Right…and what I’m saying is…back in my day…folks didn’t apply to colleges where they didn’t have a good chance of being accepted.
I have to say, we did not encourage our kids to apply to a ton of colleges. They both vetted their choices before applications were sent. Both applied where they felt they had a reasonable chance of being accepted.
I credit the common ap with the vast increase in applications. It’s just way easy to just fill up that common AP list.
I am replying to my own post because I wanted to clarify what I meant about these admitted students. Let’s start off with the most important part of the Applying Sideways article:
I believe MIT means what they wrote, and that they look for these things (particularly the nice part). But the kids that I knew were admitted had these these three qualities plus national recognition in one or more areas. No doubt there are some well rounded kids who were accepted to MIT; I just don’t know them.
After seeing the process for a few years, it was actually pretty easy to predict who in the class would be admitted to one or more HYPSM level colleges. It was not the generalist, but the specialist who was extraordinarily good at something, and had the awards to prove it.
Now for the cases I know, the kids actually enjoyed the activity they were experts in; they weren’t forced in areas they hated. But because of the focus on specialization and awards, they spent more time on this than they wanted and less on other activities that they would enjoy but not excel in.
Yes. And it helps to remember that one person’s safety is another person’s dream school that they are excited about being admitted to. I hate reading about (or seeing the videos) of kids (or even parents) disparaging a school because they think it’s below them. Most of the time I’m guessing that they haven’t even researched the rankings for their specific major, only the general ranking of the college itself. It’s surprising to see how many perceived “safeties” are higher ranked in individual programs, than some of the T50’s.
My D21 did have one safety that couldn’t picture herself going to (the other 2 she liked). She didn’t think she was too good for the safety, it just wasn’t her vibe. Because NC in-states have gotten so competitive, I insisted that she needed an in-state safety just in case going to an in-state school was her only option and the others didn’t pan out. Her heart was set on going out of state, so it was hard to get her excited about any of our in-state options but if OOS didn’t work out, I’m confident she would have chosen an in-state and been fine. She wasn’t married to any particular program so for her, college choice was based on emotion and fit.
First off, I too believe MIT believes what it says. I spent four years - well, three anyway -with the output of the admissions process. I can say that while some of my classmates were very “specialized” or “pointy”, it would be a mischaracterization to think of the class as filled with people who were extraordinarily talented in Just One Thing. The mix of depth and breadth was typical.
Next, on the question of “fit”. Many people say “fit” but mean “comfort”. Two different things.
Colleges perform two functions - education, and credentialing. The focus on prestige is an effect, not a cause, and it comes from an upstreaml focus on the credentialing aspect. A student who would be successful at colleegs X and Y might well get a better education at X, but more widely recognized credentials at Y.
MIT says “we don’t want box-checkers”, and there is a Greek chorus responding “Liars! You have secret boxes! Tell us what boxes to check!” Credentialling is all about the boxes.
In my opinion your safety is the choice you should spend the most time considering. Do it first. It makes you think harder about what you want from your education, what is important to you about the campus atmosphere and how you can best utilize the opportunities the school offers to advance your future goals. It’s easy to get excited about a popular school but much harder to determine what you really need and ultimately want out of your education.
One thing that hasn’t been mentioned. As more and more US students attend college, a BA is no longer a distinction or even a guarantee of a good job.
Therefore, there is more emphasis on WHERE you got the BA as a means of attaining some degree of distinction.
Another effect is increased attendance at grad school- degree inflation.
MIT, or any other highly selective college, isn’t going to tell students, especially publicly, that they will likely be admitted if they do X well. The reality is, though, that some students were admitted because they did X well (and didn’t do poorly in other aspects). There’re quite a few such Xs.
the few kids I know who got into MIT from our high school deserved it. They really were extraordinary kids early on. They were also very nice and humble. The one I know the best, was not even the val, as she did not play the system (with weighted classes/etc). Talking with her was always a pleasure and she had many interests. I can remember her in elementary school and just “knowing” she was MIT material. The kids that get admitted to these schools on pure merit (not legacy, recruitment, etc), have that something about them. Meanwhile there are plenty of other great smart kids in the top 10 in our HS, but I cannot say they all have “it”. I believe the schools something in the app can see the “it”.
I think too many kids though think that they are the “it”. The ones who dont think so usually are. i see the arrogance here on CC many times and then the disappointment. I think some kids think they deserve to get into T20 because they can do well on a test and get good grades and have some ECs. They tend to “start a club” or “create a non profit”. i think the schools see that arrogance .
