<p>I really need to apologize publicly to LoremIpsum. Going back and re-reading the posts I remembered here, I realize that I missed the nuance that at different times he was writing about two different sons, and that the son who started college at 14 and dropped out was not the same son as the one who also left high school early and “should” have been accepted at MIT. It was because I conflated the two sons that I said it would have been surprising if MIT had accepted him (14, and in all likelihood pretty clearly not mature enough for college even if intellectually capable).</p>
<p>No need for an apology, JHS! You are certainly correct that my first son, at age 14, was not mature enough for MIT (or for commuting to Northwestern), which is why we sent him to the state university nearby. At that time, he was going through his rebellious phase, but he eventually managed to find his own path. That’s another point that I’d like our silent readers to remember when they get frustrated with their teens: it almost always works out in the longer run!</p>
<p>MIT also does have a couple of feeder summer programs - RSI and MITES. Despite what everyone’s opinion is about who should be automatically accepted at MIT, I believe in the eyes of MIT, only participants in these two programs have a very high shot at getting admitted. RSI attendees seem to be so selective that they have a clear shot at Harvard as well (17 out of 20 early applicants to Harvard got admitted last December).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you are referring to the following question (found in an MIT CC thread)</p>
<p>‘Tell us about an experience which, at the time, really felt like “the end of the world” – but had it not happened, you would not be who you are today. Describe the process through which you discovered value in the negative.’</p>
<p>I agree it is baloney. Two more problems with holistic admissions are that it can involve an invasion of privacy and reward drama queens.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Iglooo, in this one post you have (perhaps unwittingly) summed up the entire debate on this thread.</p>
<p>First, there is nothing wrong with parents being naive about college admissions as long as they don’t complain about the results. Reread the OP’s post. Not to pick on her, but really–a 2020 for Middlebury and Dartmouth? And NO safeties? And somehow the guidance counselor is to blame?</p>
<p>Parents believing their kids belong in top institutions “just because” is not a reason to criticize the admissions process when it doesn’t work out. The problem these people are making is believing there is a very small and finite number of acceptable college choices for their offspring. As many others have said, there simply are not enough spots for all the very special kids out there–either the ones who actually do have tremendous intellectual gifts or those whose parents refuse to take an objective look at their kids’ skills and chances.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>One issue that hasn’t been addressed is that often these kids are not self-promoters and are not particularly impressed with their own accomplishments – once it’s done, it was “easy” and not worth mentioning. I had a bit of a struggle to get my son to write and talk about his challenges and accomplishments in his essays and interviews.</p>
<p>The holistic admissions process favors extroverts (and the vast majority of the gifted are introverts). It also favors those who do things for the external reward, the pat on the back from a teacher or other adult which confirms the value of what they accomplished. Those motivated by internal rewards – learning something interesting or taking on a challenge – are often not the best spokespeople for their own interests when it comes to college admission and, perhaps, landing a first job.</p>
<p>Do you really feel, Beliavsky, that such a prompt could not elicit a heartfelt, thoughtful, perceptive essay? The ability to reflect on life’s ups and downs with maturity, perspective and a sense of humor is a rather valuable skill. I know a lot of teenagers who can’t do it. Those are the drama queens, if you ask me. I don’t necessarily think that a good essay of this sort should catapult someone with a 690 SAT-M score over a Siemens Award winner with an 800 SAT-M who wrote a mediocre essay. But if I were an adcom member looking at two more or less equally qualified candidates, I don’t see why it would be such a bad thing if a better-written essay tipped the balance for one candidate.</p>
<p>I agree strongly with post #1579 by LoremIpsum. Until a family member has gone through today’s process, it’s possible to imagine that those declined are exclusively mis-anthropic nerds (who probably kick all small animals they pass), or robotic over-achievers who have been programmed and shepherded by helicopter parents. It’s very easy to imagine that they just didn’t “get it” and should have shown better what would make them great contributors to the college community. Since “baloney” has already been taken, can I call dibs on “hogwash?”</p>
<p>If all of the outcomes in one’s family and set of acquaintances were happy or at least predictable, then it’s easy to continue to hold those views.</p>
<p>I am not a believer in serendipity, really (aside from Pasteur’s “Chance favors the prepared mind,” which I do believe); nor do I believe that the admissions personnel necessarily apprehend an applicant’s level of “fit” better than the applicant does.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I am very glad that LoremIpsum’s son is enjoying Brown, and I think that it is many times the case that a top student winds up being better educated at the eventual university of choice (compared to the apparent preference in early fall of the final year of high school). Just not always.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>With all due respect, this is all just speculation. Maybe they had just admitted a bunch of kids from Illinois and they didn’t want another. Maybe there was another institutional need going on. Maybe someone else’s essay sparked a complete “wow.” I think it’s unfair to suggest why it is that LI’s kid, who certainly had the appropriate qualifications, didn’t get in - since none of us were there and none of us know.</p>
