XH attended "getting your kid into MIT" seminar

[dragons in the flower bed]

We were at MIT's Spark this past weekend and my ex decided to sit in on this class for parents on how to get your kid into MIT. (I refuse to base my homeschool curriculum around wooing a university that accepts only 10% of its applicants, so I didn't go.) He came out with notes and wanted to go over them during dinner. Here's what he said:

 

1. CTY's math/science stuff is the Holy Grail of extracurriculars one wants on their MIT admissions portfolio.

2. AOPS is their recommended math program.

3. They dislike the kind of mathletes Math Olympiad grinds out but very much appreciate the kind of mathlete that Math Counts produces.

4. What they want to see more than anything else, what says to them "this kid will fit with our vision for the culture of MIT", is when a kid focuses narrowly early on in adolescence on one very specific interest, then strives to do every single thing one can possibly do related to that interest. (However, kid should still ace his SAT subject tests in Physics, Chemistry and Math 2. So at least part of that is a desire for a kid who can focus hard and long on one thing without it damaging his ability to do well in other actually hard classes.)

 

I was not in the presentation for parents so I'm just going off what XH said here. Curious to hear what y'all think, if you have any thoughts.

[Ravin]

My first thought is to ask if you have a child interested in attending a school like MIT. If not, it's not worth stressing over. If so, I'd probably expect the kid to go to such a lecture and take notes.

 

I find the whole early specialization push dubious. Plenty of very bright people don't find their passion so early, and inter-disciplinary work and the ability to think outside the box while performing at a high level are factors they shouldn't be neglecting. Additionally, very bright students with limited means may not have the resources to build the sort of portfolio of specialized activity they're looking for, suggesting they have skewed their process in a way to discourage poorer students.

[Dmmetler]

I guess being able to AFFORD CTY means you can afford MIT??

 

Seriously, I'm starting to get various summer program information from DD's talent search participation, and it costs as much to do a 2 week non-residential summer class at age 8 for her as it did for me to go to college for a semester back in 1990. Yes, I'm sure she'd LOVE that math class, but sheesh!

[jhschool]

This is interesting.

 

I wish I knew why they don't like the Math Olympiad kids but do like the MathCounts kids.

I am familiar with the former contests but not the latter.

I know the MathCounts kids sometimes win scholarships to college but the Math Olympiad

kids don't. So there is something different.

 

I looked at CTY before--they are really expensive! But the offerings look decent.

 

Thank you for posting! This is very useful information!

[Luckymama]

I guess being able to AFFORD CTY means you can afford MIT??

 

Seriously, I'm starting to get various summer program information from DD's talent search participation, and it costs as much to do a 2 week non-residential summer class at age 8 for her as it did for me to go to college for a semester back in 1990. Yes, I'm sure she'd LOVE that math class, but sheesh!

 

 

Seriously.

[lisabees]

I guess being able to AFFORD CTY means you can afford MIT??

 

Seriously, I'm starting to get various summer program information from DD's talent search participation, and it costs as much to do a 2 week non-residential summer class at age 8 for her as it did for me to go to college for a semester back in 1990. Yes, I'm sure she'd LOVE that math class, but sheesh!

 

:iagree: And, of course, we're in the income range in which they think we can afford it without help. Just like my son's college does. So irritating.

 

OP, thanks so much for the report. My niece desperately wants to go to MIT; I was just telling my MIL last night that she needs more than great SAT scores (which they're hoping for). My niece has absolutely no extracurriculars. Sigh.

[jhschool]

...

Additionally, very bright students with limited means may not have the resources to build the sort of portfolio of specialized activity they're looking for, suggesting they have skewed their process in a way to discourage poorer students.

 

CTY has financial aid. We may look into that...

For the math competitions, the contests are $4 per year and all the practice materials

are free on the web.

And I got one of the AoPS books super cheap used.

 

Anyway, I think kids who are not as wealthy could manage if they were determined.

 

Some kids who go there are very much not wealthy. I know.

[Barbara H]

Hmm.... I think that it is really impossible to boil it down into a formula and I'd be surprised if the speaker did that.

 

I question the "Holy Grail." There are camps that have much more challenging with more selective admissions and carry more prestige than CTY. MIT's RSI program, Ross math, etc. And, I feel quite certain there are Math Olympiad winners who are admitted to MIT.

[Kathy in Richmond]

Hmm.... I think that it is really impossible to boil it down into a formula and I'd be surprised if the speaker did that.

