Reminder: No one, not even me, can give you an accurate chance at MIT!

Colleges & Universities Massachusetts Institute of Technology
61

<p>

</p>

<p>My humble opinion - this may not be the way you intended to word why affirm. action is a “good thing” - I actually think good people interested in academics should be very meaningful and fun to talk to regardless of whether they as a collective form an assortment of cultures, and in fact, even with the current policies, there is a huge number of Asians at MIT. </p>

<p>The correct reason, in my books, to favor any admissions policy is that it tries very hard to build a community of people who fit the school’s mission (which, let’s face it, isn’t exactly centered on cultural diversity) using a system providing opportunity to people who achieved under different circumstances, and truly seem as likely to do great things with regards to the school mission as other applicants. I’m pretty harsh on this last point too - it has to be just as clear as in the case of other applicants.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Once again, as an outsider, this is truly wonderful, because I think it takes exactly some committed people who really care to break the barrier to transparency.</p>

62

<p>

</p>

<p>From MITChris’s post. I’m going to comment here that this is transparency. </p>

<p>I feel what is really at the heart of the many affirm. action debates may involve the following questions a) <em>should</em> MIT, hailed as unsurpassed as a site of technical research, be committed to ensuring it educates significantly many students from certain backgrounds, or should it always err on the side of what most clearly indicates maximal potential for future academic achievement … ? In theory, some would claim since it is MIT,
and given the place basically crumbles without its legions of top scholars, research, etc, the “erring” argument has a clear answer. b) is it truly ensured that when URMs are admitted at a relatively high rate, this rate is justifiable in accordance with the school mission…</p>

63

<p>A humble suggestion: </p>

<p>Some X amount of diversity (racial, ethnic, cultural, intellectual, political, geographic, economic, experiential; take your pick) is a necessary condition for both a liberal arts education and a science/technology/research education; is indeed inseparable from them. And our goal, in many ways, is to optimize for X. </p>

<p>Without it, you don’t get “the best minds” - you get echo chambers. And even the minds with the best raw power are worthless in echo chambers. </p>

<p>We are committed to avoiding echo chambers, and part of that is enrolling diverse and disagreeing (though never disagreeable) people who can bring their different experiences to bear to solve problems bigger than any one of their experiences alone. </p>

<p>Not to sound condescending, but I’ve found that this often makes more sense to students after they get to college and (often, for the first time in their lives) really experience life outside of their own comfortable and familiar communities. At least, that was my experience, and the experience of my friends. </p>

<p>Diversity (of all types) doesn’t have to replace or supplant intellectual advances - indeed, it often complements (or is necessary for) it!</p>

64

<p>

</p>

<p>What happens when there is some conflict?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>You’ve probably done so already, but maybe it would help any skeptics if you repeated here why certain URMs are admitted at higher rates…in context of this philosophy. Is it self-selection (i.e. someone from backgrounds that correlate more poorly with developing the qualities that MIT seeks, who nevertheless builds up an application, tends to offer something <em>unique</em> to the school, which already values the experiences they’ll bring)?</p>

<p>Another point - what about ethnic diversity do you find contributes strongly to a engineering/sci/tech/research education experience? Under what settings at MIT does the dialog exposing the disagreements, etc, tend to occur, and shape what the students will be led to do when they begin their careers?</p>

<p>I think posters here who know the answers to these questions will be much less likely to use terms like “genetic lottery”, because, as you say, it will decrease the perception that students are a collection of numbers which indicate their potential for academic achievement, and perhaps convince skeptics that there is a good reason to admit certain kinds of students independent of “oh, college would be boring otherwise” ..</p>

65

<p>Self-selection != a lack of diversity. I mean, forget about URM vs non-URM for a second - quite clearly the affluent child of a engineer could be driven to engineering, as could a poor child of a diesel mechanic, and the fact that they self-select to want to build things that go doesn’t mean that they don’t bring diverse and different life experiences to the problems at hand. Not only will different solutions occur to them, but different problems (what is lacking in the world? what needs to be fixed?) will occur to them, because different problems plague their communities. </p>

