"This isn't fair, ______ with much lower stats got in and I didn't!"

Applying to College
61

<p>^So? [edit: to plattsburgh]</p>

<p>Anyways, the point I'm trying to make is that it wasn't her essays that got her in. Perhaps there is another unknown factor in her application that she hasn't mentioned. Unlikely, but possible. Or it could just be plain-old gender-selection...after all, she's female and an engineering major. Trust me, I'm all for balancing classes and creating diversity...but it just annoys me sometimes when the first counter to every "URMs/Girls got in over boys/ORMs with MUCh better stats" was "They had better essays." Again, perhaps. But unlikely.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Wrong .... your smugness and arrogance is amazing...It's all about pre-manufactured fast food thinking, with formulas that come out straight from the textbook. Oops, you didn't memorise it completely by heart and now you're spending 40 seconds re-deriving it?

[/quote]
Find me a x2 USAMO qualifier who didn't get an 800 on the SAT math i OR ii.
I am sorry, but USAMO MATH INVOLVES SO MANY MORE FORMULAS THAN YOU WOULD THINK. Any formula needed for SATs a x2 USAMO qualifier would know like the back of his hand.</p>

<p>
[quote]
At some schools, you have to get a certain grade in order to be allowed in AP classes. If a student is bored, dislikes the teacher, or is misgraded by a teacher who is an idiot

[/quote]
I know my school, and I know her. and I say yes, I agree with you 100%, but this isn't the case.</p>

62

<p>Unless you can produce factual evidence that she was chosen because of URMs, drop the ********.
It's an insult to those who are URMs to insist that her gender is the sole reason she was accepted. If that were the case, she should have skipped high school entirely and applied straight from womb.</p>

63

<p>She wasn't a URM.</p>

<p>Let me sum up what I was trying to say these last few paragraphs.
1. MIT tells us that they pick girls over boys...in fact, girls have 2x the acceptance rate as guys.
2. This girl does not have good stats, writes mediocre-ly, and doesn't have any ECs.
3. She doesn't have a passion for math and science.
4. She gets in over x2USAMO qualifiers and other more qualified guys.
5. Can we safely induce that some gender-selection is at work here?</p>

64

<p>Perhaps not in the textbook manner, but in by my understanding, you've suggested she was accepted because she's female combined with her male-dominated major.
In my eyes, a URM - whether that's true can be debated, though I'd rather not.</p>

65

<p>
[quote]
It's an insult to those who are URMs to insist that her gender is the sole reason she was accepted.

[/quote]
Of course not. She was qualified, duh, just like 90% of all of MIT's applicants. But why was she part of the 11% or 12% that was actually admitted?</p>

66

<p>Northstarmom: A breath of fresh air. Thank you.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Because boosting that 2090 to 2390 is oh-so-critical.</p>

<p>It seems you live in a provincial sort of education district, one that is narrow-minded to deny students the ability to take a course (if pre-requisites are filled) because they don't pass a teacher's writing test scrutiny.</p>

<p>If a student expresses interest in a course, and that if prerequisite courses are filled, and unless space is tight or something, you hell as better assume good faith and not immediately assume the student will do poorly from the start simply because her essay irritated the markers enough in being unlike the hundreds of others in the top quartile of the district examination to give her a low score.</p>

<p>Your rigidity in demanding that students take AP English if it was offered further reveals the shallowness of your values. The only reason why I took AP English was that the classmates, teacher, time schedule and everything else worked out. It was the lesser evil out of all the English classes provided.</p>

<p>If a Comparative Linguistics had been offered as well as AP English, do you know what I would have done? I would have screwed AP English and gone for the subject I truly loved.</p>

67

<p>
[quote]
This girl does not have good stats, writes mediocre-ly, and doesn't have any ECs.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
Of course not. She was qualified,

[/quote]

Is she or isn't she qualified? Poor stats, mediocre essays and lack of ECs, suggest otherwise. Perhaps if you'd limit your post-editing, you'd quit contradicting yourself.</p>

<p>Either way, I can't say that I can continue to force myself to continue to give two ****s about this person, though I will earnestly try my hardest.
She got in. Get over it or bring it up with adcom.
Obviously she must have done something correct, whether you agree is beside the point.</p>

68

<p>
[quote]
This girl does not have good stats, writes mediocre-ly

[/quote]

