<p>No, Texas, nothing he did during the summer would have had any impact on Stanford's decision to admit him. He didn't put any of it down on his application, for one thing. He wrote computer programs, he studied the stock market, he did day trading one summer, he taught himself C++, Visual Basic, he studied Blackjack, Texas Hold 'em and other casino games that involve a combination of skill and luck (and an understanding of statistics), he tweaked an existing trading software program to do something it didn't originally do, he created a robot to play online poker (never got the bugs out), played computer stragegy games, read books on game theory... none of that went on the app. His essay had nothing to do with math or poker or computer programs or any of that -- it was a personal essay having to do with him and his family. For all Stanford knew, the kid spent the summers watching reruns of Gilligan's Island. He did good things during the year and I believe that this was evident in the transcript as well as the teacher recs.</p>
<p>Texas137:</p>
<p>My kid did lot of math competition and did take lot of math beyond calculus in high school, but has no interest in math/science. Lot of his friends has enrolled in Math 55 class if they were in H or M. However, she will not have nay interest in math 55 even though she could take it. She took math camp but did not like it because she developed other interest. She loves math for analytical skills, which can be used to solve problems. Therefore, I hope her taking math camp or doing research while in summer program will not be seen as an interest in it. She did it because it was easy to qualify based on merits and have no connection to do internship with an investment banker or political office. She wants to pursue international relation and economics. This love came through writing and politics. Life is too complex. BUt I agree in your son case this is what he evolved through and MIT is best for him.</p>
<p>Well, my kid mopped floors at a fast food restaurant during the summer before his senior year and frankly, I'm glad MIT asked what he did during the summer. He came home from work and it took two cycles in the wash to get the smell of grease out of his uniform so he could put it back on the next day.</p>
<p>Why would eliminating the question "what did you do during the summer" change the outcome? My kid still would have ended up mopping floors (or folding sweaters at the Gap or making milkshakes at Baskin Robbins) and presumably would have been admitted anyway.</p>
<p>I feel sorry for the kids who have been programming themselves to fit the criteria they think the colleges are looking for, but don't blame the college for parental stupidity, pressure, or their children's acquiesence.... MIT and HYPS are filled with kids who work during the summers, but if a parent thinks some expensive trip to Costa Rica to see how the other half lives is going to impress some adcom, let them at it.</p>
<p>The college shouldn't ask how you spent your summer to preserve the hurt feelings of the kids who do these ridiculous things to get into college? How about the rest of us? As far as we were concerned, the MIT application gave my kid plenty of opportunities to level the playing field. His grades weren't perfect... and he didn't have a laundry list of impressive activities....but there was room for him to talk about what made him tick, adcom's be damned. And if he hadn't been accepted, he'd have ended up a happy camper at U. Michigan or Binghamton or JHU or U. Maryland or any of the other schools on his list.</p>
<p>You can hardly blame a handful of private schools if the UC's have wrought havoc on the HS educational system and admissions process in California.</p>
<p>
[quote]
You can hardly blame a handful of private schools if the UC's have wrought havoc on the HS educational system and admissions process in California.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Since I'm the one who brought up UC, I guess I must have left the impression that I blame the private schools for something? If so, then I left the opposite impression than the one I intended. My point is that it doesn't matter what HPYS says--California students aspiring to the highest levels will do what UC tells them to do. HPYS could scream from the hilltops that they do not want to see "X" but if UC wants to see "X", X will be there and HPYS will not be able to hold it against them. If UC says they want to see applicants who can walk over hot coals, a new industry will be born, right next to Kumon math you'll have the Coal Walking Academy.</p>
<p>Interestedad, do you really know a kid who can't identify their reach, match and safety schools based on the available information? I find that hard to believe. The kids who can't do this are either naive, hopelessly uninformed, or delusional. </p>
<p>A school which admits 10% of its applicant pool is a reach-- doesn't matter if legacies are admitted at 20% or if left-handed native americans are admitted at 40%; it's still a reach for everyone, even if you're in one of those groups.</p>
<p>What you're looking for is some statistical grid which demonstrates that a school that's a reach for everyone else is a sure bet for your kid... and I'm sorry, that grid doesn't exist. </p>
