<p>So, I was thinking about it, and it seems like all of the people whom I know or have heard of getting into MIT weren't really trying very hard to get in. Examples of this include molliebat, a girl at my school who just applied because a teacher had suggested she apply, and more.</p>
<p>What do you guys think about this? Have you noticed anything similar? Or the opposite? It seems like it might actually be harder to get into MIT if MIT is one of your first choices or something, though this is mainly from anecdotal evidence.</p>
<p>I have to admit I've heard some similiar anectdotal evidence, but it's hard to logcially reason why this would matter? Think about it. How is the adcom going to tell how much effort you put into the application? Obviously they can tell a little bit, but I can't imagine they can gauge that much. And even if they could, why would they care? My guess is that it actually doesn't matter and that you and I have only seen one-sided evidence.</p>
<p>Hopefully mollie will reply so we can see what she has to say about her app :)</p>
<p>i'm one of these people who barely tried. i reused my harvard essay to fit rather unnaturally with one of the prompts for the essay, and i scheduled my interview about three weeks after the deadline.</p>
<p>this wasn't because mit wasn't one of my top choices -- indeed, it was my second choice, after harvard. i was just so bummed after getting deferred from harvard that i gave up and half-assed all my other applications (and, ironically, ended up getting in everywhere i applied EXCEPT harvard. caltech even gave me an axline!)</p>
<p>i figure that the adcoms like to see a frank, honest application, and that's definitely what they got because i didn't care enough to be contrived.</p>
<p>There is definite anectodal evidence at my school that the ones
who were gung ho about MIT being their #1 choice got in, somewhat
contrary to the OPs post. (Many have gone to MIT over the years)</p>
<p>Their target was not however "MIT" but to go to the "school which
could really help them nurture their passion" (happened to be MIT).</p>
<p>Sounding disinterested supposedly works in love though?:D</p>
<p>The problem with annecdotal evidence is that you have a biased sample. You're rarely going to hear people loudly proclaim that they spent their entire HS career trying very very hard to get into MIT. It's not the type of thing you talk about because people will say "well duh... of course you worked hard... you're at MIT now..."</p>
<p>On the other hand if you say "I didn't try hard at all," it's slightly misleading. Take for example iostream. He worked/tried very hard during HS on things, that were NOT college admissions. </p>
<p>Also I don't think mollie's case was "I didn't try hard." I think from reading her blog that she clearly indicated that she worked pretty hard during HS, but applied to MIT on a whim. She still tried very hard at stuff in HS, which she wrote about in her blog.</p>
<p>"It seems like it might actually be harder to get into MIT if MIT is one of your first choices or something, though this is mainly from anecdotal evidence."</p>
<p>Well obviously. ~12k people apply and roughly 1.5k get in. For at least half the applicant pool, I'm willing to bet that MIT was their first choice. Now if you look at the top of the applicant pool, many of these students know before they even roll the college admissions game that they will be getting into some of the best schools in the country. So they wait to see what they get. So yes, a huge number of people apply and get rejected in the end that put down MIT as their number one choice.</p>
<p>People tell you not to get too attached to a premier college because statistically you are not likely to get in, and of course that would slightly break your heart. But the vast majority of people at MIT worked very hard in HS. It doesn't matter what their motive was. It's pretty easy to fake the motive if you've done the work (do you seriously think every prize winning research project to cure cancer was done because that person really cared about curing cancer? Of course not! These competitions TRAIN people on how to talk to the press and help them develop "cliche" stories that the press can easily propagate.).</p>
<p>i think it's just for the reason iostream brought up- if you don't spend crazy amounts of time in your app, it would just come across as so natural compared to others, and that's definitely refreshing for an adcom. Also, perhaps imperfections in your app demonstrate to adcoms that you really have better things to do than to spend 100 hours on your MIT application-MIT is just the next logical step in your education, not some super crazy prize that you're struggling to attain.</p>
<p>Well, I guess the proximate reason I applied was because I had an exboyfriend who had applied to MIT and hadn't gotten in, but don't let that fool you -- I also applied because I was absolutely dead-set on majoring in biology, going to graduate school, and becoming a researcher. But I didn't think I was going to get in, so I adopted a carefree attitude about my application during my senior year -- which I don't think is a terrible idea, by the way.</p>
