"How did HE Get In?"

[alh]

<p>It is fascinating to me what very different perspectives we bring to this thread. I was reading hours last night catching up and ran into this:</p>

<h1>1902

First, a set of disclaimers: I can only suggest a means of identifying good schools for a “top” student who is interested in an academic career. Far from every “top” student has that interest. Many other careers can be highly rewarding intellectually, and no doubt more rewarding financially.</h1>

<p>I can only write about what I know, or can realistically surmise.

</p>

<p>and then posts #1903-1906 where QM suggests a way to identify good schools for “top” students interested in math/science. I think this is just for math/science?</p>

<p>And I’m getting all excited thinking “wow this is great stuff! - so many students and parents are going to benefit from this, it needs to be a sticky up top.”</p>

<p>and then jym wants to know “what language?” :)</p>

<p>and then a parent wants advice based on QMs posts…</p>

[alh]

<p>

I don’t know anyone who is actually successful in ANY field who doesn’t work very, very hard. Nothing special about science. Really. You guys aren’t the special snowflakes you think you are.

</p>

<p>Is it possible that scientists will give us unlimited non-polluting energy?
Is it possible scientists will cure cancer or other horrible diseases?</p>

<p>If this is possible, are those scientists really special snowflakes beyond the regular sort of special snowflake? </p>

<p>I don’t know how to judge who is most valuable to society. I think individuals who do hands on basic childcare allow the world to function. They don’t, however, cure cancer or discover new energy sources.</p>

<p>Is it possible to do the sort of research that leads to unlimited, non-polluting energy or cancer cures outside of a university setting? Can private business/industry support this type research? Friends on the ground floor of recombinant DNA research seemed to think so, but I remember many of these companies folding after only a few years. I have no idea where the best of this type research takes place today. I have heard that usually private industry can’t afford to support research teams for the decades of “unprofitable” and “unmarketable” research until they possibly make a breakthrough. no idea if this is true.</p>

<p>IF universities are necessary for ground breaking research that benefits EVERYONE, then I think everyone has a say in the mission of the university… even if it is a private university. I think we are justified in questioning the mission of the university and how the university makes admissions decisions. </p>

<p>A few of us tend to think the mission of the university should be mainly academics, but we seem to be in the minority. Some seem to think academics is the least important part of the mission. Or at least that is how I am reading it? Yale tells us it is training future leaders or something along those lines. They seem pretty clear about that part?</p>

<p>University resources are necessarily limited. How is society best served in allocating those resources?</p>

[alh]

<p>

There’s a poster on here whose rural hs doesn’t even have dedicated math / science teachers, offers some sciences every other year. You seriously think these teachers “know” re USAMO and so forth? I think you vastly overstate the awareness and sophistication of most teachers.

</p>

<p>The sort of student who is going to take full advantage of “resources” is not necessarily going to be limited by a rural location and unsophisticated teachers. They are passionate about their interests. They used to go to the library and figure out how to access resources. When those Talent Search type programs started in the 80s, a few students, sometimes very young, identified themselves and reached out to those offices for academic support. Today most US students have internet access, at least at their public library. (anyway, I hope that is true) If they are passionate about math, I think they find out about these math competitions on their own. I know students who have found out about math and science competitions all on their own and then gone on to compete, sometimes quite successfully, with teachers and parents very unclued in about what this was all about. Once they are successful in these competitions, adults who are able to advance their academic interests become aware of them.</p>

<p>I agree that some math/science whizzes, who will take full advantage of elite university resources, aren’t interested in competitions. Some parents of those whizzes aren’t interested in their children being involved in this type competition. The competition is just an easy way to judge potential - imho.</p>

<p>…</p>

<p>I hope mythmom posts more. I agreed with everything she wrote, as is usually the case:)</p>

<p>sorry for all posts - off for the time being now :)</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>alh, it comes across as arrogant to say that “a few of us think of universities as academic in nature, but, well, I guess we’re in the minority here.” I don’t think there is anyone on this board who doesn’t agree that the primary purpose of an institution is academic in nature. Believing that there are other institutional missions and priorities that need to go in there – such as being good members of the surrounding community or doing outreach to underserved students or providing a true, rich community and not just a bunch of labs and bunk beds – is not inconsistent with that. No one is advocating that QM’s proposed auto-admits be turned down for 2.5 GPA students. We’re just not advocating for their auto-admit, that’s all.</p>

[oldfort]

<p>The way it is working today, is it broken? In my view, no. It is working just fine. Top unis are admitting well qualified students. Students who want to pursue research are able to do, and some very smart students are pursuing finance, technology, start up business. This is how free world is suppose to work. Are we suggesting that if we were to see some super talented students, we should some how lock them up in some sort of special environment to cultivate their talent?</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>

The sort of student who is going to take full advantage of “resources” is not necessarily going to be limited by a rural location and unsophisticated teachers. They are passionate about their interests. They used to go to the library and figure out how to access resources. When those Talent Search type programs started in the 80s, a few students, sometimes very young, identified themselves and reached out to those offices for academic support

