Why Applying Early Action to MIT is a HUGE Mistake

Colleges and Universities A-Z Massachusetts Institute of Technology
1

As many of you know, today was the day when MIT released results of the Early Action round of admissions. My son was not one of the 656 students offered admission today, but luckily he was in the group of 4,776 who will be considered in the Regular Decision round. My respects to those individuals who were rejected outright–these are very tough breaks, a lot of shattered dreams, and a tremendous sadness in young people wondering what more they could have possibly done. There are a lot of kids who feel (wrongly, of course) that they are worthless and that they have no future since they have not achieved admission to the college of their dreams.

Mostly though, I am angry at MIT. I feel that they have wasted my son’s time, and that of 4,775 others. Whether it is the result of laziness or apathy, they have not held up their end of the Early Admissions “deal.” Here’s what the “deal” is supposed to be: Student gets materials and application in order and submits early; MIT lets you know early. Except in the case of the approximately 70% of applicants who were deferred till the Regular Decision round of admissions.

The effect of MIT’s behaviour is that approximately 70% of the applicants will have to wait three more months for their decision. Doesn’t sound like a big deal? Most of them will be rejected anyway, right? They should be applying to lots of other schools regardless, you know?

Here’s why it’s important: Single Choice Early Action and Restrictive Early Action at OTHER schools. Let’s say you are an extremely competitive applicant, who would like to attend (Princeton, Harvard, Yale, or Stanford) and MIT. You cannot apply early to more than one of the schools listed in parenthesis in the early round of admissions. You cannot apply to MIT early if you apply early to one of these four schools.

Applying to one of these four schools may possibly increase your chances (debatable, but felt to be true by many people) of admission during the early round. Definitely, though, you are much more likely to get an answer so that you can rejoice (unlikely) or move on with your life (much more lifely).

By applying early to MIT, you have a 70% chance of not receiving a decision but a 100% chance of also not getting an early decision from Harvard, Yale, Princeton, or Stanford. So applying early at MIT will cost you your ability to participate in the Early Round of admissions at HYPS.

Because there is no appreciable improvement on likelihood of admission in the Early Round at MIT, but a 100% certainty of being unable to participate in the Early Round of admissions at HYPS, it seems to me that students who apply early to MIT are mostly likely to be “shooting themselves in the foot” if they also have an interest in getting an early decision to attend another of the elite Ivies. Won’t help you at MIT, but will hurt you at HYPS.

MIT Admissions should be ashamed of this loathsome practice and endeavour to change it for upcoming classes.

2

I share a similar sentiment after getting deferred EA. What is the point of applying early if there is no marginal advantage for demonstrating interest in MIT? Of course, MIT admissions wants to admit early applicants conservatively so that the class of 2020 can be the best it can be, but doesn’t that defeat the purpose of applying early in the first place?

3

And in what way is this different from any other Restrictive Early Action program? Take HYPS for example, each of which defers the vast majority of its early applicant pool for regular action as well. In tandem, the same underlying mechanics operate for the elite Ivies: you apply to one of them, you relinquish your chance at the others’ EA programs. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, considered to be at such a similar caliber, bears no different reward (!) nor loss (depending on how you view it) than any of the other aforementioned institutions.

There is no need to blame MIT admissions for their EA program as it does accomplish its goal of offering the “most suitably fit” candidates an early offer of admissions. Note that I refrain from saying most qualified here – your son may have been one of those upper-tier academic superstar students (qualifying for upper echelons of the US olympiads, RSI, etc.) or simply the average high school valedictorian – but in the end, it doesn’t produce a contrasting result. What MIT wants to do is find those students that it deems a perfect fit, and unfortunately your son seemed to not fit this rare description. Like most other applicants, he will be considered in the regular round.

Of course, applying EA to MIT does indeed have an additional advantage. What’s infinitely redeeming is that the EA MIT option may be compounded with EA Chicago and EA Caltech, which is noticeably less riskier than throwing your entire EA ticket at an elite Ivy, which actually has Restrictive EA.

So EA at MIT is best thought of in this way: most roads lead to deferral, but not all of them.

4

I’m sorry you’re disappointed, but I don’t really understand your point. MIT allows you to apply early. That’s all. The chances of admission aren’t great, despite the tremendous qualifications of many applicants. The statistics are well known, and that’s a risk that applicants can choose to take. Applying early to MIT doesn’t preclude applicants from applying early anywhere else that allows them to do so. Some ED schools allow for EA applications, others don’t. The SCEA/REA schools do not permit early application to schools such as MIT, so applicants have to choose whether they prefer the 9.5% chance at Stanford (as one example) or the 9% chance at MIT. I’m not sure how this is a “loathsome practice”, and it seems to have more to do with HYPS than with MIT.

5

It could be a huge mistake but it could be a huge advantage.
If the applicant prefers HYP over MIT then it’s a mistake.
If the applicant prefers MIT over HYP then it’s an advantage. When applying EA to MIT, the applicant can also apply to other schools like Caltech, U Chicago,… You cannot do that with single early action.
Deferral from MIT does not mean rejection.

6

They have this practice for many years. You make choice and take risks, MIT is a reach for every one. The chance of getting in for most people is less than 10%.

So I would rather say that it is a huge risk, not a mistake.

7

Obviously my typing is a lot slower.

8

MIT isn’t forcing you to apply there early; they also aren’t forcing you to NOT apply other places early. That’s the key difference. I was admitted today and didn’t apply anywhere else early - I knew that I had a 60% chance of increasing the wait, but it was worth it to me no matter the outcome.

