That’s not exactly what I said. I have no discipline in studying as of now, and it’s not my school’s fault. It’s definitely mine, I’m just lazy. And my school isn’t easy either. However, that said, I still have good grades, hopefully good enough to someday get me into MIT, and I’m working on my discipline now because there’s probably no way I could survive in any college without studying. And I should think that MIT courses are more advanced than AP courses :D</p>
<p>
If you’re accepted, it means you have the necessary intelligence/knowledge to succeed at the college - as long as you apply yourself, and by that I mean study. Ad. officers can’t exactly see if you had discipline or not - many people are extremely involved in ECs and get 4.0’s without studying, have had an experience-filled life, and write great essays and are accepted. These people usually find that in MIT they’ll need to study and form study habits, something they didn’t need to do in high school. This is testimony to the fact that MIT is [way] more difficult than school.</p>
<p>I doubt you need discipline in high school in order to get accepted to MIT. As long as you can get the necessary grades, it doesn’t matter if you spent your whole life studying or not a second (the former would negatively impact you, actually, because people who have nothing but good numbers on their application are almost never accepted.) However, you will need to evolve in MIT - probably forming study habits and such. I read a blog on the MIT website about a first-year undergrad there having to study at MIT, whereas in high school he never really had to, and merely went over stuff quickly before test-taking and got great grades. Can’t find the post, though. MIT’s different and harder. There’s no denying that.
<p>Okay, I’m speaking from experience as an MIT student, so I’m telling you to not worry and enjoy some semblance of your childhood while it lasts. I hate to say this about my own school, but I don’t think MIT really stands on this high pedestal that everybody seems to put it on.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s really about the way you study that matters. AP classes tend to squeeze in a lot of information in much the same way MIT classes do. Sure, taking a class on the Fourier series or organic chemistry has more advanced material than Calculus BC or AP Chemistry, but it’s all subject material. Your skills in studying efficiently and thinking sharply are more important, which, I think, is what AP classes train you in. These aspects are what most people are lacking when they feel overwhelmed coming into MIT.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I know plenty of people like you. It’s part of becoming a responsible adult, honey. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Again, not all high schools prepare student adequately. That’s why I like to say that MIT classes are comparable to AP classes, since the AP curriculum is pretty easy to predict. A good curriculum will set you on your way to a 5 on the AP test, and this kind of class is somewhat similar to an MIT class in intensity. You will need to work.</p>
<p>It sounds like you’re generalizing things you’ve heard from other people and feeding them back to me. To know what MIT is like, just go to OCW and try taking a course or listen to a lecture or two. That’s basically it. The classes are challenging, but not as overwhelming as you might think.</p>
<p>I didn’t go to a super-selective prep school like Exeter or some top-ranked high school like TJSST, just a decent one that offered a reasonable selection of AP classes, which I found prepared me very well for MIT.</p>
<p>^ You’re not the only current student on these boards It sounds like your high school was probably a very good one, on the upper end of the typical high school MIT students attended. AP classes can vary quite a bit, even if everyone’s getting 5’s. You have the “learned the material adequate” part right up to the “the AP test was child’s play compared to the work I did in this class” range, and I’m guessing you were closer to the second end.</p>
<p>Looking at OCW is probably the best thing people could do to know what to expect - straight from the horse’s mouth. (I will note, though, that despite my 5 in Calc AB, 18.01 kicked my assets. To the applicants who do look at OCW and end up terrified - don’t worry too much. Admissions let you in, you’ll be able to handle it - whether or not you know it now. You want to come to MIT to learn, right? :P)</p>
<p>this is rly encouraging guys, thanks. yeah, i’ve been watching some lectures on youtube on mit lecs, and it seems ok. just wondering, if this is odd:</p>
<p>i have taken multivariable calc, differential equations, linear algebra, heat/light physics, modern physics, and all got A’s. These seems like hard classes, even in a community college</p>
<p>but, somehow on math competitions i fail. I mean i get zeros on the mandlebrot…
I find this disturbing… are my problem solving skills not good or something?
