<p>Look Jayay90 – here’s an example. Student A comes out of celebrated private school with tons of advanced physics knowledge that he’s read, writes about all of that, and indicates he wants to become a researcher, and go to MIT to do physics theory work. Student B comes out of a much less privileged background and self-studied calculus and got a 5 on the AP exam. Could be very talented. But we can’t assume so and reject Student A logically. (Note: I know it won’t come down to something between two such stereotypical cases, this is just for sake of argument.)</p>
<p>Now, if we want to admit Student B, we have to figure out what this individual is really like. The one way I can imagine doing that is interviewing them closely for 1.5-2 hours about their aspirations. Say Student B says he wants to study physics at MIT also. Well, I’d want to talk to him and figure out what all he knows and how mature his views on physics are! This sounds the best way to me, because it doesn’t loop in expensive testing materials, expensive private schools, or anything. In today’s day and age, you can get lots of books really cheap, and read them – cheap enough for people I know who are not financially well off at all. It is possible to become very knowledgeable without spending tons of money – usually it’s the certificates and testing that take money. </p>
<p>If we could conduct such interviews, and find out more about students, then I say it’s OK to admit someone like Student B if he really seems mature enough in his academic views to benefit from the background at MIT. Else, there are plenty of good schools out there, which he may be just as happy attending. Usually it’s people who’ve been in an environment concentrated with intellectuals, or who are already developed intellectuals, who want to be in an environment full of such individuals. </p>
<p>For someone like Student B, unless the potential is already clear, it makes sense to defer things. </p>
<p>But just because Student B overcame financial difficulties doesn’t mean he’s really going to get more out of MIT than if he hadn’t. Heck, people on the MIT threads have mentioned to me that “faith-based” admits, i.e. ones who were admitted because they had “potential” and fewer accomplishments to back this up often ended up struggling to scrape it through. Others ended up very successful. But in the end, we are taking a gamble if we judge based on 500 word essays, and possibly an interview that wasn’t very technical in nature! </p>
<p>You see my point? I don’t think diversity is bad to encourage, but not until you know more than the applications of today say.</p>