<p>What SAT scores etc does MIT require for its women athletic recruits? In other words, do they relax their academic standards at all as other selective schools do? </p>
<p>No. Our athletes have to meet the same standards of academic preparation as anyone else. </p>
<p>MIT is a very difficult school academically. If they relaxed their standards for athletic recruits it would be a disservice to all involved. Participating in a sport at any college is time consuming; if youâre not up to par academically, you would even more likely fail out of MIT than students with more time available to study.</p>
The test is a simple one. If the student got a serious injury in the summer before starting at MIT and could no longer play their sport, then would MIT still be the right match for the student. If the answer is yes, then being a recruited athlete can really help your application. If the answer is no, then being an athletic recruit cannot save you.
is any weight at all given to a submitted sports form (tennis) if the applicant has no outstanding distinctions aside from passion and vice-captaincy/captaincy of JV team?
It is a common misconception that one needs to have outstanding distinctions in some field to get admitted to MIT. These things are nice to have. If you are an IMO gold medalist, then that is a stunning accomplishment and one that MIT would look upon very favorably, but there are a large number of students who get in each year despite not having any of these things. A lot depends on context. If you go to a school which provides its students with a great many opportunities, then MIT would look admit those who take advantage of those opportunities and achieve great things. If you have no such opportunities then you are not penalized for that. MIT is looking for the decisions that you take, not the decisions that you do not have the opportunity to take.
At the end of the day it doesnt really matter how holistic a process is, the final decision is always black and white.
My dreams (haha) either come true, or they dont
But I concur. I was merely hoping to think up a more feasible fantasy with which I can whittle the hours away for the next three (?) months until decisions are out
My son was going to play MIT football, and while I canât remember the number, they gave him an ACT he had to make to be admitted, even though they were ârecruitingâ him. He missed it by one point, and he didnât get in. Turned out for the best, probably for the school and him.
My daughter was recruited by MIT for her sport. They gave her an overall view of scores to achieve ( ie ACT vs. SAT, SAT II subject test scores). When she hit the scores, she decided to go early at MIT instead of taking an IVY likely letter . She got deferred. But thats the process. No guarantees.
The test is a simple one. If the student got a serious injury in the summer before starting at MIT and could no longer play their sport, then would MIT still be the right match for the student. If the answer is yes, then being a recruited athlete can really help your application. If the answer is no, then being an athletic recruit cannot save you.
jenroypa, a year ago my son did much like your daughter, forsaking an Ivy likely letter and going for EA at MIT, but he was lucky to be admitted. He had the right grades and scores for MIT admittance, but his high school EC and science record was not noteworthy. Weâre pretty sure his athletics and essays got him in. He absolutely loves being at MIT and good luck to those who are awaiting regular decision this year.
My son is being recruited for athletics and was deferred at EA. We are very anxiously awaiting the next decision process and hoping for the best. Was hoping the athletics thing might give a little advantage since it demonstrates well-roundedness, discipline, teamwork, etc.
Kills recruiting for many MIT sports. Obviously a holistic process, but coaches cannot reliably predict a single student-athleteâs chances. So, many recruitable and very academically talented athletes that would have been great fits at MIT commit elsewhere, including Ivies. A shame to some extent, since MIT could offer an early read if they wanted, but totally understandable in the milieu of MIT. With the academics offered and the networking opportunities, MIT could be a top tier D3 school in many more team sports if they handled this slightly differently.
"Was hoping the athletics thing might give a little advantage since it demonstrates well-roundedness, discipline, teamwork, etc. "
How do you know it didnât? If it werenât for athletics, how do you know he wouldnât have been rejected outright? Iâm not saying he would - just that you canât tell, since you only get 1-1/2 bits of information.