[quote]
writes mediocre-ly

[/quote]

[quote]
mediocre-ly

[/quote]

[quote]
mediocre-ly

[/quote]
</p>

<p><em>rolleyes</em> </p>

<p>
[quote]
She doesn't have a passion for math and science.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You know this, because ... </p>

<p>The fact that you haven't seen how shallow SAT Math is when it comes to testing mathematical ability makes me wonder if you really have any passion for math or science either.</p>

<p>So far all you've mentioned are stereotypes. You think it's a gender thing. You think that not winning any science competitions makes for a bad engineer?</p>

<p>Again, this only tells me you've had a very privileged and sheltered high school life.</p>

<p>Tell me -- have you ever heard of the mathematical child prodigy Evariste Galois? Look into his story. He wasn't like most of the top students in 1820s in France and had the equivalent then of having no real ECs or not winning any regional competitions. His revolutionary ideas were rejected from the competitions of his day because of their unorthodoxy. He was also heavily interested in the republican moment (that is, the movement to overthrow the monarchy and reinstate the French Republic) and had at one time drawn a dagger and said the king's name over it, promptly getting him arrested. To most mathematicians, Galois seemed the kind of student who valued rebellion and recklessness over mathematics; consequently much of his passion would have been concealed to individuals like you.</p>

<p>In fact, he would only be recognised after his death (in a duel) at the age of 20 after his papers were resubmitted.</p>

<p>So your friend seems more interested in boys. So what? Surely you must know the difference between "seem" and "to be". As a student of English, I'd expect you to know this ....</p>

69

<p>
[quote]
HOWEVER, she's never taken AP english, she doesn't know how to write essays, period.

[/quote]

WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW. </p>

<p>HUGE flaw in your logic. Writing essays for the AP English exam is TOTALLY different than writing a college essay. If you think that having a well-written essay is enough to get you into a highly selective school then you are simply being naive. I would guarantee you that most of the essays written for highly selective schools are well-written but that some are more personal, relieving, interesting, genuine, etc. than others. You need to change your definition of a "good" college essay or else you will be screwed when it comes time for you to apply to colleges.</p>

<p>
[quote]
In this case, wouldn't you be <em>pretty</em> sure that your application was stronger?

[/quote]

You did not get in so why would you assume your application was still "stronger?" Obviously it was not if you were rejected and the other person was not.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I have a similar story to that of Narcissa's. This girl also got into MIT as well. Much lower scores than any of the guys who I know applied and not as impressive math/science activities, but she got in over them. I believe her SAT is less than a 2200, her SAT II Math only a 780, and her other SAT II's barely a 700. She has not won a single regional math/science competition either. Actually, she has few math/science activities/awards at all. The main reason she got in is probably the fact that she applied as Course 6 (EECS), which is pretty male-dominated. She also had recommendations from certain people that may have given her the necessary boost. Whether or not she really deserved those recommendations and the recognition is another story. If it makes you feel any better, the people who actually reach the MIT standard will be more likely to be the ones succeeding in their courses anyway.

[/quote]

ROFL!!!!! Ok, that girl is incredibly qualified. She "only" got a 780 on the Math Level II exam. Jeez... ROLF!!!</p>

70

<p>
[quote]
Sigh, this really isn't that complicated. Obviously if your school doesn't have AP english it doesn't mean you must be a horrible writer then. But if it DOES have AP english, and you're not allowed to take it because you suck at writing, you're not going to miraculously write an awesome essay that will be equivalent to 300+ points on the SATs and make up for your lack of ECs and such.

[/quote]

Drop this whole AP English argument if you are going to continue to be nonsensical in defending your original somewhat ignorant comment about writing essays. AP Literature is about LITERATURE NOT WRITING. AP Language and Composition IS about WRITING.</p>

<p>And also quit talking like you know anything about the college admissions process. You have not even applied yet and you clearly cannot distinguish between a graded essay and a college essay.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Anyways, the point I'm trying to make is that it wasn't her essays that got her in.