 

I question the "Holy Grail." There are camps that have much more challenging with more selective admissions and carry more prestige than CTY. MIT's RSI program, Ross math, etc. And, I feel quite certain there are Math Olympiad winners who are admitted to MIT.

 

:iagree: Can I ask who gave this presentation? Was it someone from the MIT admissions staff or someone from the Spark program? I'd be surprised if MIT admissions said these things.

 

There are LOTS of kids admitted to MIT w/o any CTY experience. Like Barbara says, there are plenty of better summer experiences out there. And summer camps aren't even a requirement --there are many other ways to spend a summer productively, with or without spending $$ (and many of the really respected camps are either free or have finaid available for those who need it)

 

Which 'Math Olympiad' program was the speaker putting down? The American Math Competitions (AMC) which lead to the official USA and International Math Olympiad are most definitely respected by MIT. They even have a blank for AMC scores on their application, & my son lived with many math & science olympiad winners in his dorm.

[Matryoshka]

Hey, we were at Spark this weekend! I did not attend any talks, though, I went and sat in Starbucks where I didn't have to worry about getting a ticket... :tongue_smilie:

 

I doubt any of my kids would get into MIT, and if by some miracle one did, I doubt we could afford it. I find it ironic that we do so much there so cheap now at the middle/high school level when it's probably so far above us both monetarily and as far as resume goes... Spark is $30, HSSP is $40 for 8 whole weeks of classes!

 

As far as financial aid, I'm sure we're in that category where we make too much to qualify, but not enough to afford it.

[wendyroo]

I got into MIT (and earned bachelor (2003) and masters (2005) degrees)...

 

1. CTY's math/science stuff is the Holy Grail of extracurriculars one wants on their MIT admissions portfolio.

I've never heard of CTY. I just looked it up, though, and my middle class family would not have been able to afford it. I did, however, attend several summer programs at local universities. They were cheaper, did not require much travel and often offered scholarships.

 

2. AOPS is their recommended math program.

I went through the regular, boring, public school math program. I did finish early and dual enroll in calculus at a local university during my senior year.

 

3. They dislike the kind of mathletes Math Olympiad grinds out but very much appreciate the kind of mathlete that Math Counts produces.

I did not participate in any math competitions.

 

4. What they want to see more than anything else, what says to them "this kid will fit with our vision for the culture of MIT", is when a kid focuses narrowly early on in adolescence on one very specific interest, then strives to do every single thing one can possibly do related to that interest.

I did not specialize early. I entered MIT with no idea what I wanted to major in (though obviously I was interested in math and engineering). I had a lot of interests and extracurriculars, but they were diverse, not cohesive.

 

Just my experience.

Wendy

[Nan in Mass]

We were at MIT's Spark this past weekend and my ex decided to sit in on this class for parents on how to get your kid into MIT. (I refuse to base my homeschool curriculum around wooing a university that accepts only 10% of its applicants, so I didn't go.) He came out with notes and wanted to go over them during dinner. Here's what he said:

 

1. CTY's math/science stuff is the Holy Grail of extracurriculars one wants on their MIT admissions portfolio.

2. AOPS is their recommended math program.

3. They dislike the kind of mathletes Math Olympiad grinds out but very much appreciate the kind of mathlete that Math Counts produces.

4. What they want to see more than anything else, what says to them "this kid will fit with our vision for the culture of MIT", is when a kid focuses narrowly early on in adolescence on one very specific interest, then strives to do every single thing one can possibly do related to that interest. (However, kid should still ace his SAT subject tests in Physics, Chemistry and Math 2. So at least part of that is a desire for a kid who can focus hard and long on one thing without it damaging his ability to do well in other actually hard classes.)

 

I was not in the presentation for parents so I'm just going off what XH said here. Curious to hear what y'all think, if you have any thoughts.

 

This doesn't match the kids we know who went to MIT. I will say that they all were intelligent, had high SAT scores (something that seems to be fairly easy to achieve with a certain kind of intelligence - it wasn't something they sweated over), were technically oriented, math came easily to them and they considered it rather fun, they DID things as opposed to just participated in things, they did some things very well, and they were inventive in the sort of way that made them say, "I bet if you can do that, then you can also do this, this, and this."

 

Money had nothing to do with it, as far as the people we know go. That sort of inventiveness develops particularly well in an atmousphere of "necessity is the mother of invention". Either that or where the parents are inventors busy with their own projects and leave plenty of equipment and spare parts parts lieing around unattended. We know that sort of MIT person, too.

