Sugarcoating Rejection? Stop it. Be realistic.

<p>This thread is mainly targeted towards rejected students who felt they were strong applicants in the pool. </p>

<p>This isn't a hate thread, this isn't a rage thread, this is just a thread that asks that people to be more realistic so that the rejected themselves can be more realistic. My main concern is people who claim that "MIT rejected you because they didn't feel MIT was right for you" or "You'll find the right place for you." Now, I get that this is all well-intentioned, but here are the facts:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>MIT accepted some 1 in 10 of every applicant that applied. Even exceptionally talented students in STEM fields are rejected. There is no statistical doubt that these kids would have succeeded at MIT. If you would like to argue this point further with me, PM me. My main premise is that not only are there not enough spots at MIT for qualified applicants, there aren't enough spots for kids who would excel at MIT. Moreover, the spots aren't necessarily filled by those who would excel the most, but create what the adcoms determine as the best environment.</p></li>
<li><p>By telling rejected students things like this, it makes many of them question what they did wrong. The fact is, you didn't do anything wrong, as long as you did what YOU wanted. College admissions is a crap shoot not just because everyone is an exceptional candidate, but mostly because the criterion of admissions is not so straight forward as an assessment of accomplishment and intellect. In short, it is not meritocratic. Now, there is nothing wrong with this, in fact I think MIT has such a great environment because it ISN'T entirely meritocratic. </p></li>
</ol>

<p>At the end of the day, there is no reason for a rejected student to feel he or she wasn't good enough for MIT, and there is no reason that they wouldn't have fit in at MIT. When it's this selective, it's just a matter of chance.</p>

<p>Lastly, getting into MIT doesn't grant you success. Getting rejected doesn't keep you from success. College is about what you make it, and quite frankly a top college is a top college is a top college. You're success is dependent on YOU.</p>

<p>^^You got it bro! I totally second you. I am rejected but I am not crying over my rejection. I know that the most important thing in my life is “ME”. I also know that I can surely succeed at MIT. The point is I didn’t have the luck!</p>

<p>EDIT: I am confident that I’ll make my dreams come true with or without MIT.</p>

<p>I’m an MIT reject. I know I’ll be successful where ever I go, but I’ll never have the “MIT experience”. That’s what most of us rejected students are disappointed about.</p>

<p>Sent from my SGH-T959V using CC</p>

<p>+1 to llazar.</p>

<p>+1 for using google plus lingo.</p>

<p>At first I thought this was going to be a rage thread against MIT. But as an MIT reject, I think this is a great post.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>What is the “MIT experience”, and how does it differ from the experience at similar schools?</p>

<p>Quick repost of my posts from <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/massachusetts-institute-technology/1474084-rejected-mit-am-i-deprived-something-rest-my-life.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/massachusetts-institute-technology/1474084-rejected-mit-am-i-deprived-something-rest-my-life.html&lt;/a&gt; :</p>

<p>"I think that the “MIT experience” is really just a hard, intense, involved college life that you could get for yourself many places, but at MIT, it’s forced upon you because you HAVE to meet those high standards. And some things are more easy to do at MIT (research, internships, etc) because everyone does them. That’s one thing, but if you’re at a “lesser” school and still doing research, internships, and hard classes, it shows you took the initiative to do those things whereas all MIT students HAVE to do them.</p>

<p>I don’t believe that they really manufacture leaders and change makers…they just select a high-achieving, leadership-oriented group of kids and give them high expectations and LOTS of opportunities. You can find those same opportunities elsewhere, it just takes more effort.</p>

<p>I think that the “we teach you how to think” thing is mostly about the hard curriculum, as well as the engineering focus (problem solving, etc.) and they give problem sets (psets) as homework rather than exercises. The psets are often really difficult and require lots of thinking/collaboration – they’re not something you could copy from the back of the book. That part could definitely teach you how to think, but I do think you can learn all that elsewhere by challenging yourself."</p>

<p>@luisarose As far as what you said about hard work being forced on you, I couldn’t agree more. All good universities have opportunities for you to push yourself as hard as you want, it’s just that at MIT, the bar is all up in your face so you can’t really ignore it. If you truly want an MIT experience, then immerse yourself in your passion for STEM, regardless of what university you go to. You can make the “MIT Experience” seem as flowery as you’d like but the true beauty of that experience is the tortuously satisfying mental adventure that one is put through. </p>

<p>Here’s an analogy to high school. Not everyone goes to Andover or Phillip Exeter, in fact, most MIT applicants probably go to the average public high school with nothing more presented to you than a slew AP classes, at best. But what is it that led these very applicants to apply to MIT? It’s their internal drive to do more than what they were told is possible, it’s that insatiable hunger for knowledge which made them think “Hmm, I want to go to arguably the toughest STEM school in the nation.”</p>