Doesn’t need to be an “EC” (i.e. a school club). And MIT’s core has pretty rigorous classes in the humanities- a kid who hates to read is going to find the required courses (including writing intensive seminars) quite a slog.
What is a “strong chance”? Are we talking about a mathematical genius with B’s in Spanish (assuming that’s not the heritage language)? Or are we talking about a good math student with a long string of B’s in English, foreign language and history) in which case- why wouldn’t they take the same kid who ALSO did well in those same subjects???
@labegg it could be that I didn’t grow up in the States so my “level” of “entitlement” is somewhat subdued/nonexistent. Lol. Tho similar to ur mom, we have always told DS that “the fair ended in October!” Life is full of being-at-the-right-place-at-the-right-moment stories and there r way too many who “did everything you supposed to do and still didn’t win the prize” people out there, luck is a huge factor in our everyday life. Being a bit fatalistic here but I do think having this mentality is better than having the surreal entitlement-led disappointment.
Whether MIT and Caltech screen out introverts is not obvious. But it definitely pays at these schools to be able to interact comfortably with other students. The Psets are HARD and a collaborative environment between the students to solve these problems is encouraged, even expected. You are definitely better off at MIT and Caltech being an extrovert, rather than an introvert. Trying to go it alone, because you are reluctant to interact with your classmates, is really tough.
@whatisyourquest pls show me some studies that indicate introverts r not good at “interact comfortably with others” or be able to be collaborative and cooperative, as an introvert myself, I pride my ability to work with others. Ur idea of introverts r wrong.
I am seen as “outgoing” or as a “people person.”
I feel comfortable in groups and like working in them.
I have a wide range of friends and know lots of people.
I sometimes jump too quickly into an activity and don’t allow enough time to think it over.
Before I start a project, I sometimes forget to stop and get clear on what I want to do and why.
Introvert:
I am seen as “reflective” or “reserved.”
I feel comfortable being alone and like things I can do on my own.
I prefer to know just a few people well.
I sometimes spend too much time reflecting and don’t move into action quickly enough.
I sometimes forget to check with the outside world to see if my ideas really fit the experience.
The above conforms with my understanding about introvert vs extrovert. Perhaps you are not as much of an introvert as you think. You appear to “feel comfortable in groups and like working in them” rather than “feel comfortable being alone and like things (you) can do on (your) own.”
My idea in post #264 was that the hypothetical student was not nearly a good fit for MIT, but thought he was, based on the information available to him. Maybe MIT would actually go for a student like that.
Whether the problem sets at MIT are HARD or not, whether the education is “drinking from a firehose” or not, whether it’s a “pressure cooker” or not, depends on the ability of the student (at the specific point in time–ability can grow, but it takes time). If my admissions philosophy were followed (ha, ha, likelihood very low), there would be more students for whom the problem sets were not so hard, more students who could give good advice to the students who needed help, and less benefit to being an extravert. (In the words of Carl Jung, who introduced the term, “extrovert” is “just bad Latin.”)
MIT has plenty of introverts. You can spin your own conspiracy theories, or you can actually attend an event or 3 or 5 on campus filled with undergrads and actually observe the interactions.
This is like saying that Berkeley is prejudiced against Asians… even though when you cross campus it is a little hard to confirm that visually/empirically.
And now my head is spinning, QuantMech. I thought your point about “pretty good university” vs. MIT was that at MIT the sky was the limit (i.e. a talented student would ALWAYS find harder material to work on, i.e grad level classes with grad students. Now your argument is that the tippy top kids are NOT going to find the P-sets difficult- which suggests that these tippy top kids are- in fact- taking the easy track/basic beginner classes and NOT challenging themselves?
So confused.
But honestly- you guys are trying to reconstruct MIT’s admissions philosophy based on the 6 or 8 kids you know in real life who got rejected. That seems very unscientific for a bunch of folks who claim to be scientists or at least fact based in their approach.
How about thumbing through the most recent campus publications, young alumni newsletters, award section of the website to see the amazing things that these alleged B-listers are actually accomplishing? Somehow-- even with a couple of extroverts, and even with a couple of kids with bizarre hobbies, the institute manages to pull together a bunch of kids who are doing astonishing things.
And no- not all of these things are math, and not all of these things win awards. Some of these things are in medicine and public health and economics and sustainability and climate modification and oceonographic mapping and genetics and neuroscience-- topics which have enormous societal benefits. So if one genius in theoretical math manages to get him or herself rejected every decade in favor of a kid who is quite good in math and also exceptional in some other areas- my guess is that the faculty and administration can live with that.