 

Nan

[Sebastian (a lady)]

We were at MIT's Spark this past weekend and my ex decided to sit in on this class for parents on how to get your kid into MIT. (I refuse to base my homeschool curriculum around wooing a university that accepts only 10% of its applicants, so I didn't go.) He came out with notes and wanted to go over them during dinner. Here's what he said:

 

1. CTY's math/science stuff is the Holy Grail of extracurriculars one wants on their MIT admissions portfolio.

2. AOPS is their recommended math program.

3. They dislike the kind of mathletes Math Olympiad grinds out but very much appreciate the kind of mathlete that Math Counts produces.

4. What they want to see more than anything else, what says to them "this kid will fit with our vision for the culture of MIT", is when a kid focuses narrowly early on in adolescence on one very specific interest, then strives to do every single thing one can possibly do related to that interest. (However, kid should still ace his SAT subject tests in Physics, Chemistry and Math 2. So at least part of that is a desire for a kid who can focus hard and long on one thing without it damaging his ability to do well in other actually hard classes.)

 

I was not in the presentation for parents so I'm just going off what XH said here. Curious to hear what y'all think, if you have any thoughts.

 

I'm confused by the lauding of AoPS but then putting down Math Olympiad. Isn't AoPS written by a former Math Olympian with close ties to AMC, AIME and Math Olympiad prep?

[MBM]

We went on an MIT tour two years ago and were told by one of the admissions staff that applying students should be themselves and show their interests to the best of their ability. I'd be very surprised if they said they don't look favorably upon Math Olympians because to make it that far, a student would have to really enjoy math and be disciplined enough to study for it or at least be able to do it under duress(!). MathCounts, which is not a high school competition, has a team element so maybe they like seeing that.

 

My son is thinking of applying to MIT but his advisor told him that MIT, Harvard, Princeton do not have strong math departments. Ugh. I can see we will be doing the college selections ourselves.

[cave canem]

Were these people from admissions or were they SPARK people? There are students pursuing humanities majors at MIT. I don't think they all worked their heads off in mathematics during high school.

[Ravi B]

If you're interested in the topic of MIT admissions, I'd recommend reading the following blog post by Chris Peterson, an admissions counselor at MIT:

http://mitadmissions...plying_sideways

[MBM]

I'm confused by the lauding of AoPS but then putting down Math Olympiad. Isn't AoPS written by a former Math Olympian with close ties to AMC, AIME and Math Olympiad prep?

 

 

Yes, Richard Rusczyk, who participated in the IMO, founded AoPS with some friends who were also involved with the Math Olympiad (I think).

 

If you want to read more about this, AoPS has a forum full of information about getting into schools like MIT as well as contests. Here are two links if you're interested. The first is an MIT discussion with Matt McGann from MIT. The second is a discussion about AMC/AIME/USAMO/MOP/IMO.

 

http://www.artofprob...jams.php?past=1

http://www.artofprob...75531&hilit=mit

 

There are all kinds of ways to explore interests and they don't need to be expensive. Going to the library and looking through math and science books would be inexpensive. At the summer program my son attended last year, one of the first things the kids did was to form a human chain from the library to their dorms so that they could bring the math books closer to them. Tutoring other kids, forming a math circle, writing to people in math like mathwonk on these boards -- these are some inexpensive ways to pursue and grow math interests. You don't have to spend bundles of money.

[wendyroo]

Were these people from admissions or were they SPARK people? There are students pursuing humanities majors at MIT. I don't think they all worked their heads off in mathematics during high school.

 

 

I'm not so sure about that. I was there...humanities majors are few and far between and still very analytically minded. I looked up the degree statistics, and in 2011 MIT awarded one degree (bachelors, masters or PhD) in history, one in foreign language, two in literature, etc. Plus, many of those are probably students double majoring in one STEM field and one humanities field.

 

Sure, there may be a couple history loving freshman entering MIT, but even they had to score VERY high on the SAT math section in order to be admitted.

 

Wendy

[lisabees]

If you're interested in the topic of MIT admissions, I'd recommend reading the following blog post by Chris Peterson, an admissions counselor at MIT:

http://mitadmissions...plying_sideways

 

 

Loved this. Thank you. :)

[beaners]

I got into MIT (and earned bachelor (2003) and masters (2005) degrees)...

 

 

4. What they want to see more than anything else, what says to them "this kid will fit with our vision for the culture of MIT", is when a kid focuses narrowly early on in adolescence on one very specific interest, then strives to do every single thing one can possibly do related to that interest.

