Which would help my chances more?

Colleges and Universities A-Z Massachusetts Institute of Technology
21

<p>from the MIT admissions website:

[quote]
First, we determine whether they are academically qualified, then we look for compelling reasons to admit. We go through each application evaluating not only the academic, but also the personal and extra-curricular excellence. Underlying these three areas is always a search for the context of the application and genuine engagement in the activities and interests. Particular "hooks" that might inform an admissions decision might be...</p>

<pre><code>* Applicants who have clearly demonstrated that they want to make a difference and help others
* Hands-on, technical types, people who like to invent and create
* Those who demonstrate unusual curiosity or expertise in a certain area

[/quote]

</code></pre>

<p>If you're going to TAMS and doing pretty good, you're probably "academically qualified.</p>

<p>This topic has turned into an alum, a current student, and an incoming frosh nagging at eachother. I'm gunna go find a new way to kill time.</p>

22

<h2>"MIT deferred and then rejected our curve setter (who literally set the curve in every class, made USAMO, nearly made physics camp, etc) and took others who got B's here and there. Our school did very well for Siemens, and the two students who made the nationals this year did not have straight A's, and did not set the curve in every class. "</h2>

<p>Well, then, things certainly have changed. That never would have happened 10 years ago. I was going off of the number Marilee Jones gave--that only 15% of the current admits have a different academic profile than before her tenure. Perhaps that number is actually higher. </p>

<p>BTW, where did the "curve setter" go? Out of curiosity, were they upset by this rejection? Also, by saying "grades are deceiving," are you saying that this curve-setter person wasn't one of the smartest people there?</p>

23

<p><em>sigh</em> I'm still reading this.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Also, by saying "grades are deceiving," are you saying that this curve-setter person wasn't one of the smartest people there?

[/quote]

the curve-setter person might have been, but (lets use a math example because the track is pretty universal) who's the more qualified student: a straight A+'s student just finishing up BC calc, or a low A's, high B's student who's made it through multivariate, diff eq, and linear algebra? One would clearly have a higher class rank, but aren't they both academically qualified?</p>

24

<p>^^Well, the curve-setter people at my school generally were the most advanced anyway and took classes like abstract algebra, number theory, etc. I'm guessing this USAMO kid wasn't taking BC Calc senior year. I'm sure there were a few people who got straight "A's" taking the easier classes, but I'm not really referring to these people anyway. And I don't think they got into MIT or CalTech. As I said, some of the top people may have had a "B" or two in a humanities class, and this was tolerated by MIT admissions even 10 years ago. </p>

<p>There were a few people <em>very</em> advanced who were taking multivariable calculus first semester sophomore year and were like 12 years old. But they came in very advanced so they were no less prepared for it than a guy taking it senior year. Most of these people did very well, although some of them were understandably a bit immature and didn't have a good work ethic.
Anyway, except for these super-young people, the curve setters were part of the most advanced group of people. And they were advanced enough that they got to take all of the challenging electives.</p>

25

<p>He's going to an ivy league now.</p>

<p>Some kids took multivariable calc, linear algebra, etc junior year. They also did research, lots of other clubs, and other things. They didn't always get A's. The "curve" setter took many of these classes his senior year.</p>

<p>This isn't a case of someone not being smart; indeed easily 30+ kids could have gone to MIT. This is a case of recognizing that the classroom is not where learning ends. Some people sit in their rooms reading random math books, some programming, some doing random stuff. Most of the smart kids in the class finished up multivariable calc, combinatorics, graph theory, number theory, math modeling classes, etc.</p>

<p>For many of these classes, especially the ones where you just have to work, the grade only correlates to how much effort you put in. Don't kid yourself, anyone going to MIT can pick up a textbook on multivariable calculus, differential equations, or theoretical computer science and start teaching themselves successfully. They aren't teach us rocket science in the classroom, and after a while some of us have realized that we don't need to do all the work. I don't need to solve tons and tons of PSET's in combinatorics to get it. I get it, I know what can be done. So when it's 3 AM and we're finishing that combinatorics PSET, sometimes we say **** it. An 89 vs a 92, I don't care anymore at this point.</p>

<p>Also, when I say curve setter, I mean in his/her particular class. Many of the harder classes he took many of who are heading to MIT did not take with him/her, so we can't compare how we would have done if we had taken it then.</p>

<p>It's important that those who say "all these kids from this generation are getting in with B's nah nah nah nah!" actually spend some time testing the waters. The best of this generation are not taking calc bc senior year or junior year for that matter. They are teaching it to themselves freshmen year. </p>

<p>Also another important thing is learning to cope with failure. Some kids seem to just ace every class, thinking they are the ****. Some of us who spend 5+ hours everyday trying to get some damn computer simulation to work for our research project (and this is AFTER college decisions came out) have sacrificed getting all A's to learn more important lessons.</p>

<p>PS: And in case you are in the position of not getting all A's, make sure to ace all the AP exams/SAT II's. It's still important to show that when you absolutely have to, you can ace stuff.</p>

26

<p>On another note, I think it's also important to see the bigger picture when applying. Take RMS, founder of the GNU project, for example (and currently residing in the William Gates side of the Stata Center :p). Yes he coded the first versions of Emacs and gcc, etc. But he has also fought for the idea of free software. That's not something he learned by studying math books.</p>

