<p>Just wondering, what's the male:female ratio in 8.012 and 8.022?</p>
<p>
[quote]
@squirrels
I feel bad about getting accepted over my friends :\ Don't get me wrong, I was ecstatic about my decision, but several of my friends were rejected or waitlisted. They worked so much harder than I did (I'm fairly laid back) and had better scores; they seem to believe that the main reason I got in over them was because I'm female. I know their essays weren't very good (I read two peoples' out of three), but neither was mine (although my EC said it demonstrated passion?)...
[/quote]
Don't let this bother you. Compare the ratio of femal and male applicants in MIT (about 0.365) against the femal and male ratio at SAT I math score over 99% (where number of male only slightly biger than femal). One can say femal applicants pool is much more self selected than male applicants pool. There are quite a few boys that I know, who apply MIT or Caltech just because they think they are good at math/science because their math/science course grade is much better than the huminity courses. </p>
<p>Desclaim, I'm not talk about case by case shown in this thread, just try to clearfy the the mistery running on CC that femal got node when applying engineering school.</p>
<p>Mollie,
xkcd is NEVER superfluous... :)</p>
<p>This is certainly anecdotal, but I think I should share it:</p>
<p>As I mentioned previously, this year I was an interviewer for MIT. The very best of the 11 or so interviews I had was with a female candidate who I had no doubt would do marvelously at MIT (and I told the committee the reasons I felt this way in my report). Now, I have no evidence as to what her scores were, but we talked a lot about her accomplishments and I was very impressed...not only with the accomplishments but with her maturity and passion.</p>
<p>She was waitlisted.</p>
<p>I had another non-URM male candidate get in. He was, by my estimation, not as deserving as the girl I speak of.</p>
<p>"A male friend of mine is a Siemens Regional Finalist, Siemens AP Award recipient, USNCO qualifier, USABO semifinalist, 7 on AIME (missed USAMO by 1 question), 2360, 4.0 UW with 5's on 10 APs...and guess what? He was waitlisted."</p>
<p>Stupidkid,
And is your friend disappointed? Relieved? Or are you more upset than he? Even Intel STS finalists get waitlisted or -- gasp! -- rejected. Sometimes it's even for the best! Your friend will undoubtedly get into some fine schools, assuming he has applied smartly. </p>
<p>We don't always get the rewards we deserve in life. No one is entitled to an MIT (or Caltech, Harvard, Stanford, etc.) acceptance just because he or she worked hard and did well. If the goal of that 4.0, Intel award or club presidency is solely to get into a good college, then you've missed a whole lot of life (and joy) being focused on the goal rather than the process. It always saddens me when I hear kids say, "I did all that work and didn't get into XX...I could have been out having fun! All that work wasn't worth it!" </p>
<p>It's the <em>process</em> that's important. I think that's especially apt at MIT, where you will work your tail off and not always get the 'reward' of an excellent grade. </p>
<p>Off my soapbox now. Hope I don't kill this thread!</p>
<p>Uh CountingDown... you have a point there... and yet ... you don't have a point there... </p>
<p>Especially in the case of international students.. For these two years of my life that I've devoted to research about US, US colleges, learning for SATs, Toefl, browsing through websites, statistics, filling out applications, trying to find out how you translate stupid financial expressions, paying for court translators, tests and I don't know what, and the wait... the waiiiiiiiiiit which drives you insane (it has shorten my life for like 5 years!)... And all of this time is wasted if I don't get into some of the colleges I've applied. I could have been doing something better, like studying twice as more physics, which would serve me for something in my life.. </p>
<p>While when you're domestic student, if you've shown so much capacity to do all this brilliant things, and all of the best colleges reject you, a "third tier" college will not give you as much opportunity to shine and to develop all these cool abilities and experiences you had in high school even more. Those students will stagnate on these not-so-good colleges, and other students which have not proven as equally good, which could develop their skills on a not-so-good colleges, will be on MIT or some other TOP school, and probably will have a lot of difficulties, because of inexperience. </p>
<p>i hope i made sense in whatever i told you right now, i'm not so good in making constructive sentences in english hahahha</p>
<p>I just want to say first that MIT will not go down the hill because you think they are letting in unqualified candidates. MIT will always be strong because of its graduate and PhD students. Secondly, MIT is NOT letting in unqualified applicants. Yes, they are a supporter of AA. Many universities ARE and that's all I'm going to say because I don't really have a stance on the whole issue. You cannot always get a good picture from the stats put here. Take a look a the tables that show what MIT considers important. MIT</a> Office of the Provost, Institutional Research </p>
<p>The only very important thing is character. So this means if you have every single international award, but not the qualities MIT would want, then you will get rejected. Perhaps, all those overqualified candidates rushed their essays or did not do the best job they could have on their app. I'll be honest. I come from a small midwestern city and so I was semi-arrogant and thought I would get in everywhere. I did not do as good as a job as I should have done on my apps and got deferred from MIT. I fixed this though. I wrote a new essays, sent in more stuff (to other places as well), and it has worked out. So anyway, I agree with having admissions based more on GPA/Scores/Awards, but that is just because I feel like I should deserve getting in for the work I did, but that is not the case and that's ok i guess. I totally feel with everyone who did not get in, because the past 3 months after being deferred have been torturous. Anyway best of luck to everyone.</p>
<p>My D was rejected. She is doing well with it, but of all the highly competitive schools she is applying to I think she most connected with MIT. She is focusing on the other great schools she applied to. Just makes the next two weeks waiting a little longer. She will most likely do well anywhere as long as the school challenges her and the kids care about their education. Applying to a school with a 10 to 12% accept rate with all these amazing students applying puts alot of kids on the same playing field. Not all can be selected although most (>75%) are qualified. So anyone asking for "chances" to any of these schools is wasting their time. Just do your best and try to represent your true self on the application. Those who take it personally, shouldn't. Just move on. I learned this by watching my amazing child thru this process. I wasn't so brave and confident when I was going thru it 30 yrs ago. She's still #1 in my book!! Good luck to all of you. Those who go to MIT, do great things there!!!</p>