I did not specialize early. I entered MIT with no idea what I wanted to major in (though obviously I was interested in math and engineering). I had a lot of interests and extracurriculars, but they were diverse, not cohesive.

 

Just my experience.

Wendy

 

 

I wonder if this would still be accurate today. I know when I was in high school, you were *supposed* to be in as many activities as possible to show you were well-rounded. It was just starting to shift toward the idea of a single thing a student did very well. From what I've heard, it's moved even more in that direction. Now you're *supposed* to have one major passion from the time you're born ;) if you want a spot at any top school. I don't know if that's actually accurate, of course.

[FaithManor]

My son is thinking of applying to MIT but his advisor told him that MIT, Harvard, Princeton do not have strong math departments. Ugh. I can see we will be doing the college selections ourselves.

 

 

:lol: MIT and Princeton do not have strong math departments???? Well, I've heard a LOT of bad things about school guidance counselors and academic advisors, and I guess I shouldn't be shocked. However, this one really made me snort.

 

Wow, just wow.

 

As for CTY, it's so expensive for kids in our area where the median income has dropped to $29,000.00 per year and many times represents two adults working full-time or one full-time and near full to even make that. The SAT subject tests are not offered within a 3 hr. radius of our home and of course that is more money too, and a nightmare to try to schedule.

 

Faith

[Gwen in VA]

There are students pursuing humanities majors at MIT. I don't think they all worked their heads off in mathematics during high school.

 

As Wendy said, there are VERY VERY few humanities majors at MIT. And even the humanities majors have to make it through two semesters of calculus, two semesters of physics, and at least one semester of chemistry / biology (they changed the requirements a bit ago and I haven't followed the changes). So a humanities major at MIT has STILL taken several semesters of rigorous science and math classes!

 

I knew two humaities majors -- one was a double-major and one had a complete change of direction once at MIT but liked the atmosphere too much to transfer.

 

MIT is really for technicaly-minded folks!

[daijobu]

 

I wish I knew why they don't like the Math Olympiad kids but do like the MathCounts kids.

I am familiar with the former contests but not the latter.

I know the MathCounts kids sometimes win scholarships to college but the Math Olympiad

kids don't. So there is something different.

 

 

 

Are you sure he didn't get this mixed up? If he's thinking about the math olympiad students who earn their positions based on AMC/AIME competitions, these students pretty much walk on water, IMO.

 

As someone else mentioned, MathCounts is a middle school competition only, and while it does teach problem-solving skills and correlates well with AMC, well, MC just isn't as DEEP as Math Olympiads. Although there are at least a couple different math olympiads out there, so maybe there is some confusion. No to dis MC or students who do well on MC; those students are awesome and I'm sure many of them will go on to score well on AMC, too.

[wapiti]

How would they even know that applicants were involved in MathCounts (which my dd enjoys, btw)? It seems unlikely that a middle school activity would wind up on a college application.

[flyingiguana]

There are plenty of good STEM college programs out there. MIT is not the Holy Grail.

 

I got into MIT without any of that stuff. I didn't actually GO there because we couldn't afford it.

 

And the few people I know who did go there don't seem to be any better situated in life than other people who went to "lesser" institutions.

 

The bottom line is that every decent school is going to teach the same stuff. There may be an advantage of contacts, but I have yet to see that in real life.

 

This is an interesting clip:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101823884

Not sure if this was really a random sample.

 

I suspect graduates of any institution would be similarly challenged. It's not just MIT.

[MBM]

There are plenty of good STEM college programs out there. MIT is not the Holy Grail.

 

I got into MIT without any of that stuff. I didn't actually GO there because we couldn't afford it.

 

And the few people I know who did go there don't seem to be any better situated in life than other people who went to "lesser" institutions.

 

The bottom line is that every decent school is going to teach the same stuff. There may be an advantage of contacts, but I have yet to see that in real life.

 

This is an interesting clip:

http://www.democrati...d.com/101823884

Not sure if this was really a random sample.

 

I suspect graduates of any institution would be similarly challenged. It's not just MIT.

 

There are definitely many wonderful STEM programs available. We're just discussing MIT in particular because that was the school the OP brought up but it definitely is not the only good one. It is good, though!

 

The clip cherry-picked a few MIT graduates. Two of them figured out the problem and of those two, one actually did manage to get a little bulb to light using the wire and battery. I'd like to know how many got it right. I would hope the EEs did! LOL.

