Question regarding the Selection Process

Colleges and Universities A-Z Massachusetts Institute of Technology
1

Hello, I have a question about for an admissions officer or anyone knowledgable about the MIT selection process.

Reading the blogs from previous years, it seems like there were two really distinct rounds of admissions: summarizing and selection. That is, during selection, applicants’ “summaries” would make it to the selection committee (if one made it that far) before MIT began crafting its class. However, does MIT still do that?

This might clear up what I mean:
http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/selection
http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/selection_finished

Nowadays, does more than /just/ your summary make it to the final admissions decision room? I feel like it’s unfair that only a /summary/ of an applicant’s life, a life condensed to a resume-like bullet point list, would be the only thing read during “selection.” Do /all/ admissions officers read applicants’ essays? or do the ones at the end of the ladder read only summaries? Though this does add more objectivity to the application process, I’d hate to think this would be a typical deal-breaker situation:

John wrote beautifully-crafted essays about his family’s financial difficulties etc.
Jenna wrote mediocre essays that talked a lot about accomplishments that she wasn’t able to fit in her resume.

John’s summary:
Overcame financial obstacles

Jenna:
Accomplishment 1
Accomplishment 2
Accomplishment 3
Accomplishment 4
And so on…

Here, you can see why “selection” would be so unfair. I heard that Harvard sometimes will “project applications on the wall with a projector” so that their entire final selection committees could weigh in on whether or not to accept an applicant. I’d hate to realize that MIT only evaluates applications based on a condensed “summary” at the end of the day.

In short, the most important question is, “Do ALL admissions officers read an applicants’ entire application, and even then, are final decisions made based on the ENTIRE application, or do mere summaries and comments end up ‘crafting’ next year’s class?”

Thanks for reading!

2

@JamesGatzbyz:
It’s difficult to follow your logic and conclusions. MIT is very transparent about the process they use. Every school has their own process, and they’re always refining them. There are pros and cons to every approach.

Maybe you could find some school out there that has a non-optimal process, but you’ll be a lonely voice trying to find support that MIT’s is unfair.

If you believe MIT’s is unfair and Harvard’s is better, you are free to choose whatever path you feel works for you.

3

Holistic admissions means pretty much by definition that the decision is to a degree subjective.

4

I really do not understand the OPs question. I am not an admissions officer, and I really do not know what goes on in selection committee at all, but I can do some basic arithmetic. Suppose I was able to read all 18,306 applications from last year. And then suppose that I came ready to discuss them in selection committee. Lets say that we are going to allow roughly a month for selection committee, or roughly 18 business days (it is slightly longer but again lets simplify the math). So that suggests roughly 1000 applications to discuss per day. And lets say we have 10 hour days without lunch, because again that makes the math straightforward, so we only have to discuss and agree roughly 100 applications per hour. Is it the OPs suggestion that each of these applications be projected up on a wall, so that the finer points of each application can be effectively reviewed and debated in the 36 seconds or so that the admissions officers have to do so. That seems madness. Even if an admissions officer has read every single word or every single application, all that can meaningfully be brought into the room are their own quick and occasionally subjective summaries. Now I guess, and it is a guess, that many of the admissions decisions are clear and reasonably unanimous, leaving time to pore over the contentious candidates and to debate those thoroughly, but of course, an admissions officer would not necessarily know in advance which of the candidates are going to be disputed. And of course there are multiple selection rounds.

So I think that the OP’s concept is unworkable. Also unworkable is the idea that any human being can read 18306 applications in a month or so. These can be LONG. Letters of recommendation can ramble on. Interview reports can ramble on. Plus add in coaches summaries of recruited students, faculty reviews of music, art or maker portfolios, various other things that need to be read to understand the applicants accomplishments (eg. Just how impressive is the Gambian medal for mathematical achievement?). The high school’s profile of what an education at their establishment can mean can run several pages. An full application can be 8000 words easily, but lets simplify that to say 6500 words, then multiply by 18,306 and you get roughly 119 million words. At roughly 100000 words in a novel, you are looking at the equivalent of 1190 novels to read in a month and a half. No, I think that it is clear that not every admissions officer will read every word of every application.

MIT is quite clear in what it does. Every application will be read and summarized by at least three reviewers.Then it will go to selection committee, where multiple groups of different admissions staff and faculty members will weigh in on it. Assuming you’ve made it that far, the senior staff will then review it again. Approximately 12 people (give or take) will significantly discuss and debate your application before you’re admitted. The more competitive you are, the more people will read and weigh in on your application. It is the only way to reduce the large pile of applications that come in on the first of the year to an agreed set of decisions in the time frame available.