<p>Or-- you want a recipe which tells you "stir in half a cup of community service with a pinch of athletic talent, bake until done". Hey, the schools do that already and nobody believes them! They design applications to extract all the information they need and most kids believe that there's yet more info they need to include, i.e. resumes, cover letters, all this stuff that some clerk ends up throwing in the trash before inputing the real info into the computer. Or, well meaning parents believe that their kid is so special that only a letter of reference from some prominent friend who met the kid twice will do the trick.... or, the kids (and we've got lots on this board) think that if the school wants a 500 word essay, a 1000 word essay must be twice as effective, especially if written in 8 point type which is the only way to fit the essay onto the application.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Interestedad, do you really know a kid who can't identify their reach, match and safety schools based on the available information? I find that hard to believe.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sure. When there is zero published information (applications, acceptance, yield, median SATs, etc.) for a student's specific "slot" category, it is very difficult.</p>
<p>Want a real example? African-American female, 1390 SATs, top 5% of class at a good large public high school with the hardest possible curriculum. Is Swarthmore a reach, match, or safety? What about Columbia? What about Early Decision? None of the published generic data provides any meaningful guidance to this student.</p>
<p>Or a harder one. African-American male. 1250 SATs, top 25% class rank (steadily rising from 9th thru 12th grades) at the most academically rigorous private day prep school in a large northeast city. Reaches, matches, safeties? Again, the generic data provides absolutely zero guidance.</p>
<p>Teaxs137:</p>
<p>Your kid is very well known in circles that has something to do with math or math and computer. He is a great kid. You are right to be very proud of him. He does not need MIT to prove him. He would have been very successful wherever he would have gone. You did not say it, it is my humble opinion.</p>
<p>Texas: Agreed that my kids may have not been suited for MIT (though S who had maintained an interest in astronomy thought of going there), but I was answering what you said, which is that kids who don't want to do academic programs in the summer would not be suited to being surrounded by academically minded peers in college.</p>
<p>I didn't realize you meant MIT only; I'd like to think that the schools they are attending are somewhat challenging, even if not by lofty MIT standards.</p>
<p>Interestdad, in both cases you cite the students being AF-Am doesn't change the stats if you're talking Swarthmore or Columbia (I'm sure it's different for public U's and for sure it's different at the HBCU's.) I think it is naive for a student to assume that being African American changes a school from being a reach to a match, and the published information provided by the schools across the board confirms this. The top schools don't accept marginal minority candidates just to prove a point or to make themselves feel good, but your female applicant would get a second look at any school where she'd otherwise be a competitor. Does knowing that her chances are 18% at Columbia since she's Af-am vs. 12% (or whatever the real numbers are) change her Modus Operandus in any way regarding her applications? Columbia is a reach for anyone, black, white or green.</p>
<p>"Kids don't do the best programs to look good to colleges, they do it because they are passionate about the subject and enjoy the experience. They may feel that they learn more and have a more intellectually stimulating time during 5 weeks of Mathcamp, or music camp, or drama camp, or PROMYS, or RSI, or CTY than they do during the entire school year. They would choose to participate in these programs even if they were forbidden to tell colleges what they did during the summer."</p>
<p>Texas, I understand your point well; it is the same argument that has been explained in great details by Marite when we discussed summer programs. It is obvious that those programs are tailored to your child and Marite's son. The issue, however, rests with families who start to believe that programs such as RSI, Promys, or MITE's become the de facto standard for admission at schools similar to MIT. Moving away from math and sciences, the same could be set for classes in creative writing, arts, or social sciences. I do not have any hard data to support my claim, but I would tend to believe that not everyone who attend summer college programs do it to keep their mind busy. I would love to take a poll of the PARENTS of RSI students or Harvard Summer' programs and ask them if they viewed the financial expenses as an investment or as a valuable line item that facilitates admission at MIT or Harvard. </p>
<p>You mentioned having to "hide" summer activities. I do not think that anyone could make such requirement. However, for the truly interested student you describe, it is obvious that his love for learning and his passions would surface in many parts of the application. The issue is a biut different: the fact that Stanford -as an example- directly asks applicants how they spent the last 2 summers, indicate that the replies have a relevance and impact for admissions. Otherwise, why would the lose very important space on their application? And, because of its impact on admission, it does send thousands FUTURE applicants into a frenzy to make sure that the last two summers are filled with activities that LOOK GOOD. </p>