[Chrysalis Academy]

If you're interested in the topic of MIT admissions, I'd recommend reading the following blog post by Chris Peterson, an admissions counselor at MIT:

http://mitadmissions...plying_sideways

 

Ok, that was awesome!!!

[Susie in CA]

If you're interested in the topic of MIT admissions, I'd recommend reading the following blog post by Chris Peterson, an admissions counselor at MIT:

http://mitadmissions...plying_sideways

 

 

This has to be best down-to-earth advice I have hear in a very long time. Thanks for posting it.

[Laura in CA]

This has to be best down-to-earth advice I have hear in a very long time. Thanks for posting it.

 

Oh, I love it too! I have directed many people to this column over the years and everyone loves it. Thank you, Ravi, for the reminder.

 

 

 

(However, when forwarding, I always add the disclaimer that this line

 

Be nice. This cannot be understated.

 

should instead be "This cannot be overstated" -- right???)

 

 

 

 

And I too am baffled by the remarks about Math Olympiad vs. MATHCOUNTS, and that MIT, Harvard, and Princeton do not have strong math departments ... huh??? (where's that "confused" smilie when I need it, haha)

 

Harvard was good enough for Evan O'Dorney; Princeton was good enough for Andrew Wiles; and ... MIT is MIT ... : )

[Hot Lava Mama]

And CTY is ???? what? Never heard of this before.

Hot Lava Mama

[Dana]

CTY is Center for Talented Youth. It's through Johns Hopkins Talent Search.

[jhschool]

This is an interesting thread.

 

I think also there is something interesting about us.

We would love to have our kids go to MIT, and we want to know

what it takes. But why?

 

The guy's advice is cool, but it's pretty useless. Not trying to be

mean here, but it doesn't help a bit. He tells you to be a smart, good,

passionate person, then tells you that if you don't get into MIT, well, at least

you are smart, good, and passionate. He doesn't really tell you how to

get in, because there is no real answer. He can't tell us, because he doesn't

really know.

 

The truth is, there are thousands of qualified applicants, and only about 1,000

get in every year, and it doesn't mean the other few thousand were any

less qualified. I think a lot of it is luck, and maybe whether your essay or

personal statement really grabbed the attention of the admissions officer that day.

I really don't believe that

the admissions team is actually picking out the 1,000 "best of the best"

among the ones that are actually qualified. I don't believe "best of the best"

exists--after you weed out the non-qualified ones, of course.

I don't believe that the 1,000 that

get in every year are intrinsically different or better in any way than the other

ones, the ones that get rejected. (Talking about qualified applicants only here.)

 

You can have a 4.0 GPA, have perfect SAT / ACT scores, have 10 APs with 5s on

them, know 5 languages, have excellent recommendations, be a super leader in

your organization, volunteer for hundreds of hours, and play 3 instruments with honors,

be a top athlete,

and still not get into some universities. I don't believe there is anything we really

can do to get into one or another university. And I don't believe there is anything

better about the kids that get in vs. the ones that don't.

 

That said, of course MIT, the best engineering school in the world, will have a certain

allure for many of us...we will keep pursuing the dream...what is CTY again? (JK)

[Nan in Mass]

...The guy's advice is cool, but it's pretty useless. Not trying to be

mean here, but it doesn't help a bit. He tells you to be a smart, good,

passionate person, then tells you that if you don't get into MIT, well, at least

you are smart, good, and passionate. He doesn't really tell you how to

get in, because there is no real answer. He can't tell us, because he doesn't

really know....

 

I think people like this blog post because this admissions officer is honest and is using his power to try to improve children's lives rather than try to get them to apply to his school to raise its stats. He says, "A few years ago, we did not admit a student who had created a fully-functional nuclear reactor in his garage." Admissions officers have a reputation for not being honest, for leading their applicants on in an effort to get more students to apply so they can reject them and raise the standing of their school in News Week. Parents don't like being told that their children should give up their childhoods and not do the things that interest them in order to take a million AP's or do a flashy project. This person has a frightening amount of power. If he said that students need 800s on the SATs to get into MIT, parents would make their children spend every weekend chasing after that goal. If he said that if a student has a math SAT score of 700, he has a chance at MIT, MIT would be overwhelmed with applications. Instead, he is using his power to try to improve students' lives and communities. What would you have him do, considering that MIT has no need for more or better applicants. At some point, it is going to be considered so impossible to get in that good students won't even apply. He's fallen back on honesty. The admissions websites all look the same after awhile. They all say they want students who are enterprising, want to fix the world, like to work in teams, think for themselves, lead the pack, work hard, ... At least this person uses words like "nice". At least this person mentions an afterwards - an afterwards when you are (still) a good person even though you didn't get into MIT. When I first read his post, I thought it was refreshingly straight forward, saying that he can't tell us what we want to hear because it doesn't exist so instead he is going to offer some good advice about life. Not anything I didn't know, but at least straight forward.