@whatisyourquest Myers-Briggs is fairly schematic. Introverts come in many flavors. I’m definitely one (ask anybody who knows me) but I like being and working with a right group, as well as jumping into an activity.
"Whether the problem sets at MIT are HARD or not, whether the education is “drinking from a firehose” or not, whether it’s a “pressure cooker” or not, depends on the ability of the student (at the specific point in time–ability can grow, but it takes time). If my admissions philosophy were followed (ha, ha, likelihood very low), there would be more students for whom the problem sets were not so hard, more students who could give good advice to the students who needed help, and less benefit to being an extravert. "
This is Quant Mech’s post. Arguing for MORE students for whom the problem sets are not so hard.
I was responding to this. Which of my assumptions is incorrect? Quant Mech believes (and it is his/her right) that MIT should be more of a “the top math students in the world get in” kind of place. But MIT is not the “Institute of Theoretical Math and Physics”. And a lot of the disciplines that are part of its mission require really strong math skills but really strong other things. And so- its admissions strategy/algorithm/practices are in keeping with its mission- not Quant’s mission.
@whatisyourquest well, we r pretty off track here but if u dig a bit deeper about how Myers Briggs TI came into being, u may realize that they r not based on science, no proper psychological studies.
So have the folks who think MIT should be like Caltech/Cambridge heard of ISP (the Integrated Science Program) at Northwestern? It’s designed to send kids to science PhD programs (so like Caltech or Cambridge Natural Science on a B10 campus) and sends a ton. You could finish it in 3 years if you want to as well (vast majority of classes being science/math). Lots of research opportunities. Small classes all taught by profs (not TA’s). And they seem to always have trouble filling up as every year, they send emails to strong engineering applicants already accepted to NU asking them to apply (switch majors) to ISP.
Yet I never hear anything about it from folks who think tippy-top STEM applicants should go in to tippy-top STEM schools/programs.
BTW, @QuantMech, did the Hertz Fellow apply to Caltech? NU ISP?
For clarity with regard to assorted objections, including blossom’s, two comments:
I think that students who describe education at MIT as being like “drinking from a fire hose,” or describe the college as being a “pressure cooker” are in over their heads. I think they are learning less than they might if they were better prepared for the course level. A student who is really swamped will usually find it hard to learn much.
Another poster characterized the problem sets as at MIT as HARD. My guess is that the stronger students find the problem sets just about right. If they find them too easy, they can always shift to a higher level class. Often, faculty adjust the level of their courses depending on the population of the class. Presumably the faculty could also offer offer more challenge in any given class, if needed.
I was not suggesting that MIT admit a larger number of strong students, only to see them glide their way through classes that are too easy for them. That would not make sense.
There is an interesting Quora post by a math major at MIT who talked about particularly hard semester he had. His sophomore fall, he was taking graduate level classes in algebraic geometry and commutative algebra, along with five other math classes, and Chinese. Personally, I think this is the sort of thing people can be referring to when they say MIT (or CalTech or Cornell or whatever) can be a pressure cooker.
If you are the kind of person that strongly prefers to hunker down and solve problems on your own, and you are very reluctant to reach out for help (out of a dread for social interaction, shyness, stubbornness, arrogance, or whatever) you are likely to have a tough time at MIT or Caltech.
“When we admit a class of students to MIT, it’s as if we’re choosing a 1,100-person team to climb a very interesting, fairly rugged mountain—together.”
Please note the keywords: team & together
If you are uncomfortable being on a team or don’t enjoy being together with your classmates (i.e., you prefer to be alone), you are probably not a good match with the MIT mission.
So find me some examples from Feynman’s set of biographical anecdotes where he reached out for help. I vaguely recall one in connection with a bacterial genetics project he had on the side (at Caltech). When he was very sick with cancer, he had help with the plans to get a visa to go to Tuva. His scientific history has a lot of hunkering down and solving problems on his own, starting from his high school days, but continuing through undergrad, grad school, and faculty life.
All indications are that Feynman was quite social, just that he does not seem to have engaged in team problem solving. Actually, at one point there is a reference to his making veiled fun of classmates in a math class, who wondered whether the curves in a French curve (antiquated plastic device for drawing smooth curves by hand) had some special property. Amusing, but not very nice!