Well, I am not sure what you mean. Let’s say X is an IMO gold medalist with a perfect score. Hard to get X-ier than that. If his letters say “smartest kid I ever worked with, but an arrogant, cutthroat jerk” he’s not getting into MIT. If your position is that’s what you meant by doing poorly and selection is more nuanced, I’d agree - but then where does X come into the picture?
MIT enrolls maybe 1000 freshmen a year. If you want to tell me there are 1000 different X’s, I’d believe you. If you want to tell me there are 10, that’s not my experience. If there were, I could sort my classmates into 10 unique categories.
But the bigger question is “if you think the school is lying, why are you applying to get in?”
Have all admitted students at MIT (or another highly selective college) done one of those few Xs? Of course not. That’s not what I said or implied.
Have some students got admitted because they did very well in one of those Xs and not poorly in other aspects (by that I mean they cleared the other hurdles)? Yes.
I think there is more emphasis on WHERE you go to college in some parts of the country, but not all. College name/prestige is certainly very important to a lot of folks who post on CC, but I don’t think that’s necessarily true out in the real world. For most people contemplating college, finances trump everything else - including fit and prestige. And while the percentage of people holding a BA has increased in recent years- it’s still only one third of adults over 25. In pockets of the country, like where I live in MA (the most educated state in the country), that number is a lot higher - 41% - but it still isn’t a majority.
My son is in the ORM bucket. For his group, X seems to be national recognition in math/physics Olympiad and/or the national science competitions. I am sure there are ORM males at MIT that did not have those accolades, but they only have a few slots to distribute among various constituencies. And these top STEM competitions seem to provide a fairly deep pool of ORM males .
Regarding community service importance in the admissions process: On one hand because of the mandatory inclusion by many schools, non profit institutions are probably receiving more help. However, leaders from such institutions lament that once medals such as Presidential Gold, Silver, Bronze etc are given and the kid gets in to a “tippy top” college, they do not continue to help in college. While I understand that kids get busy in college, it is sad to see community service being used a means only to gain admissions.
Isn’t it interesting how ranking, admissions, and related threads often d/evolve into discussions of MIT’s propensity to admit math contest winners? I wonder if that that tells us something about the state of admissions in America and the culture of MIT, or if it is more a reflection on the posters here?
As for the broader question of where US college admissions went wrong, am I the only one who isn’t comfortable with a premier school putting so much emphasis on attracting winners of contests who almost always happen to be male?
I had a good laugh when I heard the Varsity Blues wiretap conversation where Rick Singer tells a parent not to bother with MIT becuse it’s, “not even a fun place to go.”
My kid- an ORM (whatever that means, but I guess white male?) did NOT have math competitions, we are from the Northeast/urban so there’s nothing desirable about his geography, and still managed to get in to MIT and did well there.
These competitions are great- no diss intended to the kids who participate in them. And since I know the competition is fierce, using these competitions as a way to attract fantastic, math and science oriented kids (which is part of MIT’s mission, after all) seems quite legit to me, MTMind, in the same way that I wouldn’t object to learning that Julliard uses various music competitions to find the talented music students (which is their mission, after all).
But by NO means is the competitive stuff the only route in to MIT, despite what you read on CC. My kid didn’t have it, I am not aware of any of his fraternity brothers doing that stuff. It’s just one of a very robust group of things that signals “Here’s a high potential student who loves what we have to offer”. Isn’t that what you want ALL adcom’s to be doing- finding kids who love what the institution offers?
Would you object to West Point admitting kids with a fascination with military history, or College of the Atlantic admitting kids with a passion for ecology???
ORM generally means over represented minority in college admissions….that’s often Asian/Indian males, but some include females, depending on specifics. Not all Asian ethnicities would be considered over represented either.
Why is it surprising? Math is fundamental to all disciplines in STEM and economics, which are the focus of MIT. Math competitions also have a much longer history, have much greater participation, and are much more developed than other types of competitions in STEM or economics.
In terms of gender balance, there’re more male students interested in STEM as there’re more female students interested in arts and humanities. I’m not sure if it’s due to nature, tradition, or prejudice, or all of the above, but I’m certain something that’s been around for centuries won’t easily be eliminated.
In the broader context of selective universities, many admissions offices try to strike close to 50-50 gender balance in STEM fields. They don’t use math contests to keep out qualified female students.
It isn’t surprising.