<p>I clearly did want to go, as evidenced by the fact that it took me about ten seconds after opening my admission letter to decide that I was going to MIT. I just wasn't willing to admit that to myself when I wasn't sure if it was possible for me to get in.</p>
<p>And to be honest, I don't remember very much about my actual application -- it was lo so many years ago. :) I know that I didn't blow it off, and I know that my MIT recs were the best (the biology teacher who made me decide to go into biology, the earth science teacher who thought I walked on water, and my theater director). As differential says, I worked very hard in high school, but I worked very hard on the things that were important to me.</p>
<p>ah, a "carefree atttitude" about your application, I think that's what I meant, when I said people who "weren't trying" - not that they didn't try throughout high school (! definitely not), just that they weren't so concerned about specifically their application.</p>
<p>I guess it seems like, while some people say "I don't think I will get into MIT" and adopt a "carefree attitude," I feel like I have been thinking "I don't think I will get into MIT, I'd better work super super hard on the application", and I am just hoping that I still portrayed myself honestly, accurately, not necessarily perfectly. it seems like taking a "carefree attitude" probably makes it easier to attain honesty rather than perfection in the application (if you know what I mean about this, like not having over-edited essays, letting one's "voice" come through, and stuff), and I am kind of wishing I had been a bit more "carefree" about the whole thing.</p>
<p>On that note, though, I had asked on another thread if it would make sense to send an e-mail about recent money eared for math team and permission received to audit a class at Harvard. maybe sending extra emails is kind of trying too hard (in the not-having-a-carefree-attitude sense), like OMG MY APPLICATION WASNT GOOD ENOUGH BUT MAYBE IF THEY KNOW ABOUT EVERYTHING THAT I DO THIS YEAR THEY'LL SEE THAT I'M WORKING HARD AND THAT I CARE ABOUT WHAT I DO AND ACCEPT ME. or maybe that kind of information (especially a change in courseload, actually, i.e. the harvard class) is important.</p>
<p>I guess, it's hard for me to figure out where to draw the line, between providing information that I think could be helpful in making an admissions decision, and having the confidence to trust that they'll accept me if they think I'll fit, and that I've provided the necessary information on the application for the admissions officers to judge that. does anybody else feel this way? also, what is your opinion on the sending-additional-info after the deadline idea? or being carefree in one's application? or life, the universe and everything? 42? :-P</p>
<p>Haha, I would have loved it if someone put their prospective major as Course 42.</p>
<p>DON'T GO STEALING MY IDEA, YOU REGULAR DECISION FOLK. </p>
<p>Anyways, lala, I see your point completely. I think the people that over analyze, over edit, and generally over-stress about whether every action they have ever performed will get them into MIT shouldn't even be there in the first place. That sentence isn't parallel. Anyways, I guess the fact of the matter is that if you are frank, honest, and open about who you are, what you love, and what defines you, you honestly can't give them anything more. My essays were way out there, but they were totally me- everyone who read them told me that they could just imagine my voice narrating them. I did the best I could. Now I simply have to wait and see if it was good enough to get me in. If not, it's not the end of the world. I don't regret doing anything in high school "just to get into college," and I know that I'll be successful wherever I go.</p>
<p>All we can do now is breath. If you feel your Harvard stuff is really important (and that is pretty cool), then send it in. If your math team stuff was something you'd been working on for a while, then send it in (though if you really just want to tell them you've now raised X amount of dollars for the team, that update may seem trivial). Relax. The answer is 42. ;)</p>
<p>I agree with ducktape... if you read MIT's blogs, the admissions bloggers really emphasize how they want you to sound natural and honest in your essays. They're looking for a certain type of person, not 1,500 copies of the same 4.0 GPA, 2400 SAT, ISEF-winning student.
It probably makes sense that people who approach their applications with a more "carefree attitude" have a bit more success, as their applications will likely be less edited and the writer's true voice will come through more...
Anywayyyy, I think that everyone who gets into MIT must put a substantial amount of work into their applications.</p>
<p>
[quote]
On that note, though, I had asked on another thread if it would make sense to send an e-mail about recent money eared for math team and permission received to audit a class at Harvard. maybe sending extra emails is kind of trying too hard (in the not-having-a-carefree-attitude sense), like OMG MY APPLICATION WASNT GOOD ENOUGH BUT MAYBE IF THEY KNOW ABOUT EVERYTHING THAT I DO THIS YEAR THEY'LL SEE THAT I'M WORKING HARD AND THAT I CARE ABOUT WHAT I DO AND ACCEPT ME. or maybe that kind of information (especially a change in courseload, actually, i.e. the harvard class) is important.