 

Nan

[Susie in CA]

I agree with Nan's reply one hundred percent!

 

The reason why his blog post is great because it is telling the truth. The truth is you do have a choice. You could make yourself and your family miserable by trying to cover every possible base on courses (and still not make it in) or you can choose what you are going to work hard at and leave time for interests. Imho, leaving time for interest is worth so much more in the long run. Yes, he didn't give specifics because there aren't any. I love the fact that he said it.

[FaithManor]

I think you are spot on, Nan. There is no magic formula. The hallowed halls of admissions will always have their secrets, "This year we want more kids from state X, or zip code Y, or the orchestra needs an oboeist so we'll reject all the pianists that apply, or let's take any qualified applicant that speaks Swahili," or whatever. It changes from year to year; frankly, it might change week to week!" It's Russian Roulette for the top 25 LAC's and Uni's, the odds slightly better for the next 25. A top 50 school is going to eliminate a huge array of applicants for a variety of reasons that will never be known to the parents and students.

 

Faith

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I think people like this blog post because this admissions officer is honest and is using his power to try to improve children's lives rather than try to get them to apply to his school to raise its stats. He says, "A few years ago, we did not admit a student who had created a fully-functional nuclear reactor in his garage." Admissions officers have a reputation for not being honest, for leading their applicants on in an effort to get more students to apply so they can reject them and raise the standing of their school in News Week. Parents don't like being told that their children should give up their childhoods and not do the things that interest them in order to take a million AP's or do a flashy project. This person has a frightening amount of power. If he said that students need 800s on the SATs to get into MIT, parents would make their children spend every weekend chasing after that goal. If he said that if a student has a math SAT score of 700, he has a chance at MIT, MIT would be overwhelmed with applications. Instead, he is using his power to try to improve students' lives and communities. What would you have him do, considering that MIT has no need for more or better applicants. At some point, it is going to be considered so impossible to get in that good students won't even apply. He's fallen back on honesty. The admissions websites all look the same after awhile. They all say they want students who are enterprising, want to fix the world, like to work in teams, think for themselves, lead the pack, work hard, ... At least this person uses words like "nice". At least this person mentions an afterwards - an afterwards when you are (still) a good person even though you didn't get into MIT. When I first read his post, I thought it was refreshingly straight forward, saying that he can't tell us what we want to hear because it doesn't exist so instead he is going to offer some good advice about life. Not anything I didn't know, but at least straight forward.

 

Nan

 

 

I think you need to take two things from the blog post:

-There is no magic bullet for admissions -- they didn't admit the kid who made the reactor

-There isn't a magic bullet for everyone else either -- they did admit a thousand kids who didn't build a reactor.

 

I see this each year with academy admissions. I'll have a young student a few years away from applying ask if xyz or abc would be looked at better. Not only are there too many variables, but I don't know which one the student has more of a passion for and would put more effort into. Is it really a good use of time for a student to put hours and years into an activity they don't really love on the off chance that it will get them into the college they think they want? When the deciding factor may well be outside their control (budget cuts, geographic diversity, other students in their area just being better candidates)?

 

Last cycle, USNA had enough QUALIFIED candidates to fill the class a couple times over. There are obvious red flag items (not passing the Candidate Fitness Assessment, low test scores or low grades that indicate the student will struggle with academics, lack of evidence that the student will thrive in the high pressure environment, or concerns that the student isn't really interested in military service). But beyond those, it is a matter of weighing a lot of different factors and trying to make up a good class.

 

There will be qualified students and good kids who are turned down. So the student might as well pursue what is of interest to them, not what they perceive will interest admissions. JMHO.

[MBM]

And I too am baffled by the remarks about Math Olympiad vs. MATHCOUNTS, and that MIT, Harvard, and Princeton do not have strong math departments ... huh??? (where's that "confused" smilie when I need it, haha)

 

Harvard was good enough for Evan O'Dorney; Princeton was good enough for Andrew Wiles; and ... MIT is MIT ... : )

 

Anymore nowadays, I'm surprised when counselors and teachers DO know about math programs. My son's counselor also told him that summer math programs like Ross, MathCamp, HCSSiM, etc. are not all that meaningful to colