<p>So... after a couple of months on CC, I wonder why kids apply to the extremely selective school at all. With acceptance rates below 10%, why would any student think that he would be qualified to be accepted into schools like MIT? I do understand that some kids (URM with amazing grades/ECs) have really good chances, but don't most see that applying to MIT will probably just leave them in want of a school that does not want them? What do you guys think?</p>
<p>I can’t speak for any of the other schools you are referring to. But after reading many threads on the MIT forum I came away with the opposite opinion. Many students who were accepted to MIT seemed genuinely surprised because they considered themselves quite normal. I really felt that MIT was a perfect place for me and figured that if I didn’t apply I would be reducing my chances to zero. Instead I worked hard on my application and am extremely excited about starting MIT in the fall! The worst thing that could have happened? I would have had to find some place else to be happy.</p>
<p>Rothsem, I like your response. It shows that to get into MIT getting into a “top” school can’t be your end all be all</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This. </p>
<p>10char</p>
<p>Exactly as rothstem said. Besides, MIT is amazing. Even if I hadn’t applied, I would have “wanted” it, but by applying, I raised my chances of acceptance from 0 to slightly above 0. I could have been rejected, but I also had a chance of acceptance (which worked out surprisingly well! 
)</p>
<p>Very few students applying to MIT believe that they will be accepted. But having a <em>chance</em> at acceptance is exciting in itself, and the potential reward is well worth the risk.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>MIT is a reach school. No one should expect to go. If you don’t dream, you will never do something spectacular.</p>
<p>Also, the app really wasn’t so difficult and I enjoyed my interview. I think it was well worth it, even if I didn’t suspect I would ever get in :)</p>
<p>A lot of kids like the challenge. If you want to be the best, you got to compete with the best.</p>
<p>acceptance rates for people who dont apply to MIT is 0%. Might as well take the chance.</p>
<p>There was a thread a few years ago that was written by a CalTech student and it was called something like “What you need to get into CalTech” ahah… It pretty much answered what you’re asking. </p>
<p>It said they want the students with a 4.0, a 780+ in all math tests, AIME/USAMO, Intel/Siemens, and published research papers.
Pretty pretentious, but the truth, for the most part.</p>
<p>Some students have this… Why not go to the best school they can?</p>
<p>^ You’re wrong. A quick google shows how you’re wrong on SAT stats:
[Admissions</a> Statistics | MIT Admissions](<a href=“http://mitadmissions.org/apply/process/stats]Admissions”>Admissions statistics | MIT Admissions)</p>
<p>I assure you that you’re wrong on the others are well. It is not necessary to have big competitions or research papers to get into MIT. (Before I start hearing all the whining - yes, even the white or Asian male can get in without these things!)</p>
<p>If you want to sit there and put the word “necessary” in my mouth, then of course I’m wrong.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I didn’t think it was pretentious. It seemed pretty down-to-earth to me. </p>
<p>Anyway, MIT admissions is not the same as Caltech admissions. You could be significantly smarter and more accomplished than another candidate, and MIT could offer you admission over the other candidate. </p>
<p>Caltech’s admission is more straightforward, so that Caltech thread discussed exactly how one needs to distinguish oneself to get admitted to such a tiny class (~200 per year.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I never said you said it was necessary. I am debating your “true, for the most part”, and expanding on this. If you would like to defend your original statement, be my guest.</p>
<p>^I thought he was talking about Caltech, not MIT.</p>
<p>If he was talking about MIT, then I disagree with the notion that they are looking for nearly everyone to have those qualifications.</p>
<p>^ I assumed he originally posted that here because he thought it applied to MIT too, and his response to my post wasn’t a clarification that he was only talking about Caltech. So that’s what I’m assuming right now.</p>
<p>Well I think the original thing about Caltech’s admission requirements does not apply to MIT AT ALL. If it gives anyone some scope, I hadd 800 math, 720 CR, and 730 W for SAT I and 800 Math II and 750 Physics for SAT II. I never did any research or international science competitions. I participated in many local Science Bowl/ Science Olympiad type things but never did particularly well. I think what they really value is the interview. I showed them I have diverse interests, have done cool things throughout high school (i.e. Euro trip, Habitat for Humanity volunteer in Mississippi) and be SURE to ask your interviewer plenty of questions about the college. This really shows interest and that you’ve done your research.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ugh, I wrote this backwards. </p>
<p>I meant to say, “You could be significantly smarter and more accomplished than another candidate, and MIT could offer admission to the other person over you.”</p>
<p>@SAP: Be careful about extrapolating from one data pt. It sounds like you had a respectable record; anything might have gotten you in. It might not have been the non-academic things that put you over the top.</p>