are rejected even they worked very hard and had far better grades and scores. </p>
<p>"The best way I can comment on that is to say that when we’re in committee, we don’t look at the applicant’s race and go “oh hey! This person is black/brown so they’re an automatic admit!” "</p>
<p>lol, where I am brown usually means Indian (the subcontinent, not Native American). pretty sure they aren’t URMs.</p>
<p>^ Er, there are indeed rich white and rich Asian people at MIT.</p>
<p>I don’t know why people think getting a 2400 on the SAT is so easy. If the SAT is such an easy test, why doesn’t everyone just prepare for it and get a perfect or near-perfect score? There is a huge difference between 2400 and 2390. Why do you think I retook it? It took several months of practice before I got from the 2330-2380 range to hitting 2400’s.</p>
<p>It takes brains to make it into the 2200-2300 range. But it takes a tremendous amount of mental stamina, precision, and thoroughness to get a perfect score. Try moving from getting an A in a class to getting every single question right, and you’ll be able to see the difference in required effort and ability.</p>
<p>There’s something in what you’re saying, christiansoldier - it does take thoroughness and precision for a 2400, although I’m going to say that for someone already scoring in the 2200-2300 range, it probably doesn’t take that much effort to pull a superscored 2400, which is all MIT will look at anyway.</p>
<p>And if you’re within the 2200-2300 range, you’re within the range MIT looks for anyhow. We should wait for MIT to release this year’s statistics to try to draw conclusions though. Those at least are representative of the entire applicant pool.</p>
<p>@christiansoldier</p>
<p>There are many people who could get a 2400 if they simply re-took the test.</p>
<p>I got my 2340 in June after my Junior year. I could have taken the SAT a few more times, and received at least one single-sitting 2400, definitely a super-scored 2400.</p>
<p>Anyone getting a 2200+, in my opinion, could easily get a 2400 with two more tests.</p>
<p>One of my friends got in today and I’m so happy for him! You can complain that you had higher SAT scores and GPA than him and that he’s African American and it won’t change a thing. There’s no need to complain about something you can’t control. Don’t be so elitist and insecure.
I think sometimes it’s worth the risk to accept someone who has big dreams. He’s also a really cool guy who is loved by everyone.
Confidence and a great personality are much more important than stats as long as it is certain that the person can do the work.</p>
<p>2200+ rescoring 2400s easily? not in my opinion. maybe the 2350+ scoring people tho.</p>