<p>Isn’t it wonderful that one of the most sought-after schools in the nation values its enrolled students so much that admissions build a class that will help deliver a truly superior experience, including an incomparable athletic experience for participants and spectators. </p>
<p>Considering how attractive the proposal is, it is incredibly hard to dispute the success and the happiness of the school and its students. And hard to dispute that a school hardly needs to fill its classes with perfect scorers or uni-dimensional applicants.</p>
You’ll note my post merely mentions the existence of such classes. I didn’t say they have them at MIT. There are other schools, despite what you might think from reading this thread.</p>
<p>Obviously, I have no idea what sort of classes you’ve taken, therefore there is no mention of that specific subject in my post. However, if you were indeed enrolled in a bio class like this in high school, that presupposes they exist. That would indicate my post is correct, so I’m not sure what your point is.</p>
<p>To clarify -
My impression would be that at some of the top schools, MIT included, it would be difficult if not impossible to get through almost any class (including O Chem) merely using memorization.</p>
<p>Hello everybody,
Sorry I’ve been too busy the past week to be part of this lively discussion. I spent couple hours yesterday trying to catch up, and my eyes hurt. I’m really sorry I can’t reply directly to all good people who reacted to my posts. I liked the opinions of QuantMech, Mythmon, and a few other people. Too bad few people understand the needs of talented kids and the benefits to society that meeting these needs bring. I’m glad most teacher education programs now require a course on gifted education. Hopefully, the attitude will change. </p>
<p>Now those who are sick and tired of hearing more MIT “bashing”, please stop here!
++SPOILER ALERT++++++++++++++++++++
I’ve been thinking why the MIT keeps popping up in the discussion of admission fairness, etc on CC and elsewhere. For example, Harvard and such don’t face as much criticism for their holistic admission. I guess it’s because they don’t pretend to be fair. They don’t claim as MIT does that they select the best of the best. They don’t keep admission blogs on which they discuss applicants, often in diminishing, disrespectful terms. The same can be said about Caltech, which also claims they select the best of the best.
On Thursday, we found out that S was waitlisted by MIT. Now, please remember I expressed my reservations long before that, so you can’t say “sour grapes”. But my hypothesis was confirmed yet again. The girl from his school who was admitted is way below him on academics, interest and achievements in STEM, ECs, leadership, and personality. Anyone who knows them both will say that. I’m not sure about volunteering because nobody knows what she is doing after school. And I’m not going to give more details due to privacy concerns: You don’t have to believe me. Fortunately, my son had no fixation on MIT and feels good that his achievements were already recognized by 3 extremely selective colleges with top ranked programs in his area of interest. Btw, he doesn’t feel entitled, nor is he upset. Certainly, MIT didn’t owe him an admission! It’s their business. My take from this situation is that their claim of taking the best of the best is BS. That’s all. If you are still reading, a little context: knowing our child’s interests from early childhood we thought he belongs in a technology institution like Caltech or MIT, and given his achievements, we thought he has a good chance. The other research universities he applied to we viewed as reach schools, knowing how unpredictable they may be. So far he is having more luck with those. And he got into Caltech. So in my son’s case he will have all the opportunities to develop his talents. Unfortunately, not all talented kids will have such opportunities. Some of them aren’t so lucky and may end up in places where their abilities won’t be recognized and nurtured. </p>
<p>And finally, I’m quoting a poster from an MIT thread. It’s so informative. On one hand, the EC was wrong to shatter the dreams of this young person, but on the other hand he/she was frank. I always respect honest opinions that help me make my decisions.
