<p>I saw this thread on a few other school sub-forums, thought I'd pose the question here.</p>
<p>Some obvious ones are the courseload and difficulty, what about other things?</p>
<p>
Some of us would argue that courseload and difficulty are actually good things about MIT.</p>
<p>For me, it’d be weather.</p>
<p>This isn’t particularly organized but here are some of my thoughts on not great things about MIT. I would agree with mollie that MIT’s difficulty is one of the things that makes it great. The accompanying stress that many students feel may be a downside though. Along these lines I’m somewhat more open to the possibility that MIT’s core is too extensive but I’m not sure about that either. The humanities offerings and the number of students interested in the humanities are also pretty limited compared to most other research universities if you care about that. Study abroad options are also not as extensive as at other universities. The food is generally considered not great as well. Another minor thing that annoys about MIT is the registration process for HASS classes. Seemingly every class has a different mechanism for allocating spots in the class and in many classes you won’t learn whether you get a spot until after the first class meeting which seriously complicates making schedules. Many students seem to hate the administration although I don’t think the administration is particularly bad.</p>
<p>The number of HASS classes you have to take can be a downer as well when they take up chunks of your schedule that could otherwise be filled with the classes you’re actually going to MIT for.</p>
<p>^Most people need a break from all technical classes. The require 8 humanities classes, one a term. I believe economics may count as a HASS, too, so if you really want to take almost all technical classes you could probably do it. Also, you could take a couple of humanities classes elsewhere during a summer, and thus have more time during the year for technical classes.</p>
<p>To add to the list, I would say the campus and dorms leave a lot to be desired except or the main dome and Killian Court. However, there are some people who do like the campus.</p>
<p>MIT is not good for the person that does not want to go to a school like MIT.</p>
<p>Olin is a nice difference. They emphasize more of the hands-on approach to learning. It is force fed there, vs. MIT’s optional UROP.</p>
<p>Opera/Mollie made good points. I don’t think the question is “what isn’t good about MIT”, but rather “who isn’t good for MIT.”</p>
<p>^Well, I mean, basically I’m terrible at this game. Always have been. It’s not just that I’m fundamentally fairly happy-go-lucky, or that I have an extremely internal locus of control – it’s also that I think, at least as far as things that are a priority to me, that MIT basically gets things right, and I don’t really care about things that aren’t a priority to me.</p>
<p>From a parent’s perspective: Too little sleep.
From my son’s perspective: Too much drug use.</p>
<p>I love MIT for my son. I love that he’s so happy at MIT. There is much to love about it, but the question was asked.</p>
<p>I think that’s a healthy attitude, Mollie. To the OP-it might be more useful to ask for perspectives about whatever concern you have about MIT.</p>
<p>I’m really curious what the OP hopes to learn from this question?</p>
<p>As siliconvalleymom, molliebatmit, operadad, and others have noted, its attitude. MIT is filled with things that are wrong with it - as is every other college. Much of why you’re there is to learn to deal with whatever life throws at you.</p>
<p>@matlas:
Can you expand on how replies to this question would help you?</p>
<p>Their low acceptance rate and incoming class size! Stresses out seniors like me who have MIT as a top choice #1 dream college. Some opportunities are offered at MIT that are not offered elsewhere.</p>
<p>Tusing: It should not stress you out. You should have NO expectation of being admitted. You should be ecstatic if you are. Since you should have no expectation of being admitted, it should not cause you any stress if you are not.</p>
<p>In any case, I do not see the relevance of your post to the original poster’s question.</p>
<p>Wow a lot of these answers are rather shallow. While “weather isn’t nice” and “hard to register for HASS classes” are certainly downers, they should not be the primary factor when choosing colleges. “Too much work” is not a good answer, because a rigorous education is the reason why most people end up choosing MIT, and are fully aware of this coming in. Here’s my answer:</p>
<p>As much as we (MIT students) like to pride ourselves with being super quantitative people, problem solvers, technical geniuses, etc., the real world thinks of us differently. You don’t earn nearly as much respect in the real world for being able to solve incredibly quantitative problems or churning out robust code. You don’t rise to executive positions by being the smartest guy on the team. As much as MIT students would like this to be true, it’s not the case in the real world. At MIT, we are taught to solve very well-defined, albeit often very challenging, problems. Yes, we become really good at doing that. But after we graduate and start at our full-time job, we end up having to work on problems where /noone/ knows the solutions to. And this whole office bureaucracy, office politics, team dynamics kind of things take on much bigger forms. Can I say with confidence that MIT fully prepares us to take on these new challenges? No. I think other schools such as the Ivy Leagues do a much better job. Students from those schools come out much more socially and professionally mature. Are they the smartest group of people? No. But look at the CEOs of the Fortune 500. I guarantee you that those are not the smartest people at each of the respective companies. I don’t regret choosing MIT, but sometimes I wish we were preppier, more self-aware, more focused on the bigger picture.</p>
<p>I can say much more about this at another time, but what I want to sum up with, and put as a short response to your question, is that:</p>
<p>Life after college isn’t just about psets and exams, even though MIT sometimes makes it seem that way.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Many MIT students wouldn’t find what is required to be a Fortune 500 CEO to be the most worthwhile challenge for them to tackle.</p>
<p>@iceui2 I think you are misunderstanding me. I certainly agree that “hard to register for HASS classes” should not be a major factor in choosing colleges! I think the correct impression from my list of minor complaints is that things are pretty good at MIT. I don’t even disagree that MIT is not the best place for preparation for being an executive at a Fortune 500 company. However, at least from my perspective that’s not a bad thing. If you want to be a scientist/researcher/other very technical job then this aspect of the environment at MIT may be a good thing.</p>
<p>@tusing/Operadad I think the high selectivity of MIT is at least potentially a bad thing. Highly accomplished high school students tend to be rather homogenous in at least some aspects so there is not quite the diversity of life experiences you might find at less selective universities. While there are a few students with non-traditional backgrounds at MIT it’s definitely much rarer than at many state universities. The high selectivity has some positives as well as classes can be set at higher difficulty levels and the homogeneity can also be nice in social settings. The real constraints on incoming class sizes and hence the necessity of high selectivity in the long term are MIT’s finite resources and while MIT is a pretty rich university it is not as rich as some of its peers which is not great in some aspects.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. But I think it /should/ be worthwhile, regardless if you’re a scientist or an aspiring executive.</p>
<p>^ Why?</p>
<p>10char</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Learning how to solve challenging problems is how you learn to solve the ones that have never been solved before. If they could teach you how to solve the unknown solutions, then it could be argued that the solution is known (thus not an unknown).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Part of the reason for the MBA program is to teach the doers (like engineers and other professionals) to be managers. I’m guessing that MIT people come up the ranks through the R&D side. The Ivy League people come up the sales and marketing side, which does not require technical ability.</p>
<p>That’s not to say that maybe MIT should have classes that teach how to be “people” persons. Something like the One Minute Manager. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>IMHO, the best leaders are the visionaries and people who can inspire. Not everyone has those talents. It takes management skills to a whole new level. It is a different type of “smart”. Just like you can teach everyone math, it takes a certain talent (and desire) to become an engineer. While you can teach everyone to manage better, it takes a person with certain talents (smarts) to become the CEO. If everyone could do it, you wouldn’t need to pay the CEO $ millions (basic econ - supply and demand).</p>