<p>
How qualified the entire pool of applicants is certainly has an effect on your admissions outcome, but it’s not material whether any of those people go to high school with you. Students are not compared directly with other students from their schools.</p>
<p>EDIT: Sorry, Laura – I posted before I saw your post.</p>
<p>^How about when they’re trying to take GPA into context? If 2 from the same high school applied, with the same courseload, and one had a higher GPA than the other, then would this harm the one with lower GPA [because of the GPA-in-context part of admissions]?</p>
<p>So theoretically speaking, suppose a school historically has 1 girl and 1 boy accepted via MIT EA. </p>
<p>Would it still be possible and PROBABLE for 5 people from this school to get in MIT EA this year? (Granted these 5 people are every bit just as qualified as the 2 previously admitted via EA.)</p>
<p>EDIT: And would it also be possible/probable that 4 out of these 5 people are the same gender? (Under the assumption that they’re all qualified.) Basically, is gender over-representation from a specific, particular HS a problem? Or would the difference just be made up with admitted students of the opposite gender from other high schools?</p>
<p>^Gender doesn’t really matter, and neither does the HS you’re at. And no the previous 2 people admitted do not increase your chances, even if you’re as qualified. Getting admitted is a bit of a gamble at a certain point, and the odds are against any applicant. And as for the 5 of you getting accepted: your chances are ~1/10^5, going solely on acceptance rate (this isn’t very accurate because some people have a better chance than others, but still).
It’s not even probable for 1 student, let alone 5 - as indicated above.
Good luck! :D</p>
<p>
The applications aren’t ever directly compared, and they would almost definitely be read by different combinations of people. So it’s quite unlikely that they would get the same readers, and that the readers would happen to remember that they went to the same school, the courseloads were the same, and Person 1 had a 3.89, but Person 2 had a 3.97.</p>
<p>^ What happens MIT if I remember correctly, MITChris and associates go through all the applications together all jumbled between regions and schools and make decisions. Then they could through the apps again looking at applicants from the same school. The decision has already been made but the adcoms want to know why they might have accepted the ranked 10 person over the rank 1 person for example so that they can tell the GC at the high school.</p>
<p>
They could, but they don’t.</p>
<p>We do review each school after making decisions, but not to change decisions (never, in my experience, have we initially accepted a student only to then reject him or her based on what we saw at the school). </p>
<p>It’s closer to what HitMan said - sometimes, GCs will call us, confused, about why we accepted some student who was not the valedictorian, or a legacy (if they think we do legacy admissions), or something like that. </p>
<p>But yeah - we don’t have quotas per school, and we certainly don’t reject kids we otherwise would’ve accepted because we rejected someone higher up the class rank than them, or anything like that. </p>
<p>We take who we want to take, torpedoes be damned ;)</p>
<p>^So technically, you guys could accept 5 kids of any combination of race/gender from the same school via the EARLY ACTION round, and you guys wouldn’t realize or care that they were from the same school until after the decisions have already been made?</p>
<p>Thanks for the replies everyone <3</p>
<p>Not only “technically”, but we DO do that.</p>
<p>MITChris, does participation in Project Lead the Way help toward MIT admission? For those who don’t know, PLTW is a program that teaches a 4 year track of college-level engineering courses to high school students. It’s run by a group of about 30 universities (Duke, Perdue, Penn State, RIT, etc.) in partnership with select high schools around the country. HS faculty are brought into the affiliated university to be certified in the curriculum, then they teach the courses to HS students. At the end of each course, students who score high enough on the exam earn college credit, somewhat like an AP exam. The credits are on transcript from the affiliated college, and are transferable subject to other colleges’ regular transfer rules.</p>
<p>Students of PLTW have essentially taken 4 years of college-level engineering courses. Those who have excelled have demonstrated that they enjoy the material and can handle the work. Assuming a student is otherwise qualified for admission, does PLTW give him an edge over similar candidates without such experience?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What do you think?</p>
<p>Looking for and capitolizing on opportunities is good for your application. Showing an affinity for science/engineering is also a plus.</p>
<p>But being part of a specific program in itself won’t give you an edge. There are a lot of different ways to go above-and-beyond the typical high school coursework.</p>
