USAMO an anti-hook?

Colleges and Universities A-Z Massachusetts Institute of Technology
81

<p>Thomas Jefferson High is a science/technology magnet school that routinely sends many students to MIT, as noted by Geomom.
In 2008, TJ qualified 6 students for the USAMO, and it also placed a team in the top 16 at the National Science Bowl, as shown at the links below: </p>

<p>2008</a> USAMO Qualifiers
<a href="http://www.scied.science.doe.gov/nsb/HS/pdf/Final%2016%20Teams%20for%20Web.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.scied.science.doe.gov/nsb/HS/pdf/Final%2016%20Teams%20for%20Web.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>But does that mean that every top math/science student at TJ is guaranteed admission to MIT? Of course not, especially since there's more competition these days from large public schools like Homestead High School in Cupertino. The links above show that Homestead, which is not a science/technology magnet school, qualified 4 students for USAMO in 2008 and also placed a team in the top 16 at the National Science Bowl (for the second year in a row, probably similar to TJ). </p>

<p>The difference between Thomas Jefferson and Homestead is this: At Homestead, even though you may be an Intel semi-finalist, valedictorian, captain of the robotics team, and have taken multivariable calculus at Stanford, over the past 6 years your shot at admission at MIT has hovered at around 10%. Around 10-15 students apply each year from a senior class of around 525, and an average of 2 are offered admission. Over the past 4 years, a Siemens finalist was denied, a captain of the robotics team was denied, and various students with perfect SAT scores and perfect GPAs have been denied. It looks as if TJ's student body has enjoyed a higher rate of acceptance, but this might change as increasing numbers of students at large public schools like Homestead encourage more and more of their students to enter state and national math and science competitions.</p>

<p>There are no guarantees in admissions because the entire process grows more competitive year by year. Anyone thinking they're sure of a spot at a school like MIT is either naive or over-confident. That said, highly qualified students not admitted to MIT are likely to land offers at other great schools, unless there's some problem in the application materials.</p>

82

<p>^^That's interesting, CalAlum, although I don't think it's relevant to Godot's result. There is still a finite number of spots at the USA_O competitions, Intel, and RSI, so increase in access means these competitions should be more valued--not less. Also, MIT is still admitting ~20 TJ kids per year, so the result appears to not make sense even comparing MIT admission results from that school alone.</p>

83

<p>And that brings us right back to the original question: why not this kid?
The only answer is "it happens sometimes..."</p>

84

<p>
[quote]
And that brings us right back to the original question: why not this kid?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And the only answer is that we will probably never know. For obvious and excellent reasons, we didn't see the application folder, we did not read his essays, or interview report. We do not know. And the chances are fairly good that there were good reasons why he did not get in. However, the possibility exists that there were not. But the important things to remember here are:</p>

<p>1) People do not apply to MIT. Admissions folders apply to MIT. MIT tries very hard to get to know the person behind the folder (which is one of the reasons why the interview is valued), but it is imperfect. I have met many colleagues who do not come across well on paper, and I am highly suspicious that everyone on CC claims to have superb essays. In this particular case, given his external placements, I am prepared to accept that Godot probably has superb letters of recommendation.</p>

<p>2) Anyone who is "furious" at being rejected certainly has the personality to possibly do very poorly in the interview. For example, consider this completely fictitious exchange:</p>

<p>Interviewer: And how do you cope with setbacks, what do you do when things do not work out as you have planned? [A crappy question, but experiments that do not work as planned are extremely common in Science and Technology, so not completely unfair]
Candidate: I don't have setbacks
Interviewer: Surely something must not have gone according to your plans.
Candidate: Not really. I achieve everything that I set out to. If something did not work out for me, I would be furious. Maybe hit something.
Interviewer: OK, thanks</p>

<p>Now, I'm not saying that Godot blew the interview. Again, I WAS NOT THERE. However, if I heard an exchange like that, as an interviewer, I would be tempted to write an interview report that might adversely affect the candidates chances for admission. And MIT's decision not to admit after receiving that report would not be unfair, unbalanced or capricious.</p>

<p>Again, this is not to say that this happened in this case, but admissions are sufficiently competitive, that it is difficult to completely blow any section of the process and to still get in. The fact that he was rejected rather than deferred EA suggests that there was a DO NOT ADMIT flag somewhere in his application. I don't know where or what, nor should I. </p>

<p>However those posters who write things like "This case does not look good for MIT" or "MIT admissions are a complete joke" and other fine statements on this thread are arguing with only a small piece of the information, and I think are being unfair to MIT. Yes, I understand the appeal of being able to predict from a set of stats whether someone will get in, but you cannot. If you could, you wouldn't need admissions officers.</p>

85

<p>QuantMech: who's not being kind or compassionate? This person's stats were posted for all to see, because he WANTED people to discuss it. We are therefore discussing it, and mentioned the possibility that arrogance might have played a role. Should we all agree that this was a "mistake"? What would be the point of this discussion board (or any discussion, for that matter), if everyone agreed all the time?</p>