9

MIT isn’t the only university where this happens…

Harvard: 4673/6173 = 75.7% deferred
Yale: 53% deferred
Princeton (2019): 75.8% deferred

The only outlier in HYPS is Stanford:
Stanford: 701/7822 = 9.0% deferred

Be angry at the system, but not at MIT specifically. All of the above cost you the chance to use early action at MIT as well. The benefit of early action is that admissions committees know their institution is the student’s top choice. So considering your chances at HYPS is irrelevant.

10

@Eidetic
You clearly have a good understanding of the chances of being admitted to MIT and the impact on early action restrictions. If you knew the rules and likely outcome of the game before you decided to play, what should MIT have done differently?

11

My daughter applied EA to MIT and is not interested in any Ivys. In fact she only applied to four schools. Yesterday she was accepted to MIT - so the system worked for us. Blaming MIT for a decision your son made, just makes you sound bitter.

Why don’t you blame the schools that have restrictive EA instead?

12

Having been through the process last year of deferral and rejection ad nauseum with OS at elites, here’s my advice/attempt at consolation for you:

Elite college admissions are a big game. They are a powerball. Students seemingly less worthy than yours will get in - often with lower test scores or less talented (at least subjectively, in your eyes, when you read the “accepted” threads), sometimes because they were recruited athletes or because they contributed to racial “diversity.”

Realize the following:

1)Your child’s success will not be determined by whether they enroll at an elite college.

2)Even if he were admitted, he might have found himself in a pressure cooker battling other super-talented students for top grades in classes with tough curves. Bad grades at an elite school will not be looked upon as favorably as good grades at a good public university when applying to med school, grad school, etc.

3)Despite all of the touted financial aid at elites, if you are full pay, then paying $250,000 for a bachelor’s at an elite school may not be worth it.

The solution: look for good honors programs at public universities where he can succeed - and don’t look back.

13

The only thing I would like to say is that everything is not a science after a certain point. We need to let our kids enjoy the process of applying to colleges and learn from it. My son got deferred last night. He is just a 17 year old, and doesn’t have the maturity to accept the facts. My advice for him was, if he really wants to get in, he should try to increase his chances. His accomplishments were not tailored to get into MIT. The first time he went through the website was last summer. So, he needs to be proud of the fact, that he is still being considered. Like every child, he thinks he is a loser!! But, that is a natural feeling for kids that age. As parents, we should make them understand, admission process cannot be modelled as a scientific process. Thee is an element of randomness in the process, early or late.

14

I can not understand why you are angry at MIT. The facts you stated, you and your son knew before he chose to apply to MIT early over Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford. You are angry at MIT because they allow you to apply anywhere you want and you’re not angry at the schools that limit your choice to only their school? How does that make any sense? Why did your son choose to apply to MIT early instead of applying to any of those other schools?

15

It was not a mistake for my daughter. Sorry you feel that way, but you knew the risks, as parents we must teach our children to handle both the wins and losses of life. Life is not destination, its about how to handle ones path.

My daughter was rejected for MITEs last summer, she was disapointed and did not do a summer program. Although it was a huge gamble she tried again and won last night at 6:28. She only applied to MIT and UMass, either way it would have been okay. If she was denied, she would have tried again at MIT for graduate school, found her way into Draper Labs, etc.

16

It stinks, but at least not a rejection.

SCEA is just ED without the binding outcome. People need to see it that way. My kid took a huge gamble on ED and was rejected. It was hugely disappointing for him. But he knew he was closing off any other early advantage at other peer schools by doing so. As he said, no risk, no reward. He went all in.

Now he is in the RD pool at the other schools, just like your kid, except his early school is out.

All the kids deferred or rejected in ED or SCEA are in this boat. Is it worth it? To my kid it was, but to your kid, perhaps not. Maybe he did have a better chance early but was still deferred/rejected. It’s the chance you take when you go big or go home. I’m proud of my normally very safe practical kid for putting all his chips in. That was a b*llsy move.

Duke isn’t good enough for my little snowflake anyway!!! (Said momma bear!)

17

One more thing - I recall a story from MIT admissions about a kid who built a nuclear reactor in his garage that did not get accepted.

When I read that, I realized that we had no business applying there.

18

@Nerdyparent I think you missed the point of that blog post.

That someone who built a nuclear reactor in their garage didn’t get in is encouraging. Here’s a portion of it:

I think this shows that MIT wants the human, not the superhuman. Who knows why the kid with the nuclear reactor wa rejected? Maybe their essays were dull and their attitude was arrogant. Maybe they spent so much time on their reactor that they ended up skipping class and getting a 3.0. But I think MITChris is trying to say that an applicant should not rely on that “one-trick” achievement without ensuring that the rest of their application is strong.

Such is holistic review.

19

http://web.mit.edu/ir/cds/2015/c.html

The overall admit rate for males was 5.8% and it will be lower this year based on the higher number of early apps.

http://mitadmissions.org/apply/process/stats

The admit rate for the RD round drops to 5% and deferred candidates have only slightly higher chance at 5.5%.

When a male candidate applies to MIT, they need to be aware that they have a lower chance of being admitted there than HYP.

20

@loquatical - no- believe me - I understood MITChris perfectly - it’s just that if building a nuclear reactor was not enough of an “it” factor for them, then I’m not sure my progeny has “it” either.