</p>

<p>The poster I’m referencing - his D indeed “escaped” that resource-poor environment and went to a magnet school for math & science. But the irony is not lost on me of the following:</p>

<ul>
<li><p>If a potentially talented student lives in poor-ville, or rural-ville, and doesn’t have access to the kinds of mentors, teachers and coaches to enable him to fill his potential (or who would have heard of USAMO, etc.) oh well- there’s always the internet where they can maybe find out about those things. Let them eat cake (or pi).</p></li>
<li><p>But if a talented student gets rejected from our precious MIT - even though the mentors, professors and resources at a whole handful of schools are close enough for spitting distance – it’s a travesty that needs to be overcome by ensuring every single USAMO winner gets his magic acceptance letter – the world owes him nothing less as he nurtures his talent, and why, not admitting him to MIT is like not having a ramp for a disabled student - it just blocks him, lock stock and barrel, from doing ANYTHING worthwhile. </p></li>
</ul>

<p>See the irony here? yeah, me too</p>

[jym626]

<p>Alh-
Guess our sense of humor differ, which is fine. </p>

<p>And some of the things you bring up were from many days and many, many (literally hundreds of) posts ago. Perhaps this is why this thread is caught in a permanent loop.</p>

[oldfort]

<p>I do not think working 24 7 is healthy. It is too one dimensional. People should have hobbies outside of work. I guess that’s what we are debating here isn’t it? Some posters think it is great to be working 24 7 because they love their work, and it is perfectly normal. I work hard, but I go on many vacations. I am currently sitting by a pool watching some GOs doing crazy dance. When I am on vacation I never talk about my work with people. Instead I like to find out more about local people or people from another country. It is interesting, most Americans I meet always start with, " what do you do? Where do you live."My work does not define me. It is only one facade of me. Excuse me for understanding this single minded pursue of science.</p>

[alh]

<p>PG: Like mythmom I find it an interesting discussion. It is not about MIT for me. I think I essentially asked what you are asking above (if I understand you correctly?) back on March 8th in my post #1295. I think Gourmetmom questioned whether some students from backgrounds lacking resources should have access to Juilliard? No one has seemed to really want to talk about anything except MIT although a few of us have tried to broaden the discussion.</p>

<p>I don’t know how good my Classics example is because that may be a field where research improves with the wider knowledge that comes with age. My impression is that mathematicians peak early? maybe not true?</p>

[alh]

<p>jym - I’ve been in this loop for years now. Maybe someday I’ll be able to wander out. Maybe someone will throw me out :eek:</p>

<p>What do you want the thread to be about?</p>

<p>adding:</p>

<p>

. No one is advocating that QM’s proposed auto-admits be turned down for 2.5 GPA students. We’re just not advocating for their auto-admit, that’s all.

</p>

<p>when we talk about allocating resources, I can imagine valid arguments in favor of some of the 2.5 GPA students - just as much as in favor of auto-admit for math whizzes</p>

[jym626]

<p>Not my place to determine what it should be about, but consider that in a thread with 2400 posts, there are many things that have been repeated ad nauseum. Dredging up a post from days and days ago to repeat what has been said before gives me a big yawn. Perhaps better to stick with the current conversation? Fine to catch up on whats been discussed over the week you’ve been gone, but, speaking for myself, it seems better to stay with the current discussion.</p>

[jym626]

<p>Went in search for some math humor, to do a little “study” on humor. Will present 5 different math jokes. Who finds which one funny, and why?</p>

<p>1: Two people are traveling in a balloon over unknown territory.
“Hey!” they call out to a passerby, “where are we?”
The person looks carefully for a moment at them and yells back, “You’re in a balloon!”
“He must be a mathematician,” says one of the travelers to the other.
“Why is that?” asks the other.
"First, he thought awhile before answering. Second, his answer is absolutely precise. And third, it’s utterly useless.</p>

<p>2: As an experiment, an engineer, a physicist and a mathematician are placed in separate rooms and left with a can of food but no can-opener. A day later, the rooms are opened one by one.
In the first room, the engineer is snoring, with a battered, opened and emptied can. When asked, he explains that when he got hungry, he beat the can to its failure point.
In the second room, the physicist is seen mouthing equations, with a can popped open beside him. When asked, he explains that when he got hungry, he examined the stress points of the can, applied pressure, and ‘pop’!
In the third room, the mathematician is found sweating, and mumbling to himself, ‘Assume the can is open, assume the can is open…’</p>

<p>3: What should you do when it rains? Coincide</p>

<p>4: She: Why is “6” afraid of “7”?
He: Because “7, 8, 9”.</p>

<p>5: A team of engineers were required to measure the height of a flag pole. They only had a measuring tape, and were getting quite frustrated trying to keep the tape along the pole. It kept falling down, etc. A mathematician comes along, finds out their problem, and proceeds to remove the pole from the ground and measure it easily. When he leaves, one engineer says to the other: “Just like a mathematician! We need to know the height, and he gives us the length!”</p>