[/quote]

You do not know this so quit being such a hater. Are you like a part time college admissions officer or something? If not, quit talking as if you are one.</p>

71

<p>
[quote]
She wasn't a URM.</p>

<p>Let me sum up what I was trying to say these last few paragraphs.
1. MIT tells us that they pick girls over boys...in fact, girls have 2x the acceptance rate as guys.
2. This girl does not have good stats, writes mediocre-ly, and doesn't have any ECs.
3. She doesn't have a passion for math and science.
4. She gets in over x2USAMO qualifiers and other more qualified guys.
5. Can we safely induce that some gender-selection is at work here?

[/quote]

Oh my goodness... <em>sigh</em></p>

<p>"She wasn't a URM?" Do you even know what a "URM" is?</p>

<p>Also why does the admission rate even matter? As a x2 USAMO qualifier you should know that the rate is irrelevant because ultimately the size of the groups is all that matters.</p>

<p>Also, this girl had good stats and she sounded normal. Why is it bad if she likes to hang out with friends and date guys? Should she have been spending her weekends taking practice SAT exams just so she can increase her score which was already good to begin with?</p>

<p>"She doesn't have a passion for math and science."
Again, stop talking like you know this person. Judging from the tone of your posts and the level of detail you have provided it is rather apparent that you were not friends with this person and know VERY little about this person. Worry about yourself and quit diminishing the accomplishments of others.</p>

<p>Also, who cares if you think "she doesn't have a passion for math and science." Do you really think you know better than the admissions officers?</p>

<p>"She gets in over x2USAMO qualifiers and other more qualified guys." You seem to be suggesting that you think she is the only one who got in over these "more qualified" guys. Anyways, I find it funny you bring this up because you basically diminished the value of being a "x2USAMO qualifiers" by saying, "I am sorry, but USAMO MATH INVOLVES SO MANY MORE FORMULAS THAN YOU WOULD THINK. Any formula needed for SATs a x2 USAMO qualifier would know like the back of his hand." So being a qualifier means merely memorizing a bunch of formulas? I think it's great that MIT is looking past this "qualification."</p>

<p>"Can we safely induce that some gender-selection is at work here?"
You have failed to prove anything. How about you dig up the applications of all the 20,000+ students and then try to draw the same conclusion? </p>

<p>Also, you're a girl what's wrong with you?</p>

72

<p>I got rejected from MIT and Caltech and I tutored someone who got into MIT, Stanford, and Columbia... IN MATH. He was a URM. I also know plenty of underqualified girls who got into MIT.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Find me a x2 USAMO qualifier who didn't get an 800 on the SAT math i OR ii. I am sorry, but USAMO MATH INVOLVES SO MANY MORE FORMULAS THAN YOU WOULD THINK. Any formula needed for SATs a x2 USAMO qualifier would know like the back of his hand.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, I was one of only 10 incoming freshmen (out of 1300) to be invited to a certain math class (littered with USAMO qualifiers) at a certain top 5 university for mathematics, and I got a 670 SAT I, 770 SAT II. I don't think many mathematicians really care about their SAT scores. They have more to worry about. Problem with me is that the questions on the SAT were so boring that I couldn't concentrate on them. SAT also isn't all about formulas. </p>

73

<p>Here we go with this again. I'm glad there are so many qualified admission counselors here who can correctly determine who is and isn't qualified and whether someone got in because he/she is a URM...</p>

74

<p>
[quote]
I got rejected from MIT and Caltech and I tutored someone who got into MIT, Stanford, and Columbia... IN MATH. He was a URM. I also know plenty of underqualified girls who got into MIT.

[/quote]

Well I am pretty sure there were some "less qualified" ORMs and Whites got in while you were rejected. Also, "underqualified" is beyond a poor choice of words since it suggests that they will not succeed at MIT and were not qualified for admission in the first place. Choose your words more carefully next time.</p>

75

<p>
[quote]
You have failed to prove anything. How about you dig up the applications of all the 20,000+ students and then try to draw the same conclusion?

[/quote]

Please repeat this, but this time tattoo it to the inside of her eyelids. Perhaps the message will sink through.</p>

76

<p>
[quote]
The fact that you haven't seen how shallow SAT Math is when it comes to testing mathematical ability makes me wonder if you really have any passion for math or science either.

[/quote]
I didn't say that her SAT math was lacking.
[quote]
</p>

<p>So far all you've mentioned are stereotypes. You think it's a gender thing. You think that not winning any science competitions makes for a bad engineer?

