MIT Students - thoughts about intelligence

<p>I have always been a follower of Mark Twain’s aphorism that you should never allow your schooling to interfere with your education. What any school, MIT or any other, sells is not an education, but rather an opportunity to get an education. And indeed, education is one of the only pursuits where consumers seemingly compete to get as little as possible for their money (boasting of books not read, classes not attended, etc.) If there is anything that separates students who are admitted to MIT as opposed to students who are not admitted, it is that the admissions office is looking for students who can take advantage of the opportunity that MIT offers. </p>

<p>And yet, unlike in HS, many of the most valuable educational opportunities at MIT are to be found in places other than the classroom. I know a great many students who spent a lot of time working in labs, or with professors in what looks a great deal like a traditional apprenticeship. You don’t get a grade for that. Speaking personally, of all of the things that I learned at MIT that I use regularly in my professional career today, almost none of them were learned in the classroom. While on campus, I got involved in governance. I was appointed as the sole undergraduate representative to the senior standing committee of the MIT faculty, and found myself with speaking rights at faculty meetings (which I of course never used). The lessons I learned there about organisational politics and the behavioural dynamics of organisations, are lessons that I use week in and week out.</p>

<p>I ran the kitchen at my fraternity for a year. It was the first time that I had ever had to hire someone who reported to me (our chef), and to deal with all of the issues that come from managing people. It was also the first time I had ever have to deal with suppliers and to manage a budget with real consequences to other people if I screwed up. I learned a huge amount doing that. My house had also hired a contractor to repoint the exterior of the house. When he proved to be fraudulent, we had to take him to court. And so we did that. Appearing as a party in a lawsuit in small claims court proved to be a hugely educational experience. There were no grades for any of these things.</p>

<p>My second term of my sophomore year, I learned a lot about myself. I tried a bunch of things for the first time, I had a ridiculous amount of sex, I discovered what I actually enjoyed academically and personally. I also went before the MIT Committee on Academic Performance. My junior year, I got straight A’s in all classes. I think that I know what tradeoffs are necessary to achieve straight A’s, and I firmly believe that both second term sophomore year and first term junior year were both flawed, I was not well balanced, and in different ways I was letting myself down. (Second term junior year I got straight A’s but was much better balanced).</p>

<p>For those going on in academe, you get into the grad school of your choice not primarily by a sterling academic transcript, but by a proven potential to do real research, and you cannot truly get that in your classes. For those planning on joining the corporate rat race, there is a opportunity to learn valuable lessons on the MIT campus that again you again cannot learn in their classses. For those looking at government or the charitable sector, again there are hugely beneficial opportunities on campus, and again, they rarely offer grades. </p>

<p>Based on my experiences, I am confident that the overwhelming majority of students admitted to MIT can achieve straight A’s if they chose to made the difficult tradeoffs that that represents, but I also believe that for the overwhelming majority of students, that the decision to focus only on grades is misplaced. They would be allowing their schooling to interfere with their education. They can get a much richer educational experience at MIT in other ways, and in ways that will be a lot more valuable to their future lives.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>As a cautionary point though, sometimes one of these involves the other. Time and again, I always try to clarify this point - it is not generally true within theoretical fields that what you do in the classroom correlates poorly with ability to research. Of course, there are certainly other endeavors which help (like a love for certain specific areas, evidence of independent inquiries conducted, and attempts at original work).</p>

<p>In a field such as mathematics, which is what I’m personally familiar with, the key is that the ideas which emerge in the fundamental classes keep on coming up again and again, and in fact lots of advances are ultimately born of the same principle(s). Mastery of this stuff is supposed to be crucial.</p>

<p>This doesn’t mean that someone with perfect grades and standardized test scores is always at an advantage, because depth is crucial.</p>