<p>Luckily, I hope at least, there aren´t many others like Philip Streich.</p>
<p>I know two students from RSI 2007 who got in without reaching the minimum standardized test scores for RSI but with amazing research experience and essays.</p>
<p>"also, he's cute. now i want to get into rsi even more, if only to meet him.."</p>
<p>Yeah, dbl09, I agree! But how do you know Philip applied?</p>
<p>who wouldn't apply? :P</p>
<p>privatecitizen, do you know if the letters went out yet?</p>
<p>when do the results come out?</p>
<p>Actually, I suspect Philip might not have applied. He made physics camp last year but he is not even a quarter/semi-finalist this year-- this makes me wonder if he is not already attending university this year. So that's one more spot for the non-geniuses, right?</p>
<p>As of today, Wednesday, no one has gotten any letters... I bet we won't get any til Monday. 8( a couple more sleepless nights..</p>
<p>wait, so if the people who've gotten in haven't done anything groundbreaking, like intense research and/or international ___ olympiad, how DO they chose? based on essays? everyone's stats are the same...I honestly think that essays shouldn't be the deciding factor for anything--I could easily get someone else to write my essays and there would be a very low possibility that I will get caught.</p>
<p>not that i will, just saying.</p>
<p>
[quote]
do you know if the letters went out yet?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I emailed them about the letters today, and they said that they might get them out today or tomorrow.</p>
<p>i know and the essays were not really all that detailed topics. I mean only q 1 and 2 were the ones to show uniquness and they could not be more than 2 paragraphs. How Do they chose i wonder.</p>
<p>they choose holistically.</p>
<p>they read your applications and if they like what you wrote and your stats weren't horrible, they let you in. if they're having a bad day, you wont get in. if you wrote about the yankees and they're a mets fan, you wont get in. there is no science to it. no matter how smart you are or how good your stats are, if your reader doesn't "get" with you, you're not getting in. </p>
<p>stats get you consideration, your whole application gets you in.</p>
<p>there's no science to it: if you photoshopped your PSAT report and transcript and asked one of your outgoing friends to write your application (suggesting scientific research and stuff), you would have a much higher chance of getting in, simply because your outgoing friend knows people better. </p>
<p>im only slightly facetious.</p>
<p>that means that the letters will arrive on the 31st for me :(</p>
<p>@A-card:</p>
<p>question 1 was pretty cliche, but question 2 is fairly important imo. sure, you can go on the web and look up goldbach's conjecture or some other important theorem on wikipedia. but then it's obvious you have only a superficial understanding of what you are talking about. rsi is looking for people who are engaged and interested in current research. so if you (like me) read sciencedaily, discover, etc, avidly, you would have a lot to talk about. </p>
<p>i myself in answering number 2 spent almost an entire page. it wasn't that i pretended to know a lot about what i was talking about. rather, i talked about my topics' significance (both personally and scientifically) and about current conflicting theories in those topics. it wasn't like i had a great hypothesis-- but i think that what i wrote showed that i had a genuine interest in my fields of interest and was reading about current developments (this wasn't stuff that you could find on wikipedia). and i think that's pretty important.</p>
<p>
[quote]
wait, so if the people who've gotten in haven't done anything groundbreaking, like intense research and/or international ___ olympiad, how DO they chose? based on essays? everyone's stats are the same...I honestly think that essays shouldn't be the deciding factor for anything--I could easily get someone else to write my essays and there would be a very low possibility that I will get caught.</p>
<p>not that i will, just saying.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Narcissa: Yeah, you have a point. But, because everyone's stats (test scores, leadership in ECs, GPA, rank, etc) are relatively the same, the only deciding factor is #2 on the application and perhaps even #1. I know people with perfect scores, ECs, and some research get rejected and people with mediocre scores (not reaching minimum score for admission), ECs, and </p>
<p>Also when I emailed RSI, they emphasized that #2 is read very carefully, and that it should be the focus of the application!