<p>I wouldn't necessarily go so far as to call him "arrogant," but in general I agree with Piper. Especially the comment about comparing himself to some of the people he knows who got in demonstrated to me at least some kind of arrogance. I'm not even judging, hell, I can be plenty arrogant when I want to be. But in general, people that feel "entitled" to getting into MIT are generally not a good fit. Just because you are a math genius does not mean you will like MIT or that MIT is a good fit for you.</p>

<p>This all goes back to my broken-record point: there is more to life than SAT scores, and by "SAT scores" I mean tests, grades, etc etc. Based on the stats posted, this person does seem very one-dimensional. Based on this information (which again, is all I had, but which I was asked to use to come to a conclusion about the case anyway) he sounds very much like the sort of person that sits in his room and studies all the time. This is not inherently bad, but neither is it what MIT is looking for. There are plenty of other math geniuses who I suppose the admissions committee thought would contribute more to the community in other ways as well.</p>

<p>But let's be honest, it's probably just his horrible taste in theater. =)</p>

<p>(Sorry, I sort of hate Beckett.)</p>

86

<p>LauraN, I told Mollie that I was off this thread, but I will come back to answer your question. I wouldn't consider it kind to offer negative speculation about someone I've never met. Now I am off this thread.</p>

87

<p>QuantMech: fair enough, but that doesn't answer my question. The original post said "How does one justify rejecting the following user?" I don't see how the answer to that could possibly be positive, and I don't see the point of the entire discussion if no one is going to offer an answer and instead all just agree with each other.</p>

88

<p>somewhere in boston the mit admissions officers are probably reading this thread, and laughing</p>

89

<p>'Oh, sorry, I didn't realize I had stumbled onto the thread about John Calvin's "Elect."'</p>

<p>hahaha lawl.</p>

90

<p>
[quote]
somewhere in boston the mit admissions officers are probably reading this thread, and laughing

[/quote]

Oh, no, they're probably reading it somewhat upset.</p>

91

<p>Hopefully they are upset because they realize how sad their admissions process has become.</p>

92

<p>i am not sure what you mean by sad.... just because it is harder to get in does not make it sad.... it is simply all the more meaningful if you get in.... plus a rejection from mit does not mean anything about you ability (they reject over 2,000 perfect scores on the sat)</p>

93

<p><a href="they%20reject%20over%202,000%20perfect%20scores%20on%20the%20sat">quote</a>

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Last I checked, there were between 250-350 perfect scores on the SAT/year.</p>

94

<p>A perfect score on the SAT is hardly an indicator of ability when talking about admissions to any top school, as seen from the past few years. Sad meaning pathetic, any process for admissions for what calls itself an "Institute of Technology" that does not admit clearly qualified students has some flaws. The flaws are even more apparent when much less qualified applicants are accepted. </p>

<p>Though, who am I to define "less qualified"?</p>

95

<p>
[quote]
Hopefully they are upset because they realize how sad their admissions process has become.

[/quote]

No, I think it's more upset because they have really tough choices to make, and they thought carefully and argued about every single decision. Upset because it trivializes the problem to pretend that it's easy to pick 1500 great applications from a pool of 15,000 great applications.</p>

<p>Sour grapes are sour grapes. But I hope even those who are abundantly critical of MIT's process will take a moment to think about the enormity of the task they have before them every year.</p>

96

<p>1500? Not to trivialize your point, but its closer to 1600. </p>

<p>Sure, they have an enormous task, but does that make their decisions and process any less debatable? I do not believe so, even after taking many moments to consider it, one still has a right, perhaps an obligation, to question.</p>

97

<p>Hey, I'm all for questioning. But I think there's a difference between questioning, which might involve well-reasoned arguments, and slinging insults.</p>

98

<p>I'm feeling far less sympathy. Publicly swearing about the decision and being "offended at any insinuation that it was my fault" reeks of arrogance. In his mind blame needs to be assigned and the mere mention that the committee may have been looking for something and didn't see it sends him into a "vehement argument" and questioning the very notion or possibility - because to accept it as possible implies "fault" on his part. Nope, that committee is at fault because there can be no justifiable reason for his not being accepted.</p>

<p>One of the things that is important to survival at a place like MIT, Caltech, et al is being able to handle the times when you aren't successful - because they are designed to humble even the brilliant at some point. Even if its the result of an inconvenient convergence of events rather than an overt mistake or error, students need to look at how they could have done better when things don't go right. A need to assign blame and avoid any introspection is a formula for trouble.</p>

99

<p>After reading through Godot's blog, I have realized that he is not the person that I assumed him to be. In that case scratch USAPhO semis, and yeah, his blog really does make one less sympathetic about his circumstances.</p>

100

<p>Guys, I am closing this thread, as I feel it's too focused on one particular case.</p>

<p>Please feel free to start a new thread discussing problems with MIT's admissions policies in general, but without the singling out of any individual applicants.</p>