27

<h2>It's important that those who say "all these kids from this generation are getting in with B's nah nah nah nah!" </h2>

<p>Is this really what you think I'm saying?</p>

28

<h2>
[quote]
It's important that those who say "all these kids from this generation are getting in with B's nah nah nah nah!"</h2>

<p>Is this really what you think I'm saying?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, that was a sweeping generalization of a lot of comments from different people on this board and others. Unless I quote you specifically none of my comments are directed towards you.</p>

<p>I'm not trying to start up a very heated debate. I'm simply suggesting that <em>qualification</em> depends on what you want to do. If you want to be working at google, you will probably pursue things differently then if you want to be a research scientist. Sure many students don't yet know what they want to do in a decade. But some do, and their slightly eccentric approach should be respected just as the normal approach is.</p>

29

<p>ahhh, a Plano West student? I'm personally against TAMS because it seems too narrow for a high school education... </p>

<p>I think my high school helped me the most by being flexible and supportive (including funding) with my endeavors. If I wanted to start a club, I could. If I wanted to create an accelerated course of an existing class, I could. If I wanted to sit in a class that I couldn't fit into my schedule, I could. I don't think my resume would have been as impressive if I went to a different, unsupportive school.</p>

<p>My best suggestion is to find the school that you feel like you can thrive in, which applies to a high school OR college education.</p>

30

<p>bump (10 chars)</p>

31

<p>Assuming you have the grades and test scores to qualify, you really have to find somebody at MIT to champion you--either a prof who thinks you can contribute or a coach who wants you for his or her team. Other than that, you are standing at the 7-11 buying a lottery ticket just like everybody else.</p>

<p>In our most recent graduating class, the "curve setters" with the best academic resumes got rejected in favor of a young gentleman vocal about how oppressed he was as a minority and whose grades were outside of the top 5%. Of course the reason his grades were not great was all the persecution he was suffering.</p>

<p>PS--He's your basic overpriviliged white kid who went to fancy private schools until high school.</p>

32

<p>MIT really needs to come out and say what influence coaches have on the admission process because my impression was that it was nothing.</p>

<p>BTW, how is this kid saying he's a minority if he's white?</p>

33

<p>doublepost.....</p>

34

<p>From Matt's blog here:</a>

[quote]
Athletic talent, like music, art, theater, etc. talent, is a talent that you bring to the admissions process. For music, we have our music faculty evaluate applicants' talents; for athletes, we have our varsity coaches help us with evaluation. We are proud of having one of the largest athletics programs in the nation (I believe that only Harvard, a Division I school, has a larger number of varsity sports teams). MIT is a Division III athletics school, though, so athletics aren't something that will get you in the backdoor.

[/quote]
</p>

35

<p>^^yeah, I've seen that before, but it's still a little bit vague. Most division III schools do bend admission somewhat to fill out their rosters. My impression was that in the past there was no recruiting at all at MIT beyond coaches trying to get admitted people to come--it was like Caltech. It's not clear whether that has changed recently. In a lot of DIII schools, it makes a huge difference whether you are good enough to play for their team. If you were merely a good athlete (say MVP of your high school team), they wouldn't recruit you at all if you weren't good enough to play for their team. </p>

<p>Also, if they are recruiting athletes to fill out a roster rather than just rewarding athletic achievement/talent, that might change the admissions pattern. For example, tennis is pretty popular sport among smart people, so the standards might be higher to get an equivalent boost for that sport compared to something like football.</p>

36

<p>I think a good question would be how much of a boost being an athlete that could start on MIT's team is compared to being student council president in high school...</p>

37

<p>bump... which is better for me (for MIT) going to my "normal" high school where I should end up being 5/1015 ppl </p>

<p>or going to this special high school called TAMS where I would earn two years of high school and college credit and would probably come out with 90 credits and math courses in diff equations/linear algebra/modern algebra/ mult. calc/ vect. calc, etc.? Also, I would be able to take Modern Physics and Mechanics I (which are the two college courses tat would be taken after AP physics.. i think) The TAMS high school costs like $18000 for the two years tho. I should be able to get some sort of scholarship but still.</p>

38

<p>I think the answers you got in the early existence of this thread were encouraging you to choose the option that you liked the best <em>for now</em>, for the experience: NOT because you think one choice or the other will get you into MIT. It won't. Don't choose to stay at the "normal" school just because you'd end up with a high rank, nor choose to go to TAMS because you think the available courses will impress the MIT admissions folks. Don't do ANYTHING just for the sake of trying to woo the MIT admissions folks. Do it because it is what you want for yourself. </p>

<p>Look at it this way: assume MIT didn't exist, or had already told you they would not accept you when you applied. Then consider your choices, and see which makes more sense for you, in a vacuum that does not include MIT. And don't neglect to factor finances into the decision. And then.... make that decision, and make the most of the choice you've made! Excel within the context of your opportunities.</p>

<p>And then apply to MIT and see what happens.</p>

39

<p>Thanks for the responses every1... thank you mootmom</p>

40

<p>i think tat I will go wit TAMS...I think that I should be able to get some financial aid or some scholarship</p>