“I feel kind of bad too because my interview was on my birthday and the EC acted really rude during the interview. I was depressed because I had a different perspective of MIT and their community before I had my interview. My EC was racist in many ways. For example, he asked me If I was a Questbridge Finalist. I said no and he basically told me that my chances were slim to 0%. He started to tell how hard MIT was and that admissions were becoming a joke in a certain way because MIT used to accept the smart and brilliant kids back on his day and now they accept based on gender and ethnicity to look good in rankings, etc. At the end he told that no one will probably get in from this area and I was completely destroyed. I was really sad and I told my parents that I didn’t want to apply anymore, but they encouraged me to apply. I wish I had recorded the interview. I guess I have to stand up and fight for what I want and not let other people discourage me from succeeding in life…”</p>
<p>yolochka, going back to the original intent of the thread, you have no idea what was in the girl’s application. Claiming that her admittance was only based on her gender is a pathetic excuse. Why can’t you simply congratulate her and move on?</p>
<p>
Hmmmmm… It is generally considered bad manners to belittle others, whether on an admissions blog or on an anonymous public forum.</p>
<p>I think that completely refusing that there is a point to made and criticizing posts is counterproductive.</p>
<p>QM has conceded many points.</p>
<p>I really don’t understand some of this stubborness.</p>
<p>It reminds me of my youth when I went door to door trying to enlist opposition to the Vietnam War and I got doors slammed in my face. And yes, people really did say, “America, love it or leave it.”</p>
<p>Even if we love an institution that doesn’t make it completely above reproach. The above poster doesn’t care about the girl who got into MIT. It’s just an example to make a point.</p>
<p>There is enough evidence here to quietly wonder if there is something wonky with MIT admissions. That does not deny them the right to make these decisions. We may find this trivial in the scheme of things, but QM argument is that it’s not really trivial for a variety of reasons.</p>
<p>I have not slammed institutions for their admissions policies on behalf of my own children. Some of them seemed odd, and I said so. Kids had a pattern of being accepted more at more selective schools. I found this strange. No rancor. No resentment of those accepted. But I did think it worth a comment because people coming into this “race” are trying to understand the admissions game.</p>
<p>I <em>do</em> think it’s true that there are many different kinds of happy outcomes, but so does the above poster.</p>
<p>I think people are nitpicking flaws in posts and not concentrating on the intent of the post.</p>
<p>Yolotchka, why can’t you accept that MIT’s idea of “the best of the best” is not the same as yours? And quit fixating on the girl from your son’s school. Both of them were competing against the entire applicant pool, not against each other. Your comments sound worse than sour grapes–they are presumptuous and offensive.</p>
<p>No one- not a loving parent, teacher, the person who hands him a prestigious award- can predict admissions decisions.</p>
<p>All a savvy person can do is estimate whether the kid’s goods are enough to get him to final rounds. And, by savvy, I don’t mean, comparing any two kids or a handful.</p>
<p>mythmom, I don’t know if you’ve been following her posts, but yolochka is not arguing the same thing that QM and everyone else is about auto admits or whatever. yolochka is arguing against MIT’s policy to attempt to maintain an even gender ratio, based on her personal observations that “mediocre” girls are admitted over “future leaders in STEM” (her son and his friends). Her evidence is a sample of 15 of her son’s robotics teammates. In that case, no, I don’t think there is a point to be made. I think it is commonly accepted that having close to a 50/50 M/F split makes a university more attractive to prospective students and enhances campus life. Also, I find it extremely distasteful that she is spreading unsubstantiated, malicious gossip about her son’s teammate on an internet forum.</p>
<p>But on the other issue that QM, LF, Pizzagirl and others are disputing, there is definitely an interesting debate which is why I am still following this thread. :)</p>
<p>MIT receives more than twice as many applications from males as from females. Can they have slightly lower, or at least broader criteria for reviewing female applicants as a result? sure. They still accept more males than females, and the classes are still 55% male to 45% female. Women in math/science may have different skill sets and different indicators for future success than their male counterparts.
The young women that I’ve known over the last few years who’ve been accepted have been outstanding.</p>
<p>And similarly, admissions at top LACs are not quite the same for young men and women… such is life.</p>
<p>I am quite sure many people to this day who wonder why D was admitted to dream U. She was forced to leave HS after JR year due to health-related frequent and prolonged absences. Her grades in HS suffered because of those absences. She got a GED and started CC during what would have been SR year. Even there her health problems caused her to miss school. </p>
<p>We are delighted that her dream U was able to see her potential and ability to triumph over adversity. We are very proud of her, even though her HS still is scratching its head at how she was admitted while some of the HS’s BETTER students were rejected.</p>
<p>Not only top LACs…but also Arts & Sciences centered elite universities. Heard it straight from a senior Prof at one who did a stint looking over undergrad apps at the undergraduate college’s admissions office. </p>
<p>Said if they didn’t adjust admissions to maintain gender parity, the university could have easily tipped into being 70:30 or even 80:20 female:males.</p>
<p>Thanks for all who replied! No big surprises about reactions. Same assumptions, same attempts to shut up any opposition. I wonder why is that in this free country there are still people who grow up so intolerant to opinions different from theirs?
Anyways, I posted stats here. MIT admits very close to 50-50 males to females. Relatively more girls decline this wonderful offer, that’s why it’s not yet 50-50 matriculated. But it’s getting there! I’m happy for MIT and anyone who ends up there. At the same time I am happy my son is not there.
Speaking of sample size, most posters here speak about their personal observations with sample sizes 1 or 2 at most. No one is picking at them. Why? Because their opinion is mainstream on this thread. That’s okay. I’m enjoying being a dissident
Thank you, mythmon for supporting my right to express my opinion.</p>
<p>Are you kidding? Posters constantly jump on the onesie twosie anecdotes. We didn’t like your sample of 15.</p>
<p>It’s futile to pretend there are absolutes or that there is some sort of hierarchy where “these” kids are better than “those.” Only so many can find a seat on the bus.</p>
<p>To say “anyone who knows them” (friends, family, teachers, coaches, profs, bosses, etc) would see the difference, brings me back to my constant underlying point: those are not the people evaluating them.</p>
<p>You have a right to your opinions. You may object that we disagree with you. And you are free to call some intolerant- for not agreeing. But it’s ironic.</p>
<p>PS. I empathize and am sorry if your son experiences disappointment or confusion.</p>
<p>Yochka- my s also didn’t get accepted to His dream school this year. None is his male friends did. However there were 4 girls who got accepted into MIT from his school. Like your S, he has other wonderful options to pursue his dream including caltech. He is not even upset about not getting in. While making decisions about where to apply, whether we should consider ED to some of the top schools in his list, he wanted to take shot at MIT knowing that his chances are slim but didn’t want to regret later if only he applied. every one who got accepted are his friends too, so he is very happy for them. </p>
<p>Asi got thinking about it more, all his male friends are in the robotic team, in the math team and has taken very similar courses. So they have similar interests. They all had chosen the intended major as computer science, electrical or computer engineering or mechanical engineering. There are only limited spots in each of these majors, mit is not recruiting the entire student student body for computer science. When I look at the girls who are admitted, they have more divergent interests ranging from biology to neuroscience to psychology to math.</p>
<p>sorry, I can’t reply to all. This one from sally is especially aggressive, so I feel like commenting on it. </p>
<p>Sally,“why can’t you accept that MIT’s idea of “the best of the best” is not the same as yours?”
Me- Why do you assume I didn’t? My problem is not with the difference of ideas of who is best. Obviously, they are different. I can’t force my idea on MIT and vice versa. What I don’t like is that MIT creates false perceptions of their admission policies and leads many people to believe they can get in if they follow their passion for STEM and are extremely good at it. </p>
<p>Sally, “And quit fixating on the girl from your son’s school.”
Me - Again, you are assuming that I am fixating. I mentioned her because it supported my belief, which was already based on plenty of evidence. If I used your discussion methods I would say about you, “And stop fixating on someone criticizing MIT’s policies. Relax. My comments on a CC thread are not going to change anything. They are not worse your attention, Sally.”</p>
<p>Sally, "Both of them were competing against the entire applicant pool, not against each other. "
Me - Please allow me to disagree. When the goal is to create 50-50 ratio out of 30-70 applicant ratio, girls are compared to the female pool and boys are compared to male pool. Otherwise you can’t make the target ratio. </p>
<p>"Your comments sound worse than sour grapes–they are presumptuous and offensive. "
I’m so sorry my posts upset you. Let me assure you, even though some may consider your posts presumptuous and offensive, I am not offended.</p>
<p>lookingforward, sample size of 15 is much better than sample size of 1 or 2.
Thanks for your empathy No one is upset here, and definitely not my son who is actually pretty humble. He is happy to “fall back” on Stanford where he got in just based on his merit - no hooks what so ever, and probably one advantage - not being Asian.</p>
<p>Can I just clarify again that my intent here is to state my personal opinion that MIT’s admissions are flawed. The rest is trying to reason with people who can’t accept my right to an opinion. I’m really sorry it’s insulting to so many people!</p>