[/quote]
No, but when you don't even care to do anything regarding science (which you are supposedly "passionate" about) outside of normal coursework, you might not be up for being an engineer where you're basically surrounded by science in your careers for the rest of your life.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Writing essays for the AP English exam is TOTALLY different than writing a college essay.

[/quote]
Read my post #43 or whatnot.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Do you even know what a "URM" is?

[/quote]
thought the person above me was talking about URMs in terms of race. Misread it sorry.</p>

<p>
[quote]
As a x2 USAMO qualifier

[/quote]
Lol..I am not :(</p>

<p>
[quote]
Should she have been spending her weekends taking practice SAT exams just so she can increase her score which was already good to begin with?

[/quote]
Of course not!! but perhaps she should be actually showing her "interest" in math/science outside of school...idk, once in a while?</p>

<p>
[quote]
"I am sorry, but USAMO MATH INVOLVES SO MANY MORE FORMULAS THAN YOU WOULD THINK. Any formula needed for SATs a x2 USAMO qualifier would know like the back of his hand." So being a qualifier means merely memorizing a bunch of formulas? I think it's great that MIT is looking past this "qualification."

[/quote]
Yes. The USAMO does not just test your innate mathematical ability. It doesn't test your mathematical IQ. Why do people study for the USAMO? Because you CAN improve. No, you just assumed that when I said it requires many formulas, it is just formulas. It isn't; it means you have to know the basics, which is where the formulas come in, and then you also have to be able to think and twist concepts and lots of other stuff...which is what makes it hard. If it was just memorizing a list of hundreds of formulas it would be awfully boring and I would've actually been able to do it :) Also, the reason why USAMO is regarded so highly is because it requires some intense passion...if you aren't truly and absolutely obsessed with math (and willing to spend the time studying for it for 5 hours a day for a few months), you probably won't get it...unless you're a genius.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Judging from the tone of your posts and the level of detail you have provided it is rather apparent that you were not friends with this person and know VERY little about this person.

[/quote]
Actually, I know her well from some sport that we play together. And I'm not going to go into detail.</p>

77

<p>
[quote]
Also, "underqualified" is beyond a poor choice of words since it suggests that they will not succeed at MIT and were not qualified for admission in the first place. Choose your words more carefully next time.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Thanks for being a pedant. Unfortunately, it doesn't add anything to the conversation.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Well I am pretty sure there were some "less qualified" ORMs and Whites got in while you were rejected.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm sure there were. But there's a difference. I think MIT tries to admit the best out of each group of people, so the ORMs and Whites that got in over me were, well, mistakes. :) This doesn't apply to URMs and women... they purposely admit "less qualified" URMs and women to 'diversify' the student body. And to try to fight the stereotype that men are naturally stronger than women and whites/Asians are naturally stronger than other races in the sciences. But Lawrence Summers knows the truth, don't you, Lawrence? Ouch.</p>

<p>In any case, those defending the hypothesis that URMs and women don't get any advantages over ORMs/whites and men are simply deceiving themselves. There is no evidence for a reason: MIT will never release such records (for women, they will give admittance rate [which strongly supports my hypothesis], but won't release average test scores). In fact, MIT releases a hell of a lot of data, but the mentioned data are two that are mysteriously missing. However, common sense and the vast amount of anecdotal evidence give a strong argument for the side that argues that being a URM/woman gives you an advantage in the MIT application process. If it didn't, they'd just take the race/gender questions off of the application to please everyone.</p>

78

<p>
[quote]
I don't think many mathematicians really care about their SAT scores. They have more to worry about. Problem with me is that the questions on the SAT were so boring that I couldn't concentrate on them. SAT also isn't all about formulas.

[/quote]
True, that.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You have failed to prove anything. How about you dig up the applications of all the 20,000+ students and then try to draw the same conclusion?

[/quote]
No, I can't. But we all know that gender AA exists at MIT so can we stop pretending that it doesn't?</p>

79

<p>
[quote]
No, I can't. But we all know that gender AA exists at MIT so can we stop pretending that it doesn't?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's hardly the point. The point is you've assumed she got in because of her gender, yet haven't shown how you've come to this conclusion.
Unless you speak with the admissions officer who approved her application and ask why she was accepted, you can't make that assumption.</p>

80

<p>Also, a teacher that taught her has questioned how she got in...but teachers can be very naive about college admissions these days</p>