[/quote]
To be honest, I don't think anybody in the admissions office ever gets grouchy when people send extra information -- if they didn't want the extra information, they'd put limits on what you could and couldn't send to them.</p>
<p>I mean, you do want to stay within some sort of boundary, because you don't want to be sending them an update every day. But if something is important enough to you that you'd consider sending it, I'd say to send it.</p>
<p>And on the original topic of the thread, my philosophy is that it's great to really like all of the schools to which you're applying, but I think you should try hard not to pick a favorite until after you see where you've actually been admitted. I tried to do this for graduate school, and it worked to some degree. (It didn't work entirely, and I do have sympathy for how difficult it is not to pick an OMG-I'm-going-to-die-if-they-don't-admit-me school.)</p>
<p>Yeah, I don't have a first choice school. My stats profile here has every school except U of M listed as first choice. It's true- I'd be happy at any of them. I mean, I secretly have my favorites, but it's not as though I'd be bummed to go anywhere I'm applying. Just make sure you have a good reason for every school on your list and it's easier to get excited about the possibility of going there.</p>
<p>Then again, get back to me in April and we'll see how well this philosophy paid off.</p>
<p>I think for MIT it was very hard for me to not to get hooked onto the school(I became very hooked onto MIT in HS) mainly because of all the cool technologies and things you see coming out of MIT (and other technical school). So I applied because I figured anywhere people are doing such awesome stuff, awesome people will be!</p>
<p>
[quote]
So, I was thinking about it, and it seems like all of the people whom I know or have heard of getting into MIT weren't really trying very hard to get in.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>True for me, too, in terms of the "carefree attitude" that has been commented on in this thread. While I tried very hard in high school, I wasn't gunning for any particular school. With MIT in particular, I didn't think I had a snowball's chance in hell of getting in, so there was no point in gunning for it.</p>
<p>I have wondered about this also, with respect to kids that keep retaking the standardized tests when they already have a high score. If I was MIT and I saw that one student got a 780 on a subject test and said good enough, I'm done, versus one that took it three times to go from a 780 to an 800, would I say, wow, that second student is really trying and working hard, I'm taking that one, or gee, that second student is really kind of insecure about something, I think I'll take the one shot 780 instead? I don't have the answer, but I do wonder about it, especially when you see kids saying they are retaking a 790 or something crazy like that, are they really shooting themselves in the foot? Do they then become too much of a perfectionist that might have trouble adjusting, or are they considered hard workers and desirable for that reason?</p>
<p>There's a difference between trying hard and retaking tests. In fact, I'm not even sure what people mean by "trying hard" on a college application. You're going to spend X amount of time between all your different applications. If you spend 3/4's of X on one application, it's likely that you will produce very good work for that one application which can be modified for every other college (and it works). There's nothing wrong with this approach. And then granted that MIT EA is going to the first college application for many EA applicants to MIT, of course they are going to be slighly nervous and cross their t's and dot their i's. Seriously, unlike CC would have you think, most EA applicants to MIT are not in such standing that they can write their application with crayon and get in without a second thought. </p>
<p>If you're retaking a 790 3 times then you've got issues that probably go beyond college applications.</p>
<p>To try to clarify what they mean by "trying hard on an application" I'll explain how obsessed I was.</p>
<p>First off, I can't change my accomplishments in any way shape or form, but what I list and how I present it can really make a difference (at least htat was my logic). First, I made a list of basically every notable accomplishmnet that would have been worth listing, then I made sure I found a spot for as much as I possibly could on the application. I paid soooo much attention to how I worded things and the order in which I listed things its was ungodly. Seriously, from the time school started til like mid-October I had spent more time perfecting my application than I had on homework. After I finihsed the first draft of everything, I had three differnet people proofread and give comments. Then I revised everything they pointed out. I proofread it one final time by myself, changed a couple of minor thigns and submitted it.</p>
<p>I guess this is probalby what most people did, although I'm guessing most didn't spend as much time scrutinizing every little detail like I did. I explained to my dad that basically for every word in the application I could give a reason I used that word as opposed to a synonym. Obviously, this is an exaggeration but I think it still captures failry well how obsesed I was with perfection. Did it realy matter? Probably not. Let's face it, 219385938275 hours spent on perfecting an application won't make a difference if there's no content to present. That being said, I really did try to be myself on the application and I truthfully don't think I came off as trying to be someone I'm not just to impress the adcom. So to answer the original question: "does trying hard on the appplication hurt someones chances?" Maybe, but I dobut it. Faking who you are can hurt, but putting a lot of time I don't think does. However, looking back on it, I probalby could have spent my time more valuably. At least this way I'll know, if denied, that I did everything within by power (besdies lieing) to present myself in the best possible way.</p>
<p>crazy mom, Matt and Ben have said before in their blogs that when a student tells them they're going to retake a 750, they pretty much "order" the student not to, and suggest they go do something more interesting instead. But the one-shot-vs-multiple-retakes question wouldn't actually come up, since once an applicant has shown they can handle the work, other factors in the application become more important.</p>
<p>Thanks, mootmom, there are all kinds of kids over in the SAT Subject test Preparation threads discussing retaking scores over 760 because they aren't good enough for MIT. My son didn't even know about subject tests until he started looking at apllication requirements his senior year, so retaking was sort of out of the question. I do think that at some point of retaking, they may just be taking people who have figured out how to beat the test.</p>