[emilybee]

<p>I pick Door #2.</p>

[cobrat]

<p>QM & others,</p>

<p>Regarding MIT’s policy of no grades first semester, I have known some MIT students/alums who used that as a way to ease their academic workloads by taking the more advanced hardest major/core courses first so they’ll have higher GPAs for the future and an easier time for the rest of their MIT undergrad to have hobbies, hang out on/off campus, ECs, or attend an on-campus party*. </p>

<p>While it worked for them, what would you and others think of that seemingly unintended use of the “no grades first semester”? </p>

<ul>
<li>MIT students have a Boston area-wide reputation of throwing some of the most fun parties in the Boston area.</li>
</ul>

[shravas]

<p>

If they are passionate about math, I think they find out about these math competitions on their own. I know students who have found out about math and science competitions all on their own and then gone on to compete, sometimes quite successfully, with teachers and parents very unclued in about what this was all about.

</p>

<p>But it’s not just knowing about the opportunities that is needed. There is also the social aspect of having others around you also participate in these contests and talk to about math and science, and even just having more challenging coursework.</p>

<p>For example, I got in the top 500 in the Putnam last year, and was far enough in the top that it probably wasn’t a fluke. It’s hard to compare the Putnam with the USAMO, but based on this, you might expect that I qualified for the USAMO in high school, since at the time 500 people qualified for the USAMO. But I did not, and most years I wasn’t even close to qualifying. It might seem like I prepared a lot for the Putnam, to get better at it, but that is far from being the case. In fact, I did not prepare at all for the Putnam, while in high school I would spend many hours a week trying to qualify for the USAMO. But no one else in my high school really cared about math or math contests, there was no math club, and my classes were far from challenging.</p>

<p>I’m convinced that, at least for me, being at MIT and taking challenging courses and being around others that are very interested and talented at math did a lot more to improve my math contest abilities than any amount of studying I did on my own.</p>

[sally305]

<p>alh, you seem to hold MIT and similar institutions in higher regard than others that are not science-based. Question for you–if what they train students to do is so special and important, how come so many of their graduates leave science to go into business? How come we don’t already have a cure for cancer or new green energy sources? How come not every MIT graduate is doing groundbreaking work that is changing the world? If you are going to suggest that “society” should have a say in how the university carries out its mission, then students who sign up to execute that mission should be held to certain standards of accomplishment. Obviously, you can see the problem with this logic.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>To add to Jym’s collection, here is an often-repeated one in the non-intellectual circles: </p>

<p>A young man rolls an overloaded cart to the checkout register in a Cambridge supermarket and starts to unload his many purchases.
The salesman ask: “Are you from Harvard or MIT?” </p>

<p>The young man proudly replies: “Harvard! How did you guess?” </p>

<p>Salesman points to the sign “10 purchases or less” and says: “Harvard students can’t count, MIT students can’t read”</p>

[geomom]

<p>Math jokes - #1-#4 made me smile. #5 got a LOL, but that one made fun of the engineers.</p>

[alh]

<p>Sally: again - not about MIT/science for me. If you want to argue science is really essentially useless, I am pretty much prepared to agree. I might should have been born several hundred years ago. (This is sort of a joke but sort of serious.)</p>

<p>Blossom and I tried the same argument for Classics.</p>

<p>I think probably some transmission of knowledge is useful for humankind, but might be pretty easily convinced not much of it is. I think the wheel is probably useful.</p>

<p>As far as I can tell graduates leave science to go into business because: no future in academia; years of post-docs with no hope of permanent job; very low salaries. They leave because they aren’t valued. The only ones who stay (that I happen to know and I certainly have a limited range of acquaintance) are the ones who do it for the “fun” of it and are pretty amazed anyone pays them anything at all to do all that fun. JMHO</p>

<p>I have had more than my fair share of posts today. I hope this one is back on topic? Anyways, I’ll try not to be a thread hog & diverter anymore. sorry.</p>

<p>adding just one last thing :)</p>

<p>Did anyone respond to the question: Is someone who can cure cancer or discover new energy source a truly special snowflake? Or is this some sort of misguided arrogance? Do we want them to have access to resources just in case they decide the research is fun enough to stay in academia? And make these discoveries?</p>

<p>Are we worried like Hunt they may use their powers for evil? </p>

<p>I’m done. I’m done. I’m done. promise & cross my heart.</p>

[geomom]

<p>@cobrat When I went to MIT, not only did they have no grades for the first semester, they had no grades for the whole first year AND there was no limit on the number of credits you took. My brother (also at MIT) totally abused this by taking almost 90 units each term. He ended up with a significantly lower GPA than I did though. I would actually blame his low subsequent GPA on his strategy. </p>

<p>It pays off to learn calculus, physics, differential equations, etc. thoroughly. :)</p>