i mean, is just being good at taking classes gonna cut it? but mit should help improve my problem solving skills right? iono, im confused</p>
<p>I haven’t done the big math competitions, but others have suggested that the skills needed for those and the skills needed to succeed at MIT don’t entirely overlap. </p>
<p>And yes, MIT will improve your skills, assuming you put in the work that you need to - try hard on the psets, look up what you need to, ask others for help, go to TA/professor’s office hours, etc. Again, MIT Admissions isn’t going to let someone in if they can’t do it. If you got in, your ability is not lacking. But you will need to do the work.</p>
Okay, this is based on my own perception: AP level courses don’t need constant studying for everyone, as far as I’m aware. For the past 2 years, all I’ve done is listen in class, and I’ve gotten good grades, with the occasional lapse here and there because of a lack of any studying. I’m not taking AP courses (they’re not offered) but our program is probably a lot more rigorous. I have 16 subjects/week and no free periods, for example. I still doubt I’d survive MIT without studying.</p>
<p>
I know there’s lots of people like that, it was kind of my point. These people usually would need to start studying in college. I’m not just referring to MIT here - everyone I know keeps telling me that if I keep going the no-studying route, I won’t survive college. And I hadn’t even told them I was applying to MIT. I’m so used to my studying time being free time right now, that I really need to change it senior year if I want to make a smooth transition into college life, and I certainly don’t want to make the first semester harder than it needs to be what with the change and settling and possibly moving into dorms depending on the college I’m accepted in.
At any rate, in a way, I’m very responsible (and in another way, I’m the least responsible person ever). However, my fault is that I usually need someone to cooperate with - this whole summer I’ve wanted to enter the media field (as a hobby, just a “in my community” thing) but I haven’t been motivated to do any of the things I wanted - writing lyrics, a screenplay and acting it out with friends, and so many other things - because apparently no one shares my passion for this stuff. And I have a lot of creative ideas for what I should do on that front, but I just can’t apply them alone. Sometimes I think that one of the many upsides to going to MIT is being able to work with people who’d really help and motivate me in creating things I’ve always really wanted to [technology or otherwise.] Maybe that’s foolish thinking, but I hope not.</p>
<p>
Exactly what I’m saying :D</p>
<p>
I’ve watched several MIT lectures (but have no idea what OCW is). To be honest, I knew most of the material covered in the course, so I’m hoping that those were just recaps - they were freshman courses after all. However, the lecturer was excellent - very blunt and to-the-point, whereas at school it’s just annoying how many sentences they go through to explain a simple concept that was explained by the prof. in half a minute in the lecture. Not to mention the 300 questions that follow the explanation in school. Another reason MIT appeals to me - it’d be great to work with a lot of very qualified and intelligent people. The opportunities are endless.
And I’d just like to add that EC’s are very important to me, because I have a hell of a huge range of interests, from every form of media imaginable, to technology, to biology, and several other fields. Colleges here don’t offer many opportunities for side stuff like that. I’m currently working on the high school yearbook, and it’s just a mess. We don’t have a proper place to work, the team is half-scattered, and the team was chosen based on relations (who had the best relations with the administration) and very few people know what they’re doing. We also have only one more month to complete it, and half the layout work is going to be dumped on me. I can’t stand this type of “cooperation”, nor this type of administration.</p>
<p>Small question: what’s a pset? I seem to remember it being part of the arrangements section of math, but that can’t be what you’re talking about :D</p>
<p>ocw.mit.edu has MIT lectures, psets, etc. I really suggest looking at the psets and tests to get a feel for the class, because I always feel there’s a disjunction between the lecture and the psets. (Psets also seem more theoretical than tests, which is why I’m emphasizing to look at both.)</p>
<p>Psets are basically your homework problems. But on steroids :)</p>
<p>I haven’t done the big math competitions, but others have suggested that the skills needed for those and the skills needed to succeed at MIT don’t entirely overlap.</p>
<p>Here’s the thing - there are probably some established way you can prep for and get better at competitions.</p>
<p>But the real reason what Piper said is true would be that the skills of conceptualizing what you need to and putting in consistent effort to absorb material, internalize the different ways you may see it again, etc, are different from the skills of noticing math competition problems and having the right intuition on what to do. While it’s true that people who achieve brutally high results at, say the IMO, are inherently terrifically gifted problem solvers, if you take much lower end achievements at math competitions, they needn’t correlate perfectly at all with success in high level university work. </p>
<p>You spend the time, be smart and inquisitive about what you have to do at MIT, and you’ll get somewhere. </p>
<p>AP level courses don’t need constant studying for everyone, as far as I’m aware. For the past 2 years, all I’ve done is listen in class, and I’ve gotten good grades, with the occasional lapse here and there because of a lack of any studying.</p>
