<p>Based on the 28 posts in the RD thread, I have gathered the following statistics:[ul]
[li]Average SAT score[list]</p>[/li]
<p>[li]Accepted - 2248[/li][li]Waitlisted - 2095[/li][li]Rejected - 2263[/li][/ul]
[li]Average SATII score[ul]</p>[/li]
<p>[li]Accepted - 2333[/li][li]Waitlisted - 2217[/li][li]Rejected - 2360[/li][/ul]
[/list]</p>
<p>You don't even want to know the acceptance rate breakdown by gender/race - it is disgusting. MIT should be ashamed of what is doing.</p>
<p>I don’t think we have sufficient evidence to draw any conclusions about acceptance rates based on score, from just 28 replies…would anyone care to perform a t-test? :D</p>
<p>Maybe there is more to MIT admissions than test scores?</p>
<p>I am proud that I even applied to MIT, Even though I was rejected.</p>
<p>I wonder if all of the rejected student data is reported accurately.</p>
<p>Correct me if i’m wrong, but most of those accepted were hooked in some way, while most of those rejected were unhooked. Minority (and female at MIT) status has always conferred a well known advantage in admissions.</p>
<p>Wait until the dust has cleared.</p>
<p>I’m a black male with a 32 ACT and 2170 SAT IIs, and I got rejected. This whole afformatI’ve action thing is overrated. Obviously the black/Hispanic kids that er in are extremely smart if I was left out</p>
<p>This is a bad thread.</p>
<p>no… its not due to affirmative action really. When you look at the raw data, the kids getting in are the ones without the numbers.</p>
<p>A lot of people havent posted their stats. Im sure MIT is well aware of what theyre doing and has chosen their next class well. I was waitlisted with a 2330 SAT score and 2370 SAT II overall score.</p>
<p>Looking at 28 data points from a pool of 18,000 will not lead you to any reasonable conclusions. Besides, if MIT wanted to fill its class with perfect, 2400-scoring students it could, but admissions chooses not to. Like quesadilla said, there is more to MIT admissions than test scores.</p>
<p>people are looking at the stats wrong…
we would expect sat score advantage to give an advantage (or at the least, no difference), but offer a disadvantage (seemingly…). i don’t think OP is trying to create a “perfect” statistical sample here, but rather just *****ing about a rejection</p>
<p>Yes. The data suggests that the lower the SAT score, the more likely you are to be admitted.</p>
<p>What a fascinatingly bad opinion!! Thanks lyxdeslic.</p>
<p>Chris, I really admire the way you manage to put things so nicely all them time :)</p>
<p>Just because you got rejected doesn’t mean you go crying and trying to make sense of the stats from a board that necessarily is smarter than the average college population. 28 points? Yeah that will give a great estimate, maybe if you looked at the other 18 thousand you’ll see the difference. Don’t bring the “I thought I was special” parade onto the rest of the people here.</p>
<p>Proof MIT has a great idea of what it is doing: your rejection</p>
<p>
Just like the heartless one paragraph rejection email. Glad I’m not going to this Institute of Technology.</p>
<p>Just look at Snipersas decision as well. Me and him have by far the best resume’s on this board and neither of us got in… of all places, I expected MIT to be the most logical. Guess not.</p>
<p>ITS NOT JUST STATS FFS. Jesus I’d rather take a person who gets B’s and is an awesome person than you.</p>
<p>We get it that you are bitter about your rejection. However, I as well as many other applicants on this forum were also rejected from MIT, and we all seem to be able respect MIT’s decisions and congratulate those that were accepted. Complaining about this will do absolutely nothing. The decision has been made and there is no way to change it. The best thing to do is move on and make the best of the next four years, no matter where you end up.</p>