<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, despite the fact he didn’t have the slightest idea how to answer it himself. The funny thing is that at that time, MIT’s reputation is not as great as it is now. In fact, John Nash hated it when he could join MIT but not Princeton for his first tenure.</p>
<p>i’m a senior learning number theory at NYU, am i a lock for MIT? 
God, i don’t know how i survived multivariate. The class was so damn boring.</p>
<p>try joining the math team; high scores on the AMC and AIME should probably help you.</p>
<p>pimpthatthang:</p>
<p>While I am not an expert, I have read a lot about MIT. Here are my thoughts:</p>
<p>No one is a lock for MIT. There is no set of requirements that will guarantee you admission to MIT. There are guidelines. But NO ONE, I repeat NO ONE, is a lock. Heck, they turn down half their applicants with perfect SAT scores. They turn down valedictorians. They turn down 4.0 students with dozens of AP classes. You can dream of MIT, but don’t bet the house on it</p>
<p>thats not true…he asked student to solve some pi problem…right?</p>
<p>Well, it’s been a few years since I read A Beautiful Mind, so I could have gotten it mixed up… I did think it was Fermat’s last theorem though.</p>
<p>
Ah, but do they turn down students with all of the above?</p>
<p>You betcha.</p>
<p>MIT wants to admit people who can thrive in the MIT environment. Often those people aren’t the 2400/valedictorian/4.0/eight zillion APs type – the perfect kids don’t know how to fail. If there’s one thing you need to learn as an MIT student (or really, as a scientist or engineer, regardless of school), it’s how to fail without letting failure eat you.</p>
<p>i was kidding, guys. take it easy. I’m not even applying to MIT…</p>
<p>peggy, not true
although very rare, there are locks for MIT
there was one student at my school who got in last year who was basically the perfect candidate for MIT
he was so sure he was getting in that he didnt bother applying to any schools early, and only did MIT and one other competitive school regular</p>
<p>the same thing can’t be said about Harvard but there are locks at MIT</p>
<p>sorry for double post, but if you want the set of requirements to get into MIT for sure, PM me</p>
<p>MIT’s admissions probably places much more emphasis on science/math curriculum than it’s equivalent schools (harvard, princeton, yale, Stanford). I have a quite a few friends here at cooper who got into MIT and got waitlisted (and some even rejected) at places like Cornell/CMU/Columbia. These people are very intelligent, have top-notch sat scores and have their schedule <em>decked</em> out with AP science/math classes with a 4.0 unweighted. Furthermore, their essays are all radically different. </p>
<p>For example, one of them wrote an essay about proving or disproving the existance of a supernatural, supreme being using math/rationalism. I would venture a guess that MIT appreciates and fosters very original/radical scientific young minds. Places like HYPS look for students to make their school a <em>better</em> community. I personally think MIT looks for people to add to their <em>scientific</em> community. Indeed, it is the university with the largest collection of scientific minds.</p>
<p>“MIT wants to admit people who can thrive in the MIT environment. Often those people aren’t the 2400/valedictorian/4.0/eight zillion APs type – the perfect kids don’t know how to fail. If there’s one thing you need to learn as an MIT student (or really, as a scientist or engineer, regardless of school), it’s how to fail without letting failure eat you.”</p>
<p>This is something I want all future engineering students to learn! Many come into college having never failed at anything. And some get knocked down by a Calc test or a Chem test and never seem to recover.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It may not be that extreme. As molliebatmit said, MIT accepts students who it perceives will thrive in the MIT environment. Other than strong inclination in science and engrg, the aspirants have much better chances if they are all rounded. Extracurriculars, even not in math/science, will be helpful towards MIT admission. Only its rival Caltech accepts student purely by scientific inclination and grades, where other skills are almost never looked at.</p>
<p>name me an Intel finalist that hasn’t been accepted to MIT.</p>
<p>I’m sure there have been a few – just as there have been RSI attendees who weren’t admitted.</p>
<p>I could ask Ben Jones to look at this thread if you’d really like the official admissions officer point of view on the topic.</p>
<p>Yea, what happened to those RSI rejects? Did they commit some heinous crime while at the program? Throwing a drunken party? Murdering a fellow rickoid?</p>
<p>My friend Chris (a freshman this year) says that the people who were in RSI with him who didn’t get into MIT were all internationals (the international pool is a lot more competitive, as there’s a quota), but he heard of one kid two years before him who didn’t get in, and the rumor was that he had committed a felony. :)</p>
<p>wingardiumleviosa is quite right
that’s why theres a perfect type of kid for MIT unlike HYP…
that’s why you can be a sure thing at MIT unlike HYP
this is not to say MIT is any worse than the others but just means MIT type student is easier to tell</p>
<p>From what I’ve seen, Caltech runs an even ‘purer’ admissions process than does MIT in terms of admitting supertechie people. Even MIT tries to admit people who will make the place better, although clearly not to the extent of HYPS. MIT therefore probably sits in the middle between HYPS on the one hand, and Caltech on the other.</p>