<p>A well-taught AP course can be very challenging, because they’re meant to be introductions to college level material, and that can be taught at different levels. The course can be at a higher level than the AP exams suggest, by far.</p>
<p>Sure, taking a class on the Fourier series or organic chemistry has more advanced material than Calculus BC or AP Chemistry, but it’s all subject material. Your skills in studying efficiently and thinking sharply are more important, which, I think, is what AP classes train you in.</p>
<p>AP classes can vary quite a bit, even if everyone’s getting 5’s. You have the “learned the material adequate” part right up to the “the AP test was child’s play compared to the work I did in this class” range, and I’m guessing you were closer to the second end.</p>
<p>This is also important though, happilywallowing - AP classes can be poorly taught. It’s pitifully easy to get a 5 on many AP exams, but the classes can be hard, and surely good to prepare one for a rigorous university experience. But they can also be the bare minimum. The former case would be the case when you could say an advanced class is just an extension.</p>
<p>MIT courses don’t need constant studying (just a normal amount, enough to help you stay sane). I study just as much as I did in high school, and so do many other people I know. We have free time to enjoy ourselves; we go to the movies, restaurants… Anyways, since you haven’t taken AP classes, I’m not sure how to help you judge MIT other than OCW. If you look at some of the tests on there (try 18.01 or 8.01 or 8.02), you’ll see that they don’t require any mind-blowing, super awesome brain skills.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>MIT classes can be poorly taught. In fact, one of my worst instructors was a Nobel laureate (but the math department teaches really well! =D). It can also be ridiculously easy to do well on an MIT test. The linear algebra average for the final was a 96%, and the average for a differential equations test was 91. A large percentage of people (well, okay, my friends and neighbors) study the night before for a test. And if the test is hard? Well, they just curve it, usually centering the average at a B (spring 2010 orgo average was a 55, and 62+ was an A LOL). </p>
<p>I think that if the exam average of an AP class is 4.3+, then it’s a good, rigorous class (about the average of my AP classes). If you take 4 or 5 classes like that in a year and score well on the AP test, then that’s pretty similar to about 4 classes at MIT. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think that if everyone (n~>10) gets a 5 in an AP, then the amount the class can vary is pretty small (the tests aren’t THAT easy). It has to be a good class.</p>
<p>Problem-solving skills help! =P It just means that you can cut your time studying/doing homework down by 30-40% (or more depending on your level). You’ll develop them if you don’t have them coming in, but your life will be a lot easier if you have experience doing competition questions, because it’ll be easier for you to see the patterns and put the pieces together. For example: no experience problem-solving–> maybe you’ll need to go to lecture and read the book and ask people to explain. Some experience–> just go to lecture and read the book. Lots of experience–> Just go to lecture. That’s not a formula, by the way, just a hypothetical example.</p>
<p>Anyways, I think that if you want to improve your problem-solving skills (you don’t lose anything, right?) you should go to [Portal</a> • Art of Problem Solving](<a href=“http://www.mathlinks.ro%5DPortal”>http://www.mathlinks.ro), and they have competition problems almost every year from the AMC and AIME and USAMO. I just hate it when I see people struggling here because they don’t have the problem-solving skills. It’s hard to feel good about yourself when you get bad grades, especially when, almost all your life, you’ve been defined by your intelligence. I think it’s better (but not necessarily easier) to improve problem-solving in high school, just because you don’t risk as much. If you don’t learn them fast enough at MIT, you kind of risk your grades and your self-esteem and your health/stress/sleep.</p>
That’s all well and good, but you’re missing my point. I meant that MIT needs studying, unlike high school for many students. High school is full of people who don’t study (and many of them still succeed adequately). However, are there students at MIT who survive without studying? (Not a rhetorical question.)</p>
<p>
Again, I never meant that you have to stay locked up in your room all day to be able to pass. That would be ridiculous - I’d never consider a college like that and at any rate it wouldn’t be that great if there were any colleges like that, which I doubt there are. College life without fun and outings is like Ebony without Ivory - it’s just incomplete - and it’d suck if MIT didn’t give you that opportunity. I know it does.</p>
<p>
I’ll check those out in a moment - the MIT website might overload if I open any more of its pages in my browser right now. I don’t doubt you’re right, and I do not think you need to be an otherworldly genius or a 24/7 study-er to survive MIT. Just that you need study habits of some form depending on what you’re comfortable with.</p>
<p>Just to clarify, you said “AP level courses don’t need constant studying,” in response to my statement that MIT classes were similar to AP classes. This implied that you thought that they were not similar to MIT classes, because you thought that MIT classes needed “constant studying.” I just read what you write–I can’t guess that you meant “AP level courses don’t always need studying like I would expect of MIT courses.”</p>
<p>I’m hormonal right now, so AWHREOFHWEIOHFW RAWRAWRAWR I’M GONNA EAT YOUR BRAINS.</p>
<p>I checked them out. 18.01 scared me while the other 2 were pretty simple even for me (I’m in junior year and haven’t covered logarithms and whatever else was in 18.01.)
