<p>@geomom, cobrat and a99, I appreciate your real world experiences dealing with the issues being discussed here. I can without reservation accept the stories you are reporting as accurate and true.</p>
<p>Following peeps, I was talking college. Fyi.</p>
<p>99, your state may base gifted on IQ, but there is no universal definition. My understanding is no state uses s single IQ score alone to determine gifted, based on what I read earlier. Can’t link via cell.</p>
<p>“The gifted have special needs” does not translate into “MIT owes them acceptance.”
You can’t always get everything you want in life. Likewise, the brilliant politician-type kid – maybe he is head of Boys Nation or such – is not “owed” acceptance by Yale even if that would be the best place for him to hone his skills. The best comedy writer is not “owed” acceptance by Harvard so he can join the Lampoon. The Olympic swimmer is not “owed” acceptance by Stanford. And so on.</p>
<p>“The Olympic swimmer is not “owed” acceptance by Stanford”</p>
<p>They are not owed but they are auto-admits usually. :D</p>
<p>Fully agree texas. An Andrew Luck type passer isn’t owed anything, but is usually an auto-admit at Stanford. Likewise, being a member of the USA IMO team is usually an auto-admit at least at one or more of the very elite schools recognized for math.</p>
<p>I have to ask Pizza, where do you come up with these phantom assertions? I don’t recall anyone claiming that their child was owed anything. I find it odd that you place quotes around the word “owed””MIT owes…” as if anyone who posted anything here used those specific words\phrases.</p>
<p>Personally, I do believe that a student’s score on the USAMO is infinitely more academically predictive than say how well you dress or interview or carry on a conversation. And no, I am not saying that the highest scorers on these Olympiad level exams are “owed” anything.</p>
<p>Thanks Neuro! That was great! On that note, time to tend to some other matters.</p>
<p>Oh god, neuroticparent! I had a kid many moons ago sing that thing over and over and OVER while I was testing her and it played in my head for DAYS!!! (RIP Shari Lewis.)</p>
<p>Because, peeps, if you read the thread, that is what this thread is about. A disagreement as to whether MIT “owes” auto-admission to certain brilliant students.</p>
<p>Stanford :rolleyes: :p</p>
<p>[Missy</a> Franklin to Don the Blue and Gold Next Year at Berkeley | SWIMMINGWORLD](<a href=“http://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/lane9/news/HighSchool/32377.asp]Missy”>http://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/lane9/news/HighSchool/32377.asp)</p>
<p>your english is just fine, peeps. In fact, your post writing style sounds oddly familiar…</p>
<p>
:eek:</p>
<p>Oh what a tangled we we weave . . . .</p>
<p>geomom, I am glad you understand that I don’t mean to sneer. I think, in all earnestness, that “grinding” in that sense is significantly more difficult than whatever the opposite is – deeply learning? abstracting the rules? The sheer amount of information that it’s necessary to memorize to succeed in a Harvard science course* by this method alone is staggering to me.</p>
<p>And I would, of course, distinguish between a student who simply enjoys spending free time learning things and a student who must copy down and memorize every word from the professor’s lecture. Both might spend Friday night in the library, but one isn’t a grind in my book, and the other is.</p>
<p>*Of course, this is where I’ve primarily seen it – easier to observe these things as a teaching fellow than as a fellow student.</p>
<p>“An Andrew Luck type passer isn’t owed anything, but is usually an auto-admit at Stanford.”</p>
<p>Stanford still would not have admitted him if he could not hack it. Based on the number of sports admits they have, they would have a horrible graduation rate if they did not ensure academic competency among those admits. I see Michelle Wie graduated with him last year. Can’t say the same for Tiger!
[Andrew</a> Luck graduates from Stanford with architectural degree - NFL - Sporting News](<a href=“http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2012-06-19/andrew-luck-graduates-stanford-degree-michelle-wie-indianapolis-colts]Andrew”>http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2012-06-19/andrew-luck-graduates-stanford-degree-michelle-wie-indianapolis-colts)</p>
<p>Comeonpeeps, I find no issues with your grammar or spelling. Unfortunately, I find the first language “excuse” just as bad as it has always been on CC, especially when used by people who graduated from K12 in the US, and used on a very selective basis. </p>
<p>Your posts are easy to follow, and I am pretty sure that they will soon move into a terrain where we will have nothing but differences on opinion. Pretty sure.</p>
<p>@ Mollie, my husband used to teach a course on Economic Institutions. He’d give essay exams, and some students would answer with whole paragraphs directly from the textbook. Sometimes it would be a paragraph on a tangential subject, showing that their grasp of the meaning of the question was shaky, but their memorizing ability was profound.</p>
<p>It was impressive really. In a way :)</p>
<p>Exactly Moku - Missy is going to Cal!</p>
<p>Fwiw, the examples of Andrew Luck or Wie are particularly poor unless one is willing to look at their class standing in their own high schools. Both could do a lot more than moving balls.</p>
<p>And, fwiw, an athlete such as Missy makes choices based on … where the coaches decide to hang their shingles. Guess where the top coach resigned? That is how Phelphs became a swimming tourist at Michigan. If you look at their choices, academics are not the primary choice unless one places schools such as Texas or Georgia or Cal in the same basket as Stanford.</p>
<p>It has just occurred to me that grind has multiple meanings (thinking slowly once again). Throughout the thread, please mentally replace “grind[ing]” with “work[ing] very assiduously.” Thanks.</p>
<p>Except that grinder is usually following the word mindless in its typical pejorative use.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>3,344 students were admitted from 25,277 applicants in 2016
2,676 students admitted from 30,396 applicants in 2017</p>
<p>Essentially, 668 fewer students were admitted one year later.<<<</p>
<p>It had to be, TPG. There was a massive over-enrollment last year. Combined with fewer residential spots with the Pierce demo, the class could not be over 1500 again. Expect a yield below 50 percent and an active WL movement in the summer.</p>