<p>
My older son in on track to fulfill the “career plans” of his fifth grade self - as stated in his yearbook. 
(My younger son left that blank in the yearbook and at 17 didn’t have a clue what he’d do, though he’s so far on track for what seemed like a good idea at 18.)</p>
<p>STEM crop? Overtaking? Frankly, I might be inclined to see someone as “neurotic/whiny/easily discouraged” if they continue on about a rejection beyond a normal disappointment phase.</p>
<p>
But apparently you believe it would be rational to completely give up on math if they were rejected by one small admissions committee. It is highly possible some of these people never even applied to MIT.</p>
<p>I really can’t fathom the situation you are describing. To me, for a student of the caliber you are describing, with the type of zeal for math and science that would demand, this would be tantamount to changing sexual orientation after being turned down for a date. I don’t think it could be done.</p>
<p>It might be different if their passion was recreation studies.Practicality might be necessary. But physics is a pretty employable degree even if you can’t make it to the rarefied heghts. Especially if you are a genius of some sort.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I totally I agree. The football analogy did not work for me at all. A closer version to the concern about a MIT rejection would be something like this. </p>
<p>A football player has always been amazing and wants to play D1 at Oregon (MIT) and then play in the NFL. Oregon does not recruit this player but he receives offers from Alabama, Notre Dame, Texas, and Stanford (Harvard, Princeton, UChicago, and well Stanford). In response to this scenario the player loses all confidence and drops playing football. Really? That’s the concern?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ok, so are you saying then, that getting into MIT is more valuable and fateful than actually attending MIT? That once these 75 future profs got into MIT, their math genius was blessed and they were then free to attend anywhere and which apparently more than 90% chose to do, and thereby they obtained math credentials at lesser institutions but were yet significant enough to teach at MIT, and then thereby gave MIT the cred to annoint other math geniuses who do not actually need to attend MIT? Now this discussion is getting surreal.</p>
<p>I don’t get your argument, 3togo. The University of Oregon has 25 scholarships to offer in football. That’s about like the number of places at Olin or Deep Springs–where I don’t think anyone draws any conclusions from a rejection. It’s about 10% of the places at Caltech, which is quite small.</p>
<p>Did no one else think at the high-school to college transition that they were entering a more challenging phase of academic work? No other scientists, mathematicians, or engineers? Did no one else wonder whether they could get an academic research position, and try to estimate the likelihood based on the known numbers? How about med school? (Many more places there, I think.)</p>
<p>I think collegealum314 persuaded the people he knew not to take the rejection too hard. However, they were real people to the best of my belief, and they did apparently take it hard. Posts above seemed to be suggesting that something was wrong with them. I will generally leap to the defense of people I think are being unfairly criticized, even if I don’t know them and they probably aren’t on the forum, either.</p>
<p>No, Bay, the other places are not lesser than MIT in math. The MIT acceptance is no guarantee of future employment possibilities–any more than the football players who get Div I-A scholarships will be drafted by an NFL team.</p>
<p>On the other hand, not being accepted to MIT, if the student thought that it was based on an accurate assessment of scientific potential, could logically be interpreted as a rather negative sign for an academic career choice. Thanks to CC, we now know that is not how MIT admits.</p>
<p>The amount of information on CC about admissions outcomes is extremely valuable to students in high schools where relatively few people go to schools out-of-state (and also valuable to their parents). The information available now is much better than when I started posting. If you and your children already knew “all this stuff,” then you didn’t need CC as much as some.</p>
<p>Regarding the football analogy, you have to remember that the spots are position-specific, and the team doesn’t recruit a replacement for each position every year because you have the recruits from previous years still playing. So the odds are worse than they appear.</p>
<p>Secondly, in sports like football there is a great deal of overlap in the recruiting lists precisely because, unlike with regular applicants, the vast majority of schools aren’t selecting for anything except athletic ability relevant to football and half a brain. Even Harvard isn’t going to care one whit if super star Joe Football ever fed the homeless or was a member of the military history club. If the kid is talented and smart enough to be on Notre Dame and Stanford’s list, you can be sure he’s on Oregon’s and everyone else’s list too, though perhaps not in the same order of priority because of who the various coaches already have or don’t have at that position. Oregon might already have an excellent QB, but if an Andrew Luck recruit is out there, they’ll still try get him, if only to keep opponents like Stanford and Notre Dame from getting him.</p>
<p>I think QM is suggesting that similarly, the superior math ability demonstrated by these kids is special enough that it doesn’t matter if the applicant has all the other bells and whistles too. All the schools should want them, but ESPECIALLY a school like MIT should have them on their priority list.</p>
<p>