Are these the easiest courses in your opinions? Or just random ones you chose out? (By the way, what year? Freshman?)
Does Prof. Lewin still teach at MIT or has he retired? His was the first MIT lecture I’d watched. I must say I really enjoyed it :)</p>
<p>Edit: By constant I meant habitual, consistent. In this meaning:
<p>Hmm, methinks you still went to a high school better than most. Poorly-taught MIT classes, in my experience, are nowhere near as bad as poorly-taught high school classes :)</p>
<p>lol this is turning out to be a pretty interesting discussion. I have a question though. i have taken community college courses in math and physics, but would it be too dangerous to use them to skip out of the mit courses?</p>
<p>Oh, I know who you’re talking about. In addition, one of my worst instructors is one of the most renowned global researchers in yeast genetics.</p>
<p>And speaking of poor numeric grades, one of the 7.06 exams had an average of 37 percent. If you got above a ~52 it was a A. Points mean next to nothing at MIT (except a few notable classes like 3.091, 8.01, 8.02, and 7.05, where they operate on an absolute point system). Otherwise, your final grade is always curved relative to the performance of the class (bio classes: class average = B or B+, 0.5-1 SD (that’s standard dev for you) = A, -1 SD = C). </p>
<p>I’m sorry, maybe course 7 is just bad or something, but I actually think that as many as a third of my classes are poorly taught (mostly intro classes). Moreover, my friend who’s Course 5 share the same sentiment. Almost all (except 2 or 3) of the HASS classes I’ve taken (and I’ve taken like over 20 XP) are excellent though. This might be a no-brainer but very generally class size correlates inversely with teaching quality. The best science class I had at MIT had around 30 students. The best humanities class I had at MIT had around 6.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Retired. Although he still has an office and if you’re lucky you’ll see him roaming the halls once in awhile.</p>
<p>18.01 is Calc I, 8.01 is Physics I, 8.02 is Physics II. All of these are general requirements that all MIT students have to take or pass out to graduate.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>These are excellent quotes, and very, very spot-on. This applies to other majors at MIT too, not just math. I did AMC/AIME pretty hardcore in HS and I feel like MIT exams across all majors are generally like AMC/AIME questions. There are very few “gimme” questions and almost everything requires certain depth of thinking. If you get used for looking for this “depth,” it’ll invariably help you mucho on MIT exams. Echoing what was said above, I think the reason why some students don’t do well at MIT (or even the difference between a B and a A) comes down to the ability to think critically. Everyone is intelligent here, but MIT really wants to train you to be able to apply your knowledge.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’ll have to see if MIT accepts them as transfer credit. You either have to get them to accept it as transfer credit (attach textbook list, syllabus, transcript) or you’ll have to take the ASE (advanced standing exam, equivalent to that class’ final) and pass it to skip the class. A lot of people skip out of 18.01 though with a 4 or 5 on Calc BC, so I think that’s a good idea. You can skip out of 8.01 with a 5 on BOTH parts of Physics C. The only way to get out of 8.02 is ASE or transfer credit.</p>
<p>If you think you’re never going to see the subject again, then there’s no repercussions to skipping requirement classes (like you’re not going to be a physics major and you want to pass out of 8.01 and 8.02). If you’re going to do substantial coursework on the major area though, I think it’s a good idea to take MIT’s intro classes, to get used to the “critical thinking” questions and such. (for example, they stopped accepting AP Bio credit in lieu of intro Bio beginning my year, and it’s basically because AP Bio doesn’t resemble MIT’s Bio at all)</p>
<p>ok last question, this might seem kind of too hard or too far to be thinking about it, but do mechanical engineering and electrical engineering cross over a lot? I was thinking of getting a EE minor, but i don’t think that’s offered after i looked for it. would it help me as a mechanical engineer if i took EE classes, or does MIT already prep mechanical engineers with enough backgroud in EE so i don’t need exta classes</p>
<p>But no, there’s not a lot of overlap, and there is no EE minor. As for would it help you, it depends on what you want to do afterwards You might also want to consider 2A-6. 2A is the flexible MechE option that requires you to have a non-MechE concentration, which could be 6. I’ve actually considered switching to this :D</p>