<p>For some reason, I cannot help but think that most everyone on CC understands the difference between activities that reflect a passion and activities that are developed for admission purposes. Speaking about polls, how do you think that a poll of students DROPPING activities shortly after acceptance would look?</p>
<p>Xiggi, RSI is free and you can't buy your way in. Any parent who is going to take a kid who isn't passionate about math and science and force them to RSI should be arrested-- but having known several of these kids, you can't fake your way in...</p>
<p>Don't believe all the hype you read here, Xiggi. Lots of kids get into lots of competitive schools without the benefit of expensive summer programs, a handful of AP's (or none at all) and no test prep. </p>
<p>Girl in my son's HS was rejected from MIT last year. Mother irate and wants my advice from the supermarket aisle. I say innocently, "what did Teacher X" say about her chances?" (Teacher X is the BC calc teacher who has a reputation for being able to predict college admissions with a very high degree of certainty. Don't know if its true.) Mother-- "oh she didn't have Teacher X. She took a different math class so she'd be able to fit AP Stats and Psychology into her schedule. You know, she's not really into math... much more of a science person."</p>
<p>Well, I'm not an adcom, but shouldn't the kid have read the course catalog? This isn't Victorian England where you can collect butterflies or look at tulip petals and call yourself a scientist...How are you going to make it past Freshman year at MIT if you don't like math???</p>
<p>So-- take all this ^&*(& about transparency with a grain of salt. I think most of the schools do a pretty good job of putting out the information-- is it their fault if people don't bother to read it, or don't want to believe it??</p>
<p>And-- I'm willing to bet $100 that Marilee Jones hasn't accepted a kid whose HS offers BC calc but chose not to take it (unless they'd already covered the material on their own, during the summer, etc.) since she started at MIT. And, also willing to bet that if you emailed her or one of the Adreps to ask the question they'd tell you the same thing.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Interestdad, in both cases you cite the students being AF-Am doesn't change the stats if you're talking Swarthmore or Columbia.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The heck it doesn't! </p>
<p>Swarthmore's overall acceptance rate this year was 22%. The acceptance rate for Af-Am was 46%. The acceptance rate for Asian-Am was 36%. These figures are all integrally related to the sizes of the applicant pools and yield rates. Furthermore, these figures signficantly impact the odds for white students (only 44% of Swarthmore's acceptances this year were mailed to white US citizens).</p>
<p>Every single category of student could make a much more informed evaluation if colleges provided transparency about numbers of applications, acceptances, and enrollments for each "slot" category. Read through the Columbia ED acceptances from earlier this week and look at the confusion on the part of students about kids with 2300+ SATs and top class ranks not getting accepted. For the most part, applicants have little or no clue about the slotting system and how it makes looking at overall SAT scores or acceptance rates meaningless. And, that's even before we start looking at acceptance rates for legacies, athletes, and full-pay students.</p>
<p>Well you can't have it both ways Interestdad. Either we don't know the stats or we do.... if a kid can find out that Swat's acceptance rate is 22% except if your Af-Am it's 46% and Asian it's 35%, what the heck are you talking about? I still maintain that these numbers are not actionable for any single kid... who regardless of race, should look at Swat as a reach school. The fact that as a group there are different admissions rates really isn't relevant if you're one kid in October trying to finalize your list.</p>
<p>We learned last year that to assume that because a school admits 20% of applicants that means that if you apply to 5 of them you've got 100% chance of getting into one of them is the quick road to misery... so why does the transparency you seek help these misguided souls anyway?</p>
<p>"Don't believe all the hype you read here, Xiggi."</p>
<p>All smiles here, Blossom! I hope you do not think I only form opinions based on CC "hype" or anedoctes. I'd like to think that I tend to question and second-guess most stories, even the reports of people I respect. :)</p>
<p>After reading through this entire conversation (because I'm one of those MIT kids who loves to read!), I guess I'm left feeling like sort of an odd duck.</p>
<p>In high school, my summers were filled with band camp, band practice, choir practice... my boyfriend's were filled skiing on a glacier in Canada. Neither of us did anything "for" colleges. I think that's true of many MIT kids -- lots did things like Mathcamp or RSI, but only if they were really excited about doing them. We're scientists and engineers around here... we've always been terribly pragmatic. ;)</p>
<p>I think the kids who are nothing but the package put together by some professional consultant aren't particularly successful at MIT (assuming they get in). You can't "game" MIT once you're here -- the professors explicitly are out to teach us how to think, and grade-grubbing memorizers don't do well in their classes.</p>