The limiting factor in athletics is the rigor of MIT. And , MIT would not be MIT without the rigor. No matter how good an athlete, the student must be able to pass general requirements that include 6 science/math classes. Now you may be thinking that many colleges require as many or more. That may be true but most schools allow the requirement to be fulfilled by what are essentially science courses for non-majors. MIT doesnât even have that type of class. They are all hard core rigorous courses that are difficult even for most strong STEM students. They have to take single-variable calculus and multivariable calculus, Introduction to solid-state chemistry or principles of chemical science, one of five biology classes " denoted as Biology (GIR), cover the same core material, which includes the fundamental principles of biochemistry, genetics, molecular biology, and cell biology." and Physics 1 and 2 (calculus based). In addition, âEvery candidate for a bachelorâs degree must have completed a minimum of eight term subjects in the humanities, arts, and social sciences, including distribution and concentration components. Subjects must be taken for a letter grade âŠâ MIT does not allow students to swap out rigorous core math-science class for classes called âOur environment and youâ or âMath for keeping scoreâ, "pre-algebra ". There are many athletes who are very strong students. But few can devote the time needed to be at the top of their sport and still be able to pass the rigorous MIT requirements. Athletes at the IVY league schools donât have anything close to these requirements. But then again, they are not MIT.
Sorta puts MIT Varsity athletes in a pretty good light, huh?
It does and it doesnât.
If you look at (for example) the mean SAT scores of admitted recruited athletes versus non-recruited athletes at Harvard/Yale/Princeton, then you would notice a statistically significant difference. At MIT you will not. That suggests that MITâs scholar-athletes, to use the NCAA jargon, are probably more scholar than athlete, but it also means, as CDK observes, that MIT sports will always suffer in comparison to some other schools.
Yes, this year, the Engineers football team went 9-0, took the NEFC championship and went out in the second round of the postseason (the same round that the Womenâs Soccer team went out this year (14-4-2 regular season) as well as the womenâs volleyball team (27-5 regular season)). Itâs great when MIT sports teams do well, but nobody on any of our teams came to MIT primarily to play sports.
And, I certainly agree with everything that the people after my post said. I do think that there are a handful of student-athletes (noticeâŠstudent first), every year in every sport, that are more than qualified for admission and would thrive at MIT with playing a sport, that would probably commit to MIT and the education it offersâŠbut MIT is not able to âcommitâ to them before a decision must be made. In many sports, recruiting is moving earlier in high school. Top scholar-athletes are being picked up by Ivies and other top schools. Tippy-top students that are great athletes are prized by Ivies (and NESCACs) due to their recruiting restrictions based on AI and bands. There are likely many students that are qualified that would like to attend MIT, but they are not taking a chance on the admissions process at MIT with a 7.7% chance of admission, particularly when the Harvard coach, for example, 1 mile away and a decent school in its own right, with a 5.9% acceptance rate, is offering that same student a âslotâ and (nearly) guaranteed admittance. It is what it is, and MIT will do what MIT does. And, as long as the student-athlete knows what they are getting into with the admissions process where the coach has essentially zero input or voice, and the coaches end up recruiting and following 5-10X the numbers of prospective student-athletes to apply and to yield their roster numbers, then everyone should be fine with it. Itâs just âdifferentâ.
I am not sure the freshman year General Institute Requirements are a âlimiting factor in athleticsâ at MIT, as another poster said.
Hereâs just one example. Take a look at the football roster.
Freshmen 25
Sophs 24
Juniors 16
Seniors 15
I am too lazy to check, but I think this example of attrition reveals itself on a lot of rosters at MIT. There is attrition on Ivy rosters, too, but not to this extentâŠI believe you will find
Second, while single variable and multi-variable calculus may be considered difficult for the typical Philosophy, Classics, or Sociology majorâŠfor anyone who is inclined toward math and science and is a candidate to attend an âinstitute of technologyâ, these are standard, not especially rigorous courses, that are sometimes even taken in high school.
If anything is limiting MIT athletics, it is that they are drawing from a pool of students that is much smaller than those available to schools that have liberal arts curricula.
No one should take anything I have said as a criticism of MIT. I have the highest respect for MIT.
Something isnât adding up. If MIT is so much harder to get into âathleticallyâ because the Ivy league schools have lower standards(AI bands etcâŠ) and allow lesser student athletes into their schoolâŠthen how are Harvard and Yales average SAT scores for students higher overall than MIT?