<p>I saw this on another college thread and thought it was interesting. I mean I too can look at the acceptance thread and see people saying their teacher recs were amazing. But what does that mean and is it different for an MIT applicant than from say a Princeton applicant? Aren't most of the applicants to MIT pretty amazing and accomplished people? Do adcoms find the teacher recs all pretty much the same? I mean, I wonder what kind of things really catch their eye and what kind of things are just ordinary (ordinary for MIT app's mind you). And what if you go to a really big public and have never had a particular teacher more than once, so they really don't know you that well in order to write something truly amazing about you?</p>
<p>You don’t need to have a teacher for more than one year to have them write a great rec. One year is fine for the teacher you see the kind of person you are, the actions you take, etc. Teachers typically tell specific stories in their recs about a time where you have done something that made you stand out. It is in these everyday little situations that MIT gets a better understanding of you.</p>
<p>[MIT</a> Admissions | Info For Schools & Counselors: Writing Evaluations](<a href=“http://www.mitadmissions.org/topics/schools/writing_evaluations/index.shtml]MIT”>http://www.mitadmissions.org/topics/schools/writing_evaluations/index.shtml)</p>
<p>I always wondered how students know whether or not their teacher recs are amazing… Don’t we usually waive our right to access?</p>
<p>You should always waive your right of access. This is why some posters state that they have no idea about the quality of the letters but assume they’re strong. However, sometimes a teacher will give a copy of the letter to the student, and this is why other posters seem to know what’s been written.</p>
<p>^ Why should you always waive your right of access?</p>
<p>I have read the link about what MIT would like teachers to write about but if the teacher follows this “formula” will every student automatically have an “amazing” recommendation like so many CCers post? Is everyone amazing who got the highest grade in the class (and was nice and helpful and always had a great attitude)? Or does amazing mean that all these people saved Tibet (and the teacher has the proof) or took Calc BC when they were in the 9th grade and was the most brilliant student the teacher ever had?</p>
<p>I guess what I mean is, what is considered something “amazing” at the MIT level?</p>
<p>It is usually considered a good idea to waive your right of access, because:</p>
<p>people think (I do, too)
that college admissions departments think
that teachers think</p>
<p>that if they are honest in their recommendations, and critical at all, and the student is allowed to read the recommendation, it will cause problems for the teacher.</p>
<p>Therefore, college admissions people are likely to discount glowing recommendations where the student being recommended has not waived his or her right to see this part of his or her file. In essence, the idea is that a non-confidential recommendation is probably not completely honest.</p>
<p>You don’t want colleges discounting glowing recommendations about you, and you do want your recommenders to be honest and to seem honest (and therefore convincing), so you waive your right.</p>
<p>@limabeans01:
Matt McGann blogged about some of the admitted students from past years, so you’ll find examples of “amazing” students here: [MIT</a> Admissions | Blog Entry: “Introducing the Class of 2013: Henrique '13, Chika '13, and Qinxuan '13”](<a href=“http://www.mitadmissions.org/topics/pulse/incoming_freshman_class_profile/introducing_the_class_of_2013_6.shtml]MIT”>http://www.mitadmissions.org/topics/pulse/incoming_freshman_class_profile/introducing_the_class_of_2013_6.shtml). This blog was part of a series that year, so if you search through the archives of Matt’s blogs, you’ll find others.</p>