<p>
</p>
<p>Well, if MIT felt their students weren’t ready for their firehose, that they had fallen so under the spell of holistic that they didn’t get The Very Brightest that were worthy of their offerings, then they’d change their admissions criteria, no? Or do you think the bright people at MIT are somehow deliberately subverting their own institutional desires?</p>
<p>Burnt pie essay for MIT: </p>
<p>I set the oven to 400 F and left a frozen apple pie in the oven for 50 minutes and 20 seconds. Sadly, the pie burned. I immediately turned my attention to solving the heat diffusion equation for a pie of 27 cm in diameter and 5 cm in height, at an initial temperature of 10 F, when placed in an oven 50 cm by 60 cm by 50 cm at a temperature of T. I modeled the heat capacity as uniform throughout the pie, equal to the heat capacity of water (perhaps that was an error?), and used the NIST values for the heat capacity of air at various T values, correcting for the relative humidity. I calibrated the oven settings using a separate cooking thermometer. Also, I cooked an experimental pie in order to determine the weight loss due to evaporation, so that I could correct for the enthalpy change due to vaporization of some of the water content of the pie. I experimented with Jonathan vs. Newton Pippin vs. Gala apples, to see whether the difference was significant. I incorporated the Arrhenius-law dependence of rate constants on temperature into the analysis, to estimate carmelization rates at various temperatures near 400 F. Ultimately, I concluded that I should have baked the pie for 48 minutes and 10 seconds at 350 F. Of course, this assumes that the door of the oven is never opened during baking, and that the oven light is off at all times. Next, I hope to determine the role of the reflectivity of the foil used to cover the crust at the edges, to prevent excessive browning. Oh, I just realized that I neglected the fact that the oven is not an adiabatic container! </p>
<p>So, luckily for me, I applied to college quite a few years ago!</p>
<p>But this returns to my point: science [generally] is not about us, nor about self-reflection. If anything, it requires reflection about nature, more than a focus on our own personal qualities.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For all the gnashing and wailing about how Americans Need More Math & Science, I submit this proves unequivocaly that we need more humanities. Because this is, at the core, about the human condition and what lessons in self-examination a young person is willing to own up to. And this is just as important in the final analysis – if not more – than how well they can solve a differential equation. And it’s really, really disheartening to see that some don’t get it, that it’s dismissed with a “well, science is about nature and observation.”</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, from conversations with several MIT faculty members in my field, I know that they are seriously concerned about the quality of the graduate students they admit, and that the faculty members play a role in the selection of the graduate students for their department. The quality of the grad students has a significant impact on the research that the faculty members can do. While undergrad students do participate in research, it is rare for them to have much impact on the accomplishments of the faculty members.</p>
<p>Several faculty members at top institutions have expressed concern about the quality of a relatively small fraction of their students, say 10 to 15%. The students in question are not under-represented minority students, and not women–at least not disproportionately so. However, I’ve yet to find an MIT faculty member who feels that he has the time to become involved in undergrad admissions in any way–not even to the extent of having a discussion with the admissions office about their philosophy, and certainly not when it comes to reading and discussing actual files.</p>
<p>Well, if it’s a “problem” big enough to complain about and they don’t do anything about trying to understand or solve it, then I guess they really aren’t as smart as they think they are. Or maybe it’s not a real problem, and they’re just doing the usual complaining that we all do about people who work for us.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, #1045, can’t agree with part of your argument. I recognize the vital importance of the humanities. I think self-reflection can be valuable for a person, in improving his/her overall contribution to human welfare.</p>
<p>Certainly, study of philosophy, art, history, and poetry can be sources of inspiration in science. But when it comes right down to it, if the solution of a scientific problem requires solving a differential equation, then only a person who can somehow get the solution of the differential equation is going to solve that problem. (I don’t mean a problem on a problem set; I mean a real problem.)</p>
<h1>1047–I think they are just hyper-busy and their priorities lie elsewhere, mainly with their research.</h1>
<p>Also–aack!–no mention of the error estimates in the burnt pie essay in my post #1044. Clearly not MIT material!</p>
<p>Can’t resist–the Harvard version of the burnt pie story: "Much like Alfred the Great, I . . . "</p>
<p>The essay, QM, is good. I laughed when you swung into the STEM-head examination and it shows a great deal about your curiosity- and maybe a knuckle-headed focus. It is an inventory of what you did, could stand some reflection, but it’s fun. </p>
<p>My experience is that only one or two STEM faculty will have a time relationship with admisisons. Usually these can do a focused STEM review, but are also able to judge personal qualities and potential. I’ve seen them reject a kid for slightly lower performance and experiences-- and okay a kid for some strong evidence of motivation and proven drive. The trade-off is admissions doesn’t run all STEM apps through them; only where they need a specialist read. [Not at MIT, elsewhere.]</p>
<p>Btw, the purpose of an MIT education is not solely the solution of scientific problems. That’s one point here. It’s a college experience and, like many top schools, pre-professional ed is only one aspect. The focuson the experts at solving intense problems is work world, maybe grad school. We’ve been talking UG.</p>
<p>I must not be cut out for Ivy admissions, since I doubt I could write a compelling essay about failing at something trivial to me, like baking a pie. I could perhaps write an entertaining, humorous essay, but given that pie making success is not even remotely linked to my self esteem or significant life goals, what could such an essay possibly reveal about my character or inner self? Furthermore, do schools really want to attract people who are fat and clumsy but lack the self awareness to realize that they are fat and clumsy? Does it make good sense to try out for the school gymnastics team if I am fat and clumsy, or does it rather reveal a lack of wisdom and practicality, not to mention a lack of consideration for the coach whose time I will waste by trying out? I can’t imagine wanting to emulate the sort of person who can’t sing to save her life but believes she’s fantastic enough to be on American Idol.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>One has to distinguish between those who teach there and those who work in the admissions office. I imagine an admissions office can become its own fiefdom with long time employees who gained influence under the previous, much-maligned administration. Sometimes such people take offense to being second-guessed, and others are likely to strive to “keep the peace” until such time as the damage becomes significant enough to overcome inertia. </p>
<p>It seems to me that there are an exceptional number of comments posted here about various students in recent years who logically should have been accepted and were not. Perhaps we are all the exceptions in the nation, but if we are instead the tip of the iceberg, then problems lie ahead.</p>
<p>Companies like RIM felt untouchable just a few years ago, basking in the glow of their success, and now they are but shadows of their former selves. Educational institutions can fall in esteem, too, although it takes longer, because reputation tends to linger.</p>
<p>QM: few questions for you- how does MIT know if one took SAT as a seventh grader? . Will MIT know automatically from collegeboard?