<p>Students of different ethnicities, like students of different economic strata or geographies, have different life experiences. Their lives are constructed and experienced differently by their circumstances. Their priorities are different. </p>

<p>For example, I remember one African-American student who applied. He wanted to move back to his hometown after graduating and start an engineering firm in the poor area he’d lived in, where kids who had never thought about engineering could be introduced to basic mechanic-type-work and then gradually move up to engineering. This is something that wouldn’t occur to a student from, say, my hometown, which is an affluent suburb where lots of engineers who work at BAE and Lockheed and IBM raise their families. Those kids don’t need new engineering role models, because they already have them. They don’t have that sort of problem because it isn’t a problem in their community. And it was something that he went and accomplished. </p>

<p>Now this isn’t something that is unique to the URM experience, of course - which is why we also care about other modalities of diversity (socioeconomic, political, geographic, etc). But I think it’s a helpful illustration of the way the world which produces students shapes what they care about, what they know about, what they value, what they want to fix, what they want to change, and what they bring to the task. </p>

<p>You know, it’s a cliche, but we don’t admit numbers, we admit people. And we don’t admit stories either - we admit people, and their potential to do good in the world. I know that sounds vague, and potentially unhelpful, but there’s really no way for me to explain it beyond that.</p>

66

<p>Since I got quoted twice, let me rephrase that. When I said, “Wouldn’t college be boring if everyone came from similar cultures?” I meant something more like, “Life in general, in my general experience, is a lot more interesting when you meet different, and therefore interesting, people.” People can be and are different and interesting without coming from backgrounds that are completely different from mine, but since culture can define everything from your food and the cartoons you grew up with to your values and priorities, different cultures==very different worldviews==very interesting people to talk with.</p>

67

<p>MIT looks at everything when they admit students- grades and scores, extracurricular activities, if you had fun over the summer. But they also look at where you came from, what opportunities you have had or have been deprived of, and how that may have affected your choice in life. If you have lower test scores or grades, or haven’t taken as many AP classes because they simply weren’t offered in your community, but have challenged yourself to the extent you could, that is looked upon very favorably. Students who are black or hispanic are more likely to come from situations like this, but not always. There can be a white male who comes from a high school where 15% of the students go to a four year college, and he will be evaluated just the same.</p>

68

<p>

There should be conflict! The more conflict, the better! Scientists and engineers are professional arguers (and, often, curmudgeons) – conflict is the fuel that drives everything forward. And the more that conflict forces people to remove their horse blinders and see the widest possible net of solutions to a problem, the better it is for innovation.</p>

<p>As one of my undergrad professors said once, gleefully, it’s a zoo! It’s a wonderful zoo.</p>

<p>For myself, I arrived at MIT as a fresh-faced small-town Midwestern innocent, and found myself the only white kid on my floor. I learned a lot about relatively trivial things, like that Chinese and Indian food was tasty, but I also learned a lot about big things, like the way that my friends’ upbringing caused them to approach the world differently from the way I did. We all learned a lot from each other. (One of my suitemates, an east coast city boy, asked me in wonderment, “Do your parents live in a log cabin?”)</p>

69

<p>

</p>

<p>Now let me ask my question a little differently, and less vaguely - I’m wondering what sort of “conflict” people felt I meant :)</p>

<p>I was wondering about conflict in terms of the ideals of promoting diversity in the student body and promoting students whose backgrounds mark them as “academic machines” beyond basic qualification, using the solid indicators which may have required more privileged background to uphold. This is a challenging question for admissions, as they’re no doubt aware. </p>

