<p>just wondering guys , if applicants who live in smaller cities are offered interviews as well ? any ideas ?</p>
<p>I live in udaipur , and was a guest student at the IESO , if that helps</p>
<p>Yes, applicants from smaller cities are offered Skype interviews.</p>
<p>BTW, the best way to find out if you are getting an interview is by logging in to MyMIT and checking whether it says waived next to the interview. If there’s nothing, it means you will get an interview.</p>
<p>waived :(</p>
<p>That’s surprising. I thought all the ISO participants got interviews. :-/</p>
<p>Apparently, the Head EC wanted every interview done by the 23rd, so there won’t be any more interviews. All interview reports are filed by the 28th, most have already been filed.
@jobuddy: My friend in Hyderabad got a Skype interview.
@Qwerty1739: MIT has rejected multiple astronomy medalists, to the best of my knowledge. IMO, IOI, IPhO, IChO, IBO probably get more recognition than the others.</p>
<p>
I asked them on email.
@confusedhexagon- You mean to say that interviews of Harvard are random, right?</p>
<p>@BetterThanBest: No, they’re not. If you don’t get an interview within the next couple of days, you can be pretty confident about what to expect come D-Day. Sorry. :p</p>
<p>
Well, I guess you made a mistake.</p>
<p>Huh?</p>
<p>Would you have a copy of the list of people interviewed for Harvard? It would be extremely helpfull. Thanks</p>
<p>IDK, there was a guy on 2nd page who said that there is a high probability of being accepted (especially at Harvard) if one is offered an interview, that’s just rubbish. I was offered an interview last year, but it didn’t mean s<strong><em>. Those of you who are freaking out about interviews, DON’T. If you’re offered an interview, it only means that you live in one of the metropolitan cities.<br>
@BetterThanBest By all means, apply to MIT next year, interview is irrelevant. In fact, I’d go so far to say that if you’re not offered an interview, it’s good for you because interviews don’t have any weightage in admission decisions. If you have a good interview, you won’t necessarily be offered admission, but on the other hand, if you end up f</em></strong>ing up your interviews then you WON’T be offered admission. Doing an interview is a pure risk, you don’t have a chance to gain anything, only lose [period] </p>
<p>@BetterThanBest, I’ll answer your questions one by one.
- I’ve dropped (gap) a year to play chess and work on my maths and physics, I’ll also be applying to MIT next year.
- I don’t know someone of the sort, and that too only because very few people get in and those who get in are generally from metropolitan cities (kids in villages and small towns don’t even dream about going to Harvard/MIT), hence the notion that you need an interview to get admitted.
As far as you’re concerned, Harvard doesn’t have selective interviews (I learned this the hard way), Princeton and UPenn offer interviews to almost 99% of their applicants. Brown interviews are unpredictable too, you can show lots of interest and still get rejected or say that Harvard is your 1st choice and get accepted, just keep your fingers crossed.
It’s time to chill and study for IIT entrance exams!</p>
<p>Interviews are mostly unimportant, and they’re randomly assigned by MOST colleges. But Harvard (regular round) and MIT interviews are different. It’s not a coincidence that every medal winner got an interview. Every interviewee may not even be waitlisted, but every applicant getting in/waitlisted will turn out to be interviewees.</p>
<p>@Duck007: Yes, that’s what I’m saying. But no point in debating, you’re right.</p>
<p>@BestOfBest: Never mind. :)</p>
<p>@BetterThanBest, @confusedhexagon
Which Colleges did you both apply to??</p>
<p>And confusedhexagon,
I agree with you comment on the second page where you said that earlier MIT used to interview all the applicants from India. But, however, they did not stop doing so because they wanted selective admissions, they stopped doing so because:
- the manpower required was too much as applications started progressing geometrically
- they also observed that they ended up rejecting most of the applicants ('casue they were under qualified) and they thought it’d be better if they did not waste that much manpower on a single country.</p>
<p>Finally, As I’ve said previously, it’s a sheer coincidence that medalists/high achievers are offered interviews. Because most of the times, they’re from bigger cities (metropolitans where they have great schools, including IB and Cambridge). If you ever visit a small town, be sure to ask a random high schooler where does he/she plans to go, 99.99% of times they’ll NOT name a foreign university, because of the ignorance regarding the application process etc.
Conclusion is, If you’re from one of the small towns of India, you’re at an advantage because Ivies are in the habit of seeing typical IB/Cambridge applicants from Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata etc and you’ll be looked favorably upon.</p>
<p>^ Oh sorry,
It was hatsonakeboob. And confusedhexagon, I read your chance me thread, you sound so much like me. Where do you go to school in Bengal? You said it was on of the most reputed. </p>
<p>I’m not going to debate again; just going to say that in terms of raw probability, it is HIGHLY unlikely that MIT randomly picked out 15 people from metropolitan cities to interview and the list contained all medalists / SSP people etc.
BTW, hardly any of the medalists are from international schools.
Anyway, good luck to everyone for the admission decisions. 
(confusedhexagon and I go to the same school, South Point High School. I think this was mentioned by a certain OccamsAftershave somewhere. :P)</p>