<p>Ah yes, the “logic” of deducing causation via correlations from a tiny, self-reported sample size. </p>
<p>p.s. here is why you are wrong </p>
<p>[The</a> Difficulty With Data | MIT Admissions](<a href=“http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/the-difficulty-with-data]The”>The Difficulty With Data | MIT Admissions)</p>
<p>Wow, OP it looks like you lack even the most basic understanding of statistics. As someone who is too dumb for MIT, it seems clear why you would be rejected as well. Get over yourself. </p>
<p>For one thing, SAT clearly doesn’t mean everything. If that was so, I would be accepted almost everywhere I applied to. Your naivety about the college application process is really amusing.</p>
<p>yutyut, if you wish, I will upload my entire (anomyzed to the extent possible) MIT application, essays and all, plus copies of all my recommendation letters and (anonomyzed) transcript to google docs for the community’s perusal. I’m curious if someone can deduce why I was rejected.</p>
<p>My point isn’t that I’m bitter, in fact I wouldn’t have gone even if I were accepted (got into Yale [likely], and still waiting on Princeton). </p>
<p>My point is that ironically the college which one would expect to find the most amount of fairness actually happens to be at the forefront of hidden agendas and affirmative action. They always tout the fact they don’t recruit athletes, legacies, etc… but their admissions practices are utter crap.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m willing</p>
<p>These last two posts from me have been uncharacteristically harsh. But I think lyxdeslic’s posts quite frankly deserved it. </p>
<p>We did not offer admission to over 91% of our applicants this year. It sucked for them and it sucked for us. I recognize that some of this pain gives rise to posts like lyxdeslic. But I draw a firm line when they draw cold comfort by being cruel and presumptuous about others. </p>
<p>Many MITCC posters were not admitted. To those who have taken it with grace and proper perspective: thank you. Thank you for understanding the physics of this process. Thank you for not taking out your pain on those who were admitted by demeaning them. I am very proud of you. I know you will go on and do great things, and be great people, wherever you go. Thank you for the honor and experience of playing a role in this part of your lives.</p>
<p>@OP: You will get eaten alive wherever you end up with this kind of attitude. If you can’t deal with rejection and not getting your way, then you really won’t be able to get through life. Good luck to you wherever you end up.</p>
<p>I’m not like this irl</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You realize you’re not helping yourself trying to make this not sound like sour grapes, right?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you think “fair” is judging purely by SAT scores, without any context about what an applicant has had to overcome to do well, your sense of “fairness” is completely broken.</p>
<p>Is there anyone who doubts, even for a second, that the actual average SAT score of admitted MIT students is significantly higher than the actual average SAT score of the applicant pool as a whole? </p>
<p>Have I got a bridge to sell you…</p>
<p>It shouldn’t be purely by SAT scores, but for god sakes, if you have astronomical scores, USAMO/INTEL, then why shouldn’t you be accepted?</p>
<p>I guess MIT would rather take the African American with a 2100 who had to ‘overcome obstacles.’</p>
<p>MIT assumes just because of one’s race that that means you have to deal with challenges. Despite being white I had to overcome numerous challenges including bullying, etc… shouldn’t that count?</p>
<p>Whatever, MIT doesn’t deserve me</p>
<p>I thought it was well-established that MIT admissions is not meritocratic. I even read some admissions blog post about how they are looking to provide opportunities to students, rather than purely reward good (or excellent or amazing) work in high school. I went into the admissions process understanding this and so I do not leave disappointed.</p>
<p>I think MIT most definitely knows what they’re doing. I have confidence that I am a competitive applicant. This waitlist outcome, to me, means that maybe I just wouldn’t have been as well of a fit, as determined by the admissions committee. Maybe they saw that I would flourish more in a different community. I’m fairly certain the committe knew I could get a lot out of an MIT education and also bring things to the school…but maybe they felt I could learn MORE and do MORE at another college.</p>
<p>Rewarding amazing work and providing opportunities to students aren’t mutually exclusive. It is possible to have to overcome challenges while making USAMO</p>
<p>@Calexico - </p>
<p>Absolutely we’re meritocratic. </p>
<p>[Diversity</a> or Merit? | MIT Admissions](<a href=“http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/diversity-or-merit]Diversity”>Diversity or Merit? | MIT Admissions)
[Putting</a> Diversity into Context | MIT Admissions](<a href=“http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/which-box-should-i-check]Putting”>Putting Diversity into Context | MIT Admissions)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Applying to MIT is about as meritocratic as running for the Senate - you either need a fat wallet or the ability to play the race card.</p>
<p>“Rewarding amazing work and providing opportunities to students aren’t mutually exclusive.”</p>
<p>Dude, the results on CC are hardly representative of the entire applicant pool. How do you know there isn’t an abundance of highly qualified admitted students who simply don’t have CC?</p>
<p>lol are you serious lyxdeslic??? Are you trolling or do you really believe the **** you’re saying? No wonder MIT rejected you.</p>
<p>Oh yeah, you forgot one of the most basic principles of statistical sampling. You need a RANDOM sample.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>oh my god </p>
<p>you’re m_quinn aren’t you</p>
<p>MIT didn’t rejected because of the <expletive> I was saying. They rejected me because I didn’t fit their demographics.</expletive></p>