I agree with you Aridese.</p>
<p>same dsl09... like i said i think thats the question thats gonna get kids in...</p>
<p>and how do they choose? ouija board ;-)</p>
<p>(hmm..... r-y-a-n.... okay lets pick him! lol)</p>
<p>
[quote]
wait, so if the people who've gotten in haven't done anything groundbreaking, like intense research and/or international ___ olympiad, how DO they chose? based on essays? everyone's stats are the same...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>that isn't really true.. there are a lot of olympiads out there, and many of the people i know who applied have gotten almost no where olympiad wise. sure it's easy to make the aime but there is a difference between making aime and making usamo, between making silver in usaco and gold in usaco. </p>
<p>same goes for courseloads-- i know applicants who have taken (or are taking) all the ap's listed on the rsi app and more. and leadership is important too.. not everyone is president of math club or science club or runs non-profit organizations.</p>
<p>all the people who are applying have strong stats... but strong students who aren't international __ olympiad level can still stand out.</p>
<p>4.0, many ec's, and 2400 sat's aren't nearly as important as showing leadership and self-motivation. i think someone who has gotten many olympiad-level qualifications and has a 3.6 gpa has a better chance than someone with a 4.0 but nothing extra.</p>
<p>wanna know how RSI selects kids?</p>
<p>RSI</a> admissions criteria</p>
<p>Where's privatecitizen? I hope he's not on high sea with no internet access.</p>
<p>
[Quote]
Just curious, you mentioned there are five readers, I have a few questions for Privatecitizen:
1) Do the readers make the final decisions?
2) What is the male/female ratio of this year’s readers?
3) How many files make to the readers this year and why?
4) What are the selection criteria prior to sending the files to the readers?
5) Are file readers RSI alumni?
6) What are the readers’ credentials?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
privatecitizen, do you know if the letters went out yet?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>btw, anyone feel like sharing their response for number 2?</p>
<p>might as well make me more anxious with your well-written, well-thought out answers :9</p>
<p>lol, well i guess it cant hurt...</p>
<p>for some reason though, i cant find the final draft of it, but here goes:</p>
<ol>
<li>Engineering, Bioelectrical
I would like to explore the myriad of possibilities in creating electrical devices using organic materials that can further lower the manufacturing price and the resources needed to create the advanced devices of tomorrow. With the promise of FOLED technology and paper batteries, I know that bioelectrical engineering will be a bright field of exploration in the years to come. For instance, one of the problems that face billions of people today is energy. From driving around in gas-guzzling, fossil-fuel dependent cars to charging their iPods, we need power. One solution that I have been pursuing is whether or not a battery can be grown from organic materials that will be replenished by the sun’s energy each day. Not only will it reduce or dependency on foreign oil but also help us actively counteract the effects of global warming.
Another problem that has been facing the armies of the world for centuries is the military uniform. Uniforms have to be lightweight and capable to support and protect their soldiers. A problem posed by the Department of Defense, recently featured in WIRED magazine (I also have Discover and Science magazine subscriptions at home), would be to create a wearable military uniform that can provide up to 20 watts of power for 96 hours, all while being as easy to transport and move in as possible. Recently, I have been interested in developing a symbiotic uniform that uses various biological processes within the body to power the device and that could provide life-saving support for the soldier when wounded.
Finally, it would be interesting to see how far we can push the boundaries of bioelectrical technology into our daily lives. For instance, I am actively interested in seeing to what extent integrated system-on-a-chip devices can be incorporated into everyday objects such as clothing, books, and even us. Would there ever be a day when we will be able to know exactly where our socks disappear to with wireless technology? Probably not. But wouldn’t it be amazing to see the day where our shirts could automatically adjust to temperature and sunlight or all of our class notes written down on a single sheet of electronic paper? Time is of the essence to begin these new projects and advance humankind.</li>
</ol>
<p>Engineering, Chemical
One of the biggest challenges of our ever-changing environment is to face the needs of global warming. Since my eighth-grade science project in middle school, I have been continually interested in delving deeper into the reasons behind the mystery, because there really are more factors than can be predicted. For instance, I have found through years of continued independent research that the rate of global warming is not as closely linked to CO2 production but rather aerosol levels in the stratosphere. I would like to continue finding new data to support this theory and perhaps develop a synthetic particle that can reverse the effects of global warming. My findings are summarized briefly on <a href="http://science.nefferport.com%5B/url%5D">http://science.nefferport.com</a>.</p>