<p>I agree with you, QuantMech, that it seems improbable that someone with superstar credentials would be rejected by MIT for some strong negative reason and be accepted by Harvard. But you have exactly one case of that, as far as I can tell. A few years ago, there was a similarly impassioned thread about a kid rejected by Harvard and accepted by MIT, and the simplest explanation was that the kid’s (many) friends at Harvard procured his rejection at his request so that the kid’s mother would not force him to go to Harvard rather than MIT, where he wanted to go. So it’s not even necessarily something negative. </p>
<p>It could be that Harvard and MIT have different risk profiles and tolerances for academic superstars, and in a close case – “close” as defined for academic superstars – might reach different conclusions. For example, my personal experiences lead me to suspect that Harvard is somewhat more likely than MIT to admit wildly arrogant jerks. And that could be especially true for students with a clear interest in engineering, where Harvard is clearly weaker than MIT and may see fewer, less strong applicants. Harvard may be willing to take a risk to bring in its best academic engineering prospect that MIT would not take to bring in its third- or tenth-best prospect.</p>
<p>Gourmetmom, how many kids from other RI hs? Say, last 4 years? This is a case where your GC should be in contact with MIT, should understand why they have gone so long.</p>
<p>Myth- you don’t know that they were capricious. You only know they didn’t make sense to you.</p>
<p>Have to say: the sting of my not getting into my dream Ivy did not abate until I realized I had not even applied, had not visited, had not even requested info. Like a freaking light bulb, after years of wondering. That’s the school I now work for- and everyone just assumes I went there. Ironic.</p>
<p>There was a young African-American woman from my son’s high school who was admitted to MIT last year with a math score in the 500’s. Total SAT score less than 1600. I suppose “institutional needs” or “fit” is one term one could use to describe this particular outcome. I know that most of her classmates found it to be extremely surprising. (Only admit from that high school for several years).</p>
<p>Consider the source. A student poster, with little to no life experience. Look, isn’t it abundantly clear that MIT and other elite schools turn down plenty of kids that they would love to have, if they had twice or three times the seats that they currently have? Being rejected from MIT isn’t being “rejected,” unless the rejection letter was accompanied by a “and go to hell and take your little dog too!” handwritten note. It’s not being accepted. That’s a big, big difference.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then such people would have been best served by poking their heads out of their labs and physics books every once in a while and learning some emotional intelligence. I repeat - at schools with 5% acceptance rates, where the applicant pool is extraordinarily qualified, what makes you think that being at the top of the applicant pool means ANYTHING? A lot of bright kids seem awfully stupid here. There are no guarantees anytime you apply to a school of this caliber, and if you don’t walk in fully knowing that and taking every acceptance as a gift as opposed to a confirmation of your birthright, you have no business applying.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>One of the things that gets me about the “but last year they took X kids from my high school and this year they took fewer / none” is that it presupposes the assumption that colleges “owe” high schools X number of admits. If I were an adcom, I most certainly would look towards high schools / regions that had never been represented before and favor them, as opposed to the 20th kid from TJ or New Trier. If that upsets the feelings of those in NoVA or Wilmette – well, too bad, so sad, they’ll still keep applying anyway, but part of an elite college’s institutional mission is to expand reach. Indeed, the 20th kid from TJ or New Trier is indeed a variant of the “textureless math grind” – too much of the same.</p>
<p>I don’t think that MIT cares about interest. I think there aren’t enough spaces. I thought my kid had about a 25% chance of getting into MIT (which is of course a 75% chance of NOT getting in) and at least a 50% chance of getting into Harvard based on Naviance and the admissions statistics the schools provided. My kid got into Harvard. We just thought it funny that being techie was more appealing to Harvard that year than MIT. We had always figured he’d go to “that school down the river” rather than our Alma Mater. In the end he struck out on his own, and it worked out fine, maybe even better than his original plan.</p>
<p>That said, it was pretty clear that at that time MIT did seem to be preferring more well-rounded applicants, while Harvard seemed to favor the well-rounded class approach.</p>
<p>For what it’s worth, looking at Naviance, I’d say the odds of being accepted to MIT from our high school are still better at Harvard than at MIT - no idea why.</p>
<p>Oh please, this isn’t 1950 and this isn’t St. Grottlesex. One wonders why said great psychologist didn’t self-reflect on why he was putting so much weight on one school when he was attending another great one.</p>
<p>It’s troublesome that the other students even knew what her SAT score was in the first place. I submit that’s the greater problem. I for one would not have tolerated my kids gossiping about why their classmates did or didn’t get in elsewhere; it goes against the value of worrying about what you can control and focusing on yourself.</p>
<p>I think the “sting” is probably accentuated for kids who have a lot of adults around them telling them that they will “get in everywhere,” etc. Some of these kids may be the best student produced in their high school ever, and many adults will have unreasonable expectations, which they will convey to the kids. They can look on the schools’ websites, and see that students with lower grades and scores are admitted every year–so surely this kid will get in. These same schools are also producing athletes that “everybody” thinks will become pro players, and kids who will “surely” end up on Broadway, etc. People are just unrealistic about these things. I can’t blame the kids too much.</p>