<p>foo,
I was speaking mainly of domestic applicants -- I know that international admissions is an entirely different ballgame. However, US applicants also spend time over the last year or two of high school doing the same kind of research about colleges and programs that you described -- and paying fees for transcripts, applications, etc. My experience has been that my S didn't spend time agonizing about waiting for his decisions -- either in December or now. (Worrying about how his friends will do in the admissions process is another story.)</p>
<p>People who are accepted at MIT are capable of doing the work. Period. It's in the school's interest that students succeed. Yes, MIT offers an incredible experience -- and so do many other schools. It really does work out in the end. Students who are motivated to succeed will find (or make) those opportunities wherever they go -- instead of relying on the name brand of the school to 'prove' their intelligence or worth.</p>
<p>^^ True...</p>
<p>But I have to be honest, since graduating from MIT, proving myself has been pretty damn easy. Too easy, in fact. Interviews are halfway over before they even start. </p>
<p>It's sort of guilt inducing.</p>
<p>MITMathAlum2006: Feel no guilt. First off, there were or will be times in your life when you get a lot less than you deserve. Second, you will still have to prove yourself once one the job. Your degree gives you about 15 minutes of an advantage.</p>
<p>hi bballdude:), right on ....</p>
<p>I am curious StupidKid, Your own achievements were
lesser than the "friend" you are vehmently talking about,
yet you got into MIT RD....?</p>
<p>he, he, did you wrongly claim to be a female on your app
to give you that advantage?:D </p>
<p>develop a sense of humor dude :cool: and take the long view...?</p>
<p>Do you think that MIT is the only school that admits students with "lesser" stats? There are several athletes and urm's at my school who have already been accepted at Duke, Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Penn and Stanford, with SAT's below 1800. That's just the way it is... once you get in, you must do the work, regardless of what happened in hs.</p>
<p>Accepted</p>
<p>...But I'm kind of discouraged from posting stats at the moment. Is this what I'm going to be looking forward to if I go to MIT? "You're a URM female and took this spot from a white/Asian male with better stats"?</p>
<p>This would be the downside of AA.</p>
<p>
[quote]
MIT is a school for future scientists and engineers, or people with a highly intellectual/scientific bent that later choose to do other things (finance, entrepeneurship). At age 18, people have not yet specialized so it makes sense to select for academic talent and especially for prowess in math and science. It's not that complicated.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I disagree. If selection was made strictly along these lines, it would make for a very uninspired institute. Why don't we just pick strictly applicants by AIME scores. That should do it. Anybody over a 4 or 5 gets in, everybody else is out. I have personally experienced such a system in France before going to MIT for grad school. It made for a very boring college experience. </p>
<p>MIT already has more than its share of academic superstars, Intel and Olympiad winners. This year alone, it is reported that 30% more of these applicants were admitted. The average math SAT score is already an astronomical 780. Should it only be 800? Is the best possible class the one where every MIT student competes in the Putnam? </p>
<p>The MIT faculty which sets the admission policy (as opposed to the admissions office which implements it) believes that the current crop of students is stronger than ever, more involved and interested in learning than any prior class. In addition, the ever climbing yield indicates that students' beliefs about what MIT has to offer is more positive than ever. No other school except possibly Harvard beats it on cross-admits. </p>
<p>I have seen no evidence that MIT is going down the wrong path in admission or lowering its standards in any way. Quite the opposite. I believe that an increasing number of the best and brightest students in the US are applying to MIT (especially women) because it is a diverse environment with a lot more to offer than a straight path to a PhD in math or science. You can be intellectually brilliant and contribute to MIT without also having to be a math or physics whiz. Less than half of an MIT class is now made up of engineers and even a smaller group actually pursue an engineering career upon graduation or later. </p>
<p>The life sciences are now the hottest areas for future growth. Shouldn't MIT participate in training the next generation of biologists, biochemists or physicians? What about economists, intellectual property policy experts, entrepreneurs, bankers, consultants or venture capitalists? The world is increasingly technical and these fields could certainly benefit from increased scientific awareness as scientific litteracy hits new lows.</p>
<p>I believe that drive, passion and success potential can be measured in a 17 or 18 year old and that these factors may have more to do with how well these students will perform at MIT and beyond. I see nothing wrong with MIT admitting a nationally ranked swimmer, a published novelist, concert level soloist or international juggler (who all happen to also be outstanding students) over a USAMO qualifier. They have certainly proven that can be very competitive in their chosen field and academically successful at the same time.</p>
<p>Game, Set, and Match to cellardwellar</p>
<p>Thank you for the clarity and precision of your response.</p>
<p>SopranoSenior:), If you were good enough for MIT adcom members
you are good enough for me or anyone on CC!</p>
<p>You are who you are and have made it into one of the most selective
schools in the world!</p>
<p>let me know if you want to dunk anyone in the Charles during CPW to
give them a friendly reminder of what some girls can do... </p>
<p>--- a fellow MIT admitee girl (EA)</p>
<p>and Wow Cellardweller your post was impeccable :)</p>
<p>^arwen, I may join you on the whole dunking-in-the-Charles-of-anyone-who-doubts-that-girls-are-capable. =] It sounds like fun.</p>
<p>Seeing as how I can't swim, I'll refrain from the dunking, but I'll be at the scene with a camera and a quick-quotes quill in tow :)</p>