<p>The kids who succeed at places like MIT are those who know how to get up when they fall down. I think MIT is right to look for high-achieving, busy, involved high schoolers, because a certain amount of aptitude for "juggling" is required to graduate from here without losing your sanity.</p>
<p>Still, MIT wants to admit people who can thrive in the MIT environment. Often those people aren't the 2400/valedictorian/4.0/eight zillion APs type -- the perfect kids don't know how to fail. If there's one thing you need to learn as an MIT student (or really, as a scientist or engineer, regardless of school), it's how to fail without letting failure eat you.</p>
<p>And that's my two cents. :)</p>
<p>1down - even though he chose not to dislose his summer activities, everything you describe your son doing with his free time during the summer would have supported any college's decision to admit him. In your son's case, he ended up where he wanted to be w/o discussing summer activties, based on what he did with other other 9 months of the year. But that is not the same as saying that colleges should not be interested in what kids choose to do during the summer. I found your description of what your son did with his summers very interesting, and I feel like I "know" more about him after reading it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If there's one thing you need to learn as an MIT student (or really, as a scientist or engineer, regardless of school), it's how to fail without letting failure eat you.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is so true and may I put in a small plug here for athletes -- very few athletes make it to "recruited athlete" status (D3 included) without having experienced failure multiple times along the way!</p>
<p>Texas, I never said colleges shouldn't be interested in what kids choose to do over the summer. I disagreed with the idea that a kid not interested in math camp is a kid that wouldn't be happy at MIT. It depends on why they're not interested in math camp. Is it because they're not interested in math? Or because they're not interested in camp? LOL.</p>
<p>What interesteddad is saying about chances for admissions really would help out, because if an admission rate overall is 20%, and then one subtracts for various categories with higher rates of admission, then a student may be in a pool with only a 5-10% admission rate, and very well may decide it is not worth the admission fee. One only needs to look at the grids that were displayed during the U-Michigan trial to see the large discrepancies involved. It would be so helpful to have this data available for each school. </p>
<p>The other thing to consider from the other side of admissions, if one is in a favored category, is the graduation rate of various groups, once accepted. The graduation rates by groupings would be helpful in making choices, and it would seem that the colleges need to make their applicants aware of these, as do the HS GCs.</p>
<p>From the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education:</p>
<p>"Far more disturbing is the poor black student graduation rate at the academically selective University of Michigan. This is a huge state university of 40,000 students. And its performance is a national bellwether. Only 64 percent of entering students at the University of Michigan go on to graduate. (Note: this is 2004 data and 87% of white students graduated.) Each year there are 350 or more black freshmen who enroll at the university."</p>
<p>The data from the article in the above journal is very revealing. There begins to be a 5% discrepancy in graduation rates (as of 2004) between blacks and whites in schools such as Princeton and Claremont-McKenna, going to 16% discrepancy in graduation rates at UCLA and Cal Tech, 18% at Berkeley, and 23% at U-Michigan. It is painful to think of what happens to the 20% of blacks who do not graduate MIT (as opposed to the 6 % of whites) and the 30% of blacks who do not graduate UCLA (as opposed to the 14% of whites). What is the data for other groups? Wouldn't students of various backgrounds like to know this, prior to even applying? Is the higher admissions rate for students who then may not graduate only an admissions game, masking the reality of what is best for the students? </p>
<p>Link to above cited article with data:
<a href="http://www.jbhe.com/features/45_student_grad_rates.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.jbhe.com/features/45_student_grad_rates.html</a></p>
<p>I like how Brown does it. If you are not in the top 5% of your class, good luck.</p>
<p>Good to see that there is complete agreement on this topic! </p>
<p>I-dad, apologies for not appreciating that your initial post was intended to be generic. I did not prep for a critical reading section...I just went in and took the SAT's....</p>
<p>I am completely with Blossom as she reiterates the meaning and utility of statistics as a solution to the 'pressure to get into elite colleges' dilemma. For any given kid the chances they will get in are either 100% or 0% and the fine shades of gray in between 12 and 18% or whatever are not sufficient in many cases to make it easier to sleep at night. </p>
<p>The solution is not more numbers and statistics, the solution is more common sense. I lived 11 years of my life immersed in the HYPMSetc world and now 13 years in an entirely different world where almost no problems are being solved, no children being taught, no fortunes being made and no lives being saved by anyone who went to any of those schools when they were 18 years old...</p>
<p>Neither necessary nor sufficient - I think that is the way to view it all-</p>