<p>I think “red flag” may be the wrong term for JHS’ third reason for a rejection. It suggests something troubling. Perhaps a better way to put it would be “something about this specific student that MIT did not like.” This could be something pretty subjective–which would explain why such students often gain admission to other ridiculously selective schools. But perhaps there was something in the essay for MIT that rubbed the adcoms the wrong way. I’ve mentioned in other threads an NPR report about college admissions in which an adcom from a selective school explained that they rejected a kid because he said in his essay that he had never really been interested in any subject until he discovered music. The adcom said they wanted students who were interested in lots of subjects. I thought this was crazy–that 17-year-old, on a different day, might have written that he has wide interests, but that music is his passion.</p>
<p>Indeed, the comment that rubs the adcoms the wrong way might be in the recommendation, so the student might not even know about it.</p>
<p>
- So true.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sure it’s possible to imagine this, but when we’re talking about places with 5% admission rates and a very highly qualified applicant pool, such an explanation is the zebra explanation – and the horse explanation is simply - “there are more qualified applicants than we have seats for.” I’m sorry that people go to the zebra explanation, but the horse explanation is going to cover the vast majority of it.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, #1589, yes, it is pure speculation on my part. On the other hand, I don’t view it as unfair for me to speculate in that way, because if my intuition is correct, I regard LI’s son’s “failure”/declination more as a “badge of honor” than as a short-coming. Of course, LI is the arbiter on that particular point.</p>
<p>The “not enough room” explanation works perfectly fine for me for the majority of applicants that the top places cannot take. Where it doesn’t work is for an applicant who would in fact be in the top 5% or so of the students who enroll (not the top 5% of the applicants, the top 5% out of the 7 or 8% who are admitted). Sorry to keep saying the same thing, but I can’t seem to get it acknowledged.</p>
<p>I really want those parents to know that kids get rejected just because there is not enough room for everyone, not because their kid’s application, letter of recommendations, or personality was somehow defective</p>
<p>I am sorry, but in farness to the silent readers, in fairness to all hs kids out there who are bright enough and accomplished enough for a highly or most selective college:</p>
<p>It can very darned well be the effect of application you completed and approved enough to submit. It is very important that kids understand that that the app is, in effect, a test of your fit, the one vehicle.</p>
<p>This is not to crush kids; it is to say, smell the coffee. Do your best, get a savvy adult to look over it, choose to show your personal strengths that are relevant to college and show your college readiness (that includes but is more than academic strengths.) </p>
<p>There are how many components? Short and long essays, a string of addl questions, possibly a supp, what ECs you were involved with and how you describe them and the true level of responsibility that is meaningful to adcoms- and LoRs. In addn to transcript. Attack this as wisely as a competition you care about. Don’t assume that your standing in your hs or town or among a nation of test takers makes you a natural. There will be thousands of kids also considered.</p>
<p>Sorry, but it all matters. The functional goal is to get to the finalist pool. After that, you may lose on seats in general or seats in your major, geo diversity, whatever. You won’t know. But, send out your best work.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I submit that it’s possible to imagine that MIT or any other selective school may have its reasons for not admitting an exceptionally talented young person without ever resorting to this sort of base stereotyping.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would love to have a bumper sticker for my car that reads: “Rejected by MIT. Their loss.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No argument from me, LF. Do your best, but don’t take it personally if you’re not admitted.</p>
<h1>1594</h1>
<p>yes - It is about the students who probably should be auto-admits. Why aren’t they? It is NOT something about their character, NOT the application, NOT the letters of recommendation - they are getting into equally competitive schools.</p>
<p>We are talking the “super-geniuses” - right?</p>
<p>absweetmarie: although you immediately recognize this as base stereotyping, it is common language on this board to describe the “super-geniuses” :(</p>
<p>I well remember a CC poster whose highly qualified D was waitlisted and then rejected by 2 colleges she was an incredible candidate for and <em>should</em> have been accepted by. Excuse the grammar. The only possibilities I could think of was that 1) she was a girl from the midwest and these colleges get too many of these applying, or 2) the school she was <em>meant</em> to attend, a girl’s school in the NE, was one she would not have attended if either of the others had accepted her. I guess I could add 3) they needed a tuba player or something.</p>
<p>We’re going in circles.
On one hand, no one size fits all. The kid there wasn’t space for at MIT may, sure, get into H. Or other good schools. But, the kid who has app or LoR problems, who makes a string of hs-level mistaken assumptions, WON’T be the kid accepted by H or other top schools.</p>
<p>This is just a matter of playng your best hand. Not assuming.</p>