<p>I’m considering addressing the completely optional “creation” essay with a humorous dramatized Ehrenfeucht-Fraisse (EF) game and attaching the abstract of my math research paper dealing with EF games. The idea would be to explain in hopefully non-math-person-friendly terms what the heck an EF game is and how it works, to give the general flavor of my research.</p>
<p>Any opinions on whether to include something along these lines? I know that Matt McGann said in his blog that MIT’s more interested in the research experience than, for instance, reading your research paper - but is there any value in being able to make the research topic amusing? Also, would it be better just to leave this as a supplemental, not-directly-“creation” essay if I tried it?</p>
<p>It sounds cool…plus, it shows that you love what you do, you’re creative, you really understand it and like helping others understand it as well, etc.</p>
<p>So if doing the “completely optional creation essay” on research, it’s best to talk more about the experience, as opposed to giving a scientific runthrough of the project?</p>
<p>I think this essay does both. Personally, if we had to choose, I would choose the former and include the paper so a faculty member could supply the latter.</p>
<p>I’ll probably go for it, to use the most succinct phrasing offered - I have a rough draft and short explanatory essay done, if anyone wants to offer criticism.</p>
<p>lol yea it comprhensable although I didnt read the diresctions for the 2nd link and sat there wandering if i was an idiot because there were no true values for papper, lol… fun logic</p>
<p>haha, thanks I assume that the adcom really doesn’t want to know how to play an EF game, but I’d feel guilty submitting my abstract without some sort of explanation… it’s short and accurate, but entirely meaningless without a bit of background.</p>
</p>![http://web.mit.edu/kscott/www/webposter/posterfig.jpg[/url]](http://web.mit.edu/kscott/www/webposter/posterfig.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
