…so, which single-digit admissions school saw a drop in applications?
Besides Harvard, that is 
Here’s the deal: they are all lying.
There are many great universities in America.
A lot fewer great admissions committees.
2 Likes
Again…this is anecdotal, not data.
I do think that with schools like Harvard, there is a “shoot your shot, and if you get in we will manage to pay for it” mentality.
1 Like
I wasn’t joking about Harvard though 
1 Like
I don’t know enough to form an opinion on why that is. Maybe the acceptance rate is discouraging people who are not really a fit anyway? Maybe they are flocking to the “Next tier down” schools?
Substitute “leaders” for Donors.
Change “innovators” to Money makers.
In all honestly, IMO all schools want their students to become rich and famous. It’s good for branding and great for future donations.
5 Likes
Correlation is not causation. If you haven’t noticed, the extremely wealthy also are extremely influential.
Maybe high-tops too – so, helmets and high-tops. The Hathletes.
In their defense, Caltech and MIT keep their mission statements fairly grounded.
“The mission of the California Institute of Technology is to expand human knowledge and benefit society through research integrated with education. We investigate the most challenging, fundamental problems in science and technology in a singularly collegial, interdisciplinary atmosphere, while educating outstanding students to become creative members of society.”
“The mission of MIT is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.”
It is interesting that unlike Caltech, MIT doesn’t specifically mention that its mission is to educate outstanding students.
I have always held Caltech’s adcom as the shining city on the hill of American college admissions.
I am disappointed they went test-blind.
Perhaps the folks in the city on the hill of college admissions know something about the process and outcomes that you don’t.
8 Likes
Fair enough.
I do agree Caltech and MIT as institutions don’t need rich alums or donations. In my conspiracy theorist’s mind, they are both supported by a rich uncle with very specific needs that nobody needs to know.
I thought from reading your old posts that the current SAT is starting to have difficulties separating the truly gifted from someone who just spends a lot of time studying. Was I mistaken in assume that was your position?
MIT certainly needs (and wants) rich donors. They were happy to take Jeffrey Epstein’s money for years until the negative publicity about it got to be too much. That being said, they don’t appear to let that be a driver in terms of who they admit. And, frankly, a donor admit whose academics were not up to par would struggle mightily - unlike other elite schools, the toughest part about MIT is NOT getting in, but excelling once you are there.
4 Likes
We know of a kid who applied TO and had SAT of 1260 and got admitted to HYPSM schools. Other kids who see this think they can get admitted as well and try their luck.
1 Like
I am sure there are outliers. I would guess most kids who get 1260 on the SAT have an academic profile that correlates. There are always exceptions or kids who have some sort of hook.
And I get why everyone hopes to be THAT kid. That’s why people play the lottery. They know someone who knows someone who won big. I do not think any kid should be precluded from applying. I am guessing most applications don’t get more than a cursory glance.
2 Likes
I will just say that this is not what I am hearing.
The range of academic ability at MIT is arguably wider than some would expect.
Yes, the floor is fairly high (virtually no one gets in without at least a 750 Math SAT).
But there are more students there than anywhere else in the US (if not the world) who are literally academically the very best in the world in their discipline (IMO & IOI winners) and various degrees of runner-ups and also-rans.
A recruited athlete with great stats that spent most of their free time on the track field may find themselves as academically outmatched as a high-school chess champion would at the world chess championship.
The way it works then is that even though MIT accepts very few AP credits, there is a mechanism in place that allows many of these top students to essentially test out of their first year’s worth of mandatory introductory courses during freshman orientation.
So in some way this is similar to what has been described upthread some top UK colleges are doing with remedial classes, except there majority of the class is taking these intro (by MIT standards) classes (and some report on their struggles in MIT Admissions blogs), and in the absence of them, a BS basically becomes a 3-year degree.
Further, the course prerequisites at MIT are all “soft”, and substitutions “up” are approved generously, so top students have a lot of flexibility in skipping over the material they are familiar with, with some taking graduate-level classes their sophomore year.
Yes, 95% graduate in 6 years or sooner.
But a uniform environment it is not.
1 Like
Perhaps. Or perhaps it’s all politics. Has been known to happen from time to time.
This kid had no hook. But had very good writing skills. Now regrets that they should have gone to a smaller LAC so they could thrive better
1 Like
That is still indeed my position. The ACT/SAT ceiling is fairly low.
But having a quick filter can’t hurt.
I do not see a student with a 700 math SAT thriving at Caltech - so why not drop the pretense?
But I guess I will have to take them at their word that they can filter these students out by a deeper reading of their application, and are not going to instead sacrifice their academic rigor on the altar of social justice.
In the meantime, I am glad MIT went back to requiring the tests.
because it looks bad when 75 50 25% all reads 800?