<p>I would say that the only time being part of a specific program is a real edge is if it is extremely exclusive and is open to all high schools. There are other high schools where you can get very advanced coursework, including taking the equivalent of a bio, chem, or math major in college. I think enthusiasm for (and success in) such a program does help establish the mythical “match” for MIT, but I wouldn’t call it an edge. It’s just that affinity for science/engineering has to come from somewhere in your application.</p>
<p>As far as I remember, only a handful of schools accept PLTW credit. MIT is definitely not one of them.</p>
<p>I went to a high school which required PLTW. (Yeah, I’ve been a nerd forever.) It certainly helped me get into MIT in the sense that I’m pretty sure I never would have even considered applying/wanting to be an engineer otherwise, and in the sense that it showed that I was into engineering and doing well in it. But ultimately MIT doesn’t really consider anything a “hook” in the way you’re thinking of.</p>
<p>The only program exclusive enough to be a hook through mere participation in and of itself is probably RSI. (I don’t consider the IMO US math olympics camp a “program”, but rather the contest. Same goes for Intel/Siemens finals, although those are pretty good hooks as well.)</p>
<p>@Chris
You know, you’re making me interested in a job as an admissions officer. Sounds fun, reading all those applications and having all the power 
I have a small question though - do you have quotas [official or otherwise] for international countries? For example I’m from a country with around 1-2 acceptees per year. Say you accepted 3 and I’m one of them in the initial round. Any chance you’d cut that down to 2 later on to keep with a quota? Or is there no such thing?
Thanks</p>
<p>I would not expect MIT to accept the PLTW credits. However, Laura, you seem to agree that just succeeding in the program may have helped you get into MIT. I would love some feedback from MITChris, or anyone else in the know.</p>
<p>And Laura, you may have been a nerd forever, but if your school required PLTW, you were probably in good company.</p>
<p>@Chardo - </p>
<p>PLTW is a great program - I just gave a presentation to the PLTW engineering kids a few weeks back. </p>
<p>While nothing on its own will get you into MIT, PLTW certainly demonstrates a sustained love and pursuit of sci/tech and in that sense is a good thing. </p>
<p>@Jimmy - </p>
<p>No quotas for countries. Just the overall 8-10% quota internationally.</p>
<p>One more quick comment about the SAT. </p>
<p>On the math section, for example, the difference between an 800 and a 720-740 is 1 question wrong. If you skip that one question, you move up to 750-770, but that does not generally happen because everyone wants an 800 so they answer every question. MIT recognizes that one most likely mindless mistake is 100% meaningless. So >700 is all they care about. Above that is totally irrelevant.
Plus, once you get above 700 on each section, the SAT is without question a game. 1-2 questions wrong when you’re trying to beat the curve and score perfectly is a game, and the people who win deserve no more credit than the low 700s.
Regarding studying and prep classes, if you are capable of getting a 2100 and you spend a ton of time studying, you can absolutely get at least a 2300. But this is only possible if you are willing to waste a huge amount of time learning how to beat a test that only shows how skilled you are at basic logical reasoning that will have an extremely small effect on you’re college career. I, personally, did not study a lot for the SAT, because I had much more important things to worry about, like learning things that will actually help me in college. Anyone who has taken a prep class or read a prep book will know that you are taught to study the test and strategies to effectively take the test rather than the material itself. THAT is not what should determine acceptance to college and I think MIT is the best at recognizing this.</p>
<p>Sorry for the rant.</p>
<p>Trf1021, I need to correct you on some things.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Incorrect. -1 has never resulted in 740 or anything lower than that. -1 usually results in 780-790, with the lowest ever being 760. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Incorrect. Missing one question and omitting one question result in the same score every time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I wasn’t aware that the SAT score report told admissions officers whether a mistake was due to an inability to solve the problem or a silly mistake. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What do you mean by “beat the curve” and “game”? People who score in the low 700’s did worse on the test than people scoring higher than that. It’s that simple: the better-scoring group correctly answered more questions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Some people don’t need to spend any preparation time in order to score 2300+. You are inappropriately generalizing your attributions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The SAT is not about testing material. That is what the ACT (to a greater degree, at least), Subject Tests, and AP tests are for. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You seem to think that, on average, the only thing separating students who score 2300+ from those who score 2100-2290 is preparation that helped them to “game” the test. You are mistaken.</p>