<p>Over the years I’ve been reading variations on this thread, I’ve counted at least four moms who report their kids denied at MIT and accepted at Harvard. This is the internet. It may not be true. They rarely describe their children as superstars but when I read through their posts I get a pretty good sense that they are. Most parents here do a pretty good job of hiding their kids identity. Again - this is the internet - who knows?</p>
<p>Hunt- and a lot of high school (and some college) kids telling them on CC that they are a sure thing. </p>
<p>I do have a young friend rejcted by MIT but now a senior at H. Hs val, braniac. Her four years at the latter have been extraordinary- with a breadth of experiences that, frankly, would not have been easily acquired at MIT. Includes a range of school activities, humanitarian work, on top of superior academic experiences. She’s still pre-med in intentions, but chose a humanities major- really a great experience for her. She will go far.</p>
<p>“I most certainly would look towards high schools / regions that had never been represented before and favor them, as opposed to the 20th kid from TJ or New Trier.”</p>
<p>MIT is way past 20 for TJHST - They accepted 23 in 2010. :p</p>
<p>I find the acceptance history at a high school usually sets expectation for future admissions unless the school rank has dropped off the cliff. The number of acceptances do seem to drop as people stop attending specific colleges from a particular high school after being accepted. It has worked for my kid for 2012. Only surprise was that Columbia accepted 7 kids and only one went which probably means they will accept fewer kids in 2013.</p>
<p>Like it or not, students do talk/gossip to each other about (their own and others’) admissions decisions, SAT scores, etc. However, as is usually the case, the accuracy declines the further away one gets from the authoritative source. I.e. perhaps the actual SAT math score of 770 was passed along as 570, and the actual SAT total score of 1530 was really out of 1600, not 2400, but was passed along as being out of 2400.</p>
<p>I take a different view. I think that if a kid is able to put together what is a reasonable in-the-ballpark app for a top college – then that kid has demonstrated all he needs to demonstrate to do well, regardless of where he is ultimately accepted. That’s the achievement to be proud of – that you could throw your hat reasonably in the ring for this caliber of school – not whether or not you win that particular lottery or set of lotteries.</p>
<p>So, then, perhaps I should start a thread on how it’s “unfair” that TJ and New Trier block up the spots that really should go to the fresh blood from East Paducah and West Wichita High School. After all, isn’t that a quota of sorts? Funny how that “unfairness” never seems to come up on CC. It’s easy to tell when oxes are being gored!</p>
<p>Similar anecdotes always surface with regularity. Probably only dwarfed by the thousands of stories of athletic scholarships at the Ivies. </p>
<p>Although everything is possible, especially since the published statistics show the numbers for enrolled students (as opposed to admitted students) we are able to positively ascertain the EXTREME rarity of this happening:</p>
<p>2012
[MIT</a> Office of the Provost, Institutional Research](<a href=“MIT Institutional Research”>MIT Institutional Research)
Percent of first-time, first-year (freshman) students with scores in each range:
SAT MATH
700-800 92.3%
600-699 7.7 %
500-599 ZERO</p>
<p>2011
[MIT</a> Office of the Provost, Institutional Research](<a href=“MIT Institutional Research”>MIT Institutional Research)
Percent of first-time, first-year (freshman) students with scores in each range:
SAT MATH
700-800 92.5%
600-699 7.5 %
500-599 ZERO</p>
<p>2010
[MIT</a> Office of the Provost, Institutional Research](<a href=“MIT Institutional Research”>MIT Institutional Research)
Percent of first-time, first-year (freshman) students with scores in each range:
SAT MATH
700-800 87.5%
600-699 12.5 %
500-599 ZERO</p>
<p>I’d say that a percentage of zero of enrolled students with SAT below 600 on the Math portion is a pretty good indication that … few students are admitted at MIT with such low quantitative score.</p>
<p>“So, then, perhaps I should start a thread on how it’s “unfair” that TJ and New Trier block up the spots that really should go to the fresh blood from East Paducah and West Wichita High School. After all, isn’t that a quota of sorts? Funny how that “unfairness” never seems to come up on CC. It’s easy to tell when oxes are being gored!”</p>
<p>I agree. I am shocked that MIT just likes to fill up so many seats from one specialized school. Apparently, they have forgotten to “spread the wealth around”. :D</p>
<p>“Over the years I’ve been reading variations on this thread, I’ve counted at least four moms who report their kids denied at MIT and accepted at Harvard. This is the internet. It may not be true. They rarely describe their children as superstars but when I read through their posts I get a pretty good sense that they are. Most parents here do a pretty good job of hiding their kids identity.”</p>
<p>This worries me a great deal. Harvard is admitting academic stars? Whatever happened to Harvard’s policy of admitting only no good legacies, no good athletes and no good URMs.</p>
<p>Nice to see the discussion round back to the OP’s frustration. I know SO many parents who have the same delusions of their kids’ grandeur. In many cases they have spent the first 17 years of their children’s lives building a case for both their inherent superiority–“my Alex was reading Harry Potter by age 3!” and “Ashley got put in the third grade class that is KNOWN to get all the really smart kids!”–and their potential for even more greatness based on all the support they provide with homework help, tutoring, EC opportunities, and so on. They just assume their children are exactly what top colleges are looking for. This naivet</p>