<p>Anyhow lets see do they have the exact day the person joined? It just says may 2006 for me.
so lets see… about 200 days since here.</p>
<p>i know this is very basic stuff but i am so bored I am going to do it. anyhow its averages… </p>
<p>(0,0) (200, 1501)
1501 - 0
-------- = about a 7.5005? mighta messed up the end
200 - 0 </p>
<p>so that means the average rate is 7.5005 messages / day</p>
<p>now i want nto find the instantaneous rate… yet i have no equation :(). Btw is there anyway to do this? AB Calc is so easy. but our counselors dont let us self study so bc was out of the question.</p>
<p>This topic is so pointless… while i wait for decisions i do stupid things like this as time goes by.</p>
<p>just numbers wise… since 10% of applicants are accepted and they seem to want a close 50/50 male:female ratio –> us males have a ~5% chance. so depressing.</p>
<p>Based on the nature of the “posting” function, you aren’t going to be able to take a derivative of it. Given posts occur within instantaneous amounts of time, it’s a discontinuous function.</p>
<p>Actually, males represent about 70% of the applicants, right? So if you take the 10% that are going to get in and say that 5% of them are male, then the chance is really 5%/70% or 7.1% for males, which makes 16.7% for females.</p>
<p>Assuming, of course, that my math is right.</p>
<p>By last years #'s they admitted 1513 students. 832 were men. 307 were white males. Now subtract legacy, prof and admin. kids, the famous and wealthy group from this…who knows how many…Tough school to get into for a white male.</p>
<p>I just hope I get deferred and then rejected. That way I wont feel horrible about myself. Oh and ya I know there is no possible way to find the inst. rate from just 2 points. You are right… dumb question by me.</p>
<br>
sax, its my understanding that none of those things will help someone get in to MIT. At many other universities yes, but being a legacy or being wealthy or famous doesn’t guarantee anything at MIT. You’ve still got to make the grade in the admissions officers eyes. If your not a fit, they won’t admit, no matter who your mommy and daddy are. I’m sure Ben or Mollie will pop in and confirm.</p>
<p>MIT states they turn away a lot of kids who would be right for the school. So I figure if Joe and John are on equal footing these other variables will tip the scales.</p>
<p>sax, I really don’t think being wealthy would tip the scale or being famous or even a legacy. but again we’ll have to wait for Ben or someone from admissions to pop in and give their opinion. My sense is though after reading the admissions blogs on and off for 2 years now is that it may actually be quite the opposite. Yes, there are lots of kids who are qualified by the numbers. But I think what really tips the scale one way or the other is who that child is. Its really more about intangible things - how passionate are you? Are you a risk taker? Do you fold under pressure? Or do you thrive under pressure? How do you deal with failure - do you walk away or do you learn from your experience? Those that walk away or expect someone else to solve their problem won’t make it into a place like MIT. So someone who has grownup without a lot of outside help may actually have a better chance at MIT. If they make the grade in terms of numbers, its probably much easier for them to show that they learn from failure, that they don’t give up when faced with a problem. But again, its just my opinion.</p>
<p>Yes I have read all those things too. I have read the blogs with interest for quite some time. I believe they do their best. But I also believe legacy matters including siblings… I would be very interested in those numbers but I have never seen them published. Have you?</p>
<p>I’ve never seen the numbers published. But is there even the question on the application - did any one in your family attend MIT? I remember that question from Stanford’s application. But MITs? Do they even track that info?</p>
<p>Yes, they ask if parents, grandparents, siblings are graduates or attend MIT. They ask if your parents are employed at MIT and they ask if your parent/family member is an MIT interviewer. They ask for parents degrees and school they graduated from and year also employer and occupation.</p>
<p>“At the very end of the selection process, Jones personally reviews every legacy file and those of other candidates who have been brought to her attention by members of the MIT community, to be sure the decisions on those students make sense within the context of the admitted class. And sometimes she reverses decisions. “We’re changing decisions right up until the letters go in the mail,” she says.”</p>
<p>Also, Ben Jones posted this on CC: </p>
<p>As it says in our application, “we are a meritocracy. We judge each other by our ideas, our creativity and our accomplishments, not by who our families are.”</p>
<p>Marilee believes strongly in this statement (we all do). It is true that she personally reviews the applications of denied/waitlisted alumni kids, out of respect for the alums - but I’ve never seen her reverse a decision on these grounds.</p>
<p>This is also a good place for me to clarify that our definition of “meritocracy” is comprehensive. Certainly academic achievement is paramount, but there are many other ways to demonstrate merit - and we look at all of them when making a decision.</p>
<p>So I went back and read the blogs and official statements and they state that legacy doesn’t matter. Applications ask for info. that matters and they take up a lot of lines asking these questions. Why ask directly for detailed information that has no bearing? Even subconsciously this has to play a part.
Again it would be interesting to see the numbers.</p>
<p>These are all questions that interest me. Again I think they do their best and of all the schools out there I am most impressed with MIT’s running discussions with their future applicants. They try very hard to humanize the process and ,I believe, succeed.</p>
<p>The rationale that I’ve heard is that they ask for the information so that if/when a legacy kid is rejected, they’ll be ready for the angry phone call from the parents.</p>
<p>Haha, I was being at least somewhat serious. That really is the rationale I’ve heard for why Marilee Jones re-reads the legacy files.</p>
<p>I don’t know too many legacy kids here – I can only think of two, although of course it’s not normal to sit around and talk about where peoples’ parents went to college, so maybe I’m missing a few.</p>
<p>I know you were being serious and I appreciate your taking the time to comment. It just seems like quite a few pointed questions on legacy which gives the appearance that it is very important. The rationale explaination is a bit weak but hey…it’s their college :). Anyway…not looking to argue or complain …just interested in the statistics</p>
so depressing.</p>
That really is the rationale I’ve heard for why Marilee Jones re-reads the legacy files.</p>