Can you please explain
When you say that 7 th graders with certain stat is rejected ?
I think finally it comes down to too few seats and too many applicants…</p>
<p>Among those we know who applied in the last few years, only a “science-y” boy and one girl were accepted. All of the strong math (olympiad qualifiers) - were rejected. My guess is that most of them had strong applications, because they ended up at top schools. When he applied, my son was taking high level math classes at an Ivy, played two sports, had a strong interest in the classics - I’d call him exceptionally well-rounded for a math guy. The opinion around here is that MIT is more interested in science students.</p>
<p>Our local high school has an excellent admission record with MIT, ~25% acceptance rate over the last five years. The school, however, while highly “ranked”, has no tradition in science or math competition. And the accepted students are typically well-rounded, top 5% (but not THE TOP) in their classes. Those actually chose to attend have all pursued engineering at MIT.</p>
<p>
I think there’s a misunderstanding of the math here. First, remember that a 30% admission rate of legacies doesn’t mean that Harvard has 30% legacies–it has more like 10 or 12 percent. Second, a higher rate for legacies vs. all applicants doesn’t mean that the school prefers these students because they are legacies–it may also mean that legacies, as a group, differ from all applicants in a way that improves their chances–for example, their grades, scores, and other achievements may be above average. I suspect if you compared, say, applicants coming from selective private high schools and public magnet programs with all applicants, you’d find a similar (or probably greater) disparity. Would you interpret that as a preference for those students because they come from those schools? It’s possible, of course. (It also occurs to me that we never hear about the admission rates for URM vs. non-URM applicants. I wonder what that might suggest.)</p>
<p>Put another way, what is the “right” admission rate for Harvard legacies? And how would you determine that?</p>
<p>If you are the sort of person for whom academic achievement comes easily, which I assume is the case for most people who apply to MIT much less get in, what would be most interesting to me as a reader (and evaluator) is how you dealt with failure in an endeavor where you are not likely to come out on top. Why? Well, because maybe I want students with high-powered intellect as well as the awareness that success as a human being depends on more than academic achievement. </p>
<p>People are picking deliberately trivial examples to make a point: “What difference does a burnt apple pie make to my success as a physicist?” To that I would say, first, that a failed apple pie is nontrivial. 
In all seriousness, though, reflections on failure allow someone who is an academic star to show a little humility. It could also show that, notwithstanding your academic ambitions, there are other things capable of igniting your passion. </p>
<p>I had a great conversation a few weeks ago with a delightful man, a young father who happens to be a Harvard grad (some kind of “laude”) with a PhD in physics from the U. of C. He was telling me about his struggles to make chocolate dinosaurs on a stick as party favors for his three-year-old’s birthday. It was difficult. He failed a few times. The way he described the failure was hilarious and heartwarming. If I’m on the adcom at MIT and I’ve got boatloads of academically accomplished people to choose from (and we all know they do) why wouldn’t I want a few people who also get excited about chocolate dinosaur pops? Or apple pies? Or any other “trivial” endeavor?</p>
<p>I started thinking about how many students in my area have been accepted to MIT, and I can think of startlingly few, so I checked the MIT website to see the distribution of students by state. [Enrollment</a> Statistics: MIT Office of the Registrar](<a href=“Statistics & Reports | MIT Registrar”>Statistics & Reports | MIT Registrar)
Interestingly, only 5 currently attend from my state (RI).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Right. But MIT already can get a sense as to whether you have the brainpower to solve that problem by the other measures – GPA, SAT scores, math / science competitions, and the like. </p>
<p>What they are asking you to do is talk about yourself as a fully rounded human being. And you keep going back to “but that aspect of a fully rounded human being isn’t relevant to the ability to solve a scientific problem.” Which I think is a very reductionist, linear and literal way of thinking about life. </p>
<p>Why do you think MIT asks the question “tell me about a time when you tried and failed” rather than “tell me about an academic challenge where you didn’t take first prize, or a mathematical or science construct that you had trouble grasping”?</p>
<p>RI residents, the new Asians. CC really needs new material for those discrimination threads. Can’t wait for next April!</p>
<p>If it’s true that MIT is admitting Rhode Island applicants at a lower rate than other states, what are we to make of it? Possibilities:
<p>I think these shed some light on the other discussions as well.</p>