<p>I fully agree that conflict in terms of <em>backgrounds clashing</em> is important, and think Chris from admissions gave a great example - different things occur to different people, and when impacting the world is concerned, it will be necessary to train those of various backgrounds.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I guess my comment is this particular example helps me, although I myself was wondering specifically about the URM admit rates, and the function of race in what you called important to avoiding the echo-chamber situation in context of a science/engineering/research school. I.e. what specifically about race contributes. I think I am best able to understand the situation where there is little science/tech background in a person’s community, and the individual has the potential to uplift a certain area with fresh ideas. Now a person’s race could correlate with other things, but I am trying to see if there’s something specific it contributes by itself to a science/tech/research school. The answer “different backgrounds lead to different perspectives” is of course taken into account, but I think one can understand that I am asking for a more targeted answer here.</p>

70

<p>@molliebatmit
If you ever want to drive someone to apply to MIT, I believe that telling a couple of your stories - of which I’m sure you have many - would get just about anyone interested :D</p>

71

<p>^ Agreed with Jimmy. :)</p>

72

<p>

</p>

<p>I believe what you’re saying about standarized test scores, but can you explain to me then why applicants with higher test scores have much better chances of being admitted? : [MIT</a> Admissions: Admissions Statistics](<a href=“http://www.mitadmissions.org/topics/apply/admissions_statistics/index.shtml]MIT”>http://www.mitadmissions.org/topics/apply/admissions_statistics/index.shtml)</p>

73

<p>I think what he is saying is that there is no magic formula to getting in and that high SAT score or higher grade doesn’t mean you are “better” than someone else. While there is a a bigger chance if you have a high score, that in no way guarentees admissions. Heck, in some cases, a 4.0 GPA means you know how to jack the system, not that you are smart. Or maybe I’m wrong?</p>

74

<p>There may be some areas in which cause and effect and coincidence could be confused as well…for instance, students who have a gold medal at a math olympiad and therefore a great ec for mit might be more likely to get an 800 on the math ii sat than someone else…if the admissions committee admits person a but not person b, they’re still admitting the whole applicant, not just his/her test scores.
Or at least, that’s my take on it.</p>

75

<p>

Haha, I just saw this. Don’t get me started! I am known around my lab (and, probably, everywhere) for being a storyteller and occasionally a story-exaggerator. ;)</p>

76

<p>@ripemango - </p>

<p>First, let’s look at the numbers on the page. </p>

<p>A math score of 800-750 yields an admit rate of 15%; a math score of 750-700 yields an admit rate of 12%. </p>

<p>That is a decline of only 20%, which, while noticeable, is not a huge number. </p>

<p>However, a math score of 650-690 yields an admit rate of 7%; that’s a more than 40% decline. </p>

<p>In other words, the data reflect what I’ve said - that really, once you’re in the 700s, you’re pretty good for us. There’s some margin (which itself is reflected in these data - obviously a 690 is better than a 650, but that’s how the data are divided), but it’s not a big dropoff until you get to that region. </p>

<p>Second, high test scores are likely to be correlated with other successes. For example, getting an 800-750 on the math does not mean that you also qualified for the USAMO; however, USAMO qualifiers are more likely to score an 800-750 on the math than a 750-700. Thus the higher test scores will be disproportionately composed of students who have achieved success in other areas, independent of their SAT success, which accounts for a significant part of the discrepancy.</p>

77

<p>Quite frankly, the effort Chris from admissions puts into answering questions frankly and without dodging questions with overdone rhetoric is amazing, and should be a model.</p>

78

<p>Thank you MITChris. I thought you were talking about SAT 1 and ACT scores however, not SAT II’s. Does the same principle hold for the ACT and SAT 1?</p>

79

<p>keyword: “accurate”</p>

<p>“No one, not even me, can give you an accurate chance at MIT”</p>

<p>Coincidence that he included that word?
Subliminal message?</p>

<p>Perhaps someone can get close enough, but not 100% “accurate”</p>

80

<p>Why does USAMO seem like a big deal in these forums? People who qualified for USAMO are mostly people from elite high schools with special tutors and parents who push to to work to death. Very few truly successful people ever competed in these major events.</p>

<p>And again, I think MITChris is sending a subliminal message that qualifying for USAMO DOES make you MUCH more likely to get into MIT, despite posts that says otherwise.</p>

1 Like