I was a reasonably good student but not one of these super-geniuses. So I can’t relate fully. But I did not get into my first choice school, and I was mightily bummed out about it. And this was way back when - when nobody told us anything about admissions. When if you were NMS you started getting tons of mail, and calls from local alums, and none of your friends were getting these things, and that along with how brainy everybody told you you were made it quite a shock to get a thin envelope. But like kids have always done and still do I shepherded on. The only change in plans was that I would be driving to school with my surfboard rather than flying to school with some long underwear.</p>
<p>WRT med school, many more students always give it a shot than actually have a chance. But they try. And many of the doctors I know were rejected and reappllied several times. And after a few failures, some took their UG degrees and became PAs, or nurses, or whatever. Because they wanted to work in medicine, and couldn’t see themselves doing anything else.To me that’s the rational, mature, well-adjusted thing to do.</p>
<p>QM, if I actually believed there were any significant number of children who would react in the way you describe I would be rather alarmed. I wouldn’t be worried about them changing career plans, I’d be worried about them falling into depression, turning to risky behavior, or worse. Fortunately, I don’t really believe many kids are like that, and those who are have deeper issues.</p>
<p>
You just made my argument again. A budding scientist is turned down by MIT but accepted by Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, and Notre Dame … and the MIT rejection totally trumps the other 4 positive results and kills the budding scientist career? Really. I’m not counting slots but focusing on how the MIT result trumps all results from other equally valid feeder programs for the long term goal.</p>
<p>QM-- In the spring, when the kids come on here and are crushed, and even when they say some relatively unattractive things about those who were accepted, I have a lot of (short term, a month or so) sympathy for them. </p>
<p>But, this is a discussion mostly between adults. And, as adults, I think we know that a true genius is not going to be “locked out” of a research career simply because he or she attended Carnegie Mellon or Stanford or even UMich instead of MIT. If their parents and future professors do not assist them in understanding this, then the likelihood that they will make a significant contribution to the field is pretty low, anyway. </p>
<p>But, I do feel badly for the kids during what I consider to be a reasonable adjustment phase, including the stages leading to acceptance.</p>
<p>If a math genius thinks his math life is over because of an MIT rejection, direct him to Jeremy Lin.</p>
<p>I suggest we take all our math prowess and try to predict what the last post number will be on this thread. We can analyze poster frequency and intervals, factor in privilege, factor out flip-flopping and subtract points for x-posting. Closest without going over- will be designated winner.</p>
<p>Re 3togo, #1930: Well, I don’t actually know any such person, but collegealum314 (who will probably be back around here in a while) said that he did. One student admitted to Harvard but rejected by MIT asked on the MIT forum “Is something wrong with me?” You can read this a hundred ways, but I read it as a plaintive, but sincere question.</p>
<p>I have to assume that some other people in fields where the odds are long and anyone without supreme self-confidence will wonder whether he/she can make it understand the point I am making and don’t think I am completely out in left field or into surrealism. I didn’t respond to any of my personal set-backs by giving up. On the other hand, if the set-backs had occurred at certain critical points, instead of when they did, I can’t glibly say that nothing would have deterred me (despite my deep love for my field). Also, I can’t say that I never once thought of changing to something easier–haven’t thought that for about 15 years, but then I’m pretty “long in the tooth” at this point.</p>
<p>Lol, lookingforward #1932, I am probably good to continue for another 25 years, or until MIT changes its philosophy, whichever comes first.</p>
<p>
Infinity minus one.</p>
<p>I feel we should not be entering into imaginary numbers, at this point, Lookingforward. ;)</p>
<p>QM… a part of success in any of these fields IS not giving up. But, I’m sure you already know that.</p>
<p>TheGFG, I believe you have kids in athletics so you have knowledge in that area. I do think that all things being equal, even in athletics, other things can come into play. Sometimes coaches will prefer a kid who is strong in character, teamwork, humility, can be developed, has supportive parents,etc.over a kid who may have more raw talent but is not as strong in other areas. Kids who don’t make it into the very top programs but are determined to play, usually find something, even if it is not at the level they dreamed of( a lesser program, club,etc.).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>MIT has a question on their app that asks how you deal with failure. Sounds like your hypothetical kid would say," I’d throw up my hands and quit because I’m obviously not the best." what makes you think MIT couldn’t read between the lines and steer very clear of a kid like that.</p>
<p>Someone said that kids should be able to participate in USAMO no matter what because all the info is on the web, well… MIT admissions policy is on the web also, junior doesn’t need cc for this information. So I would say sour grapes.</p>
<p>
I certainly understand. People without the desire or ability rightfully and rationally drop out of engineering or pre-med programs all the time. But the problem is that you are talking about giving up before even really trying, because of a single admission decision. As far as struggling and fighting the temptation to switch to something less difficult, I assumed the premise was that you are talking about students who are so superior in ability and intellect that the work itself should not present a tremendous obstacle under any circumstances.</p>
<p>Both Quantmech and I were admitted to MIT. I went. She didn’t.
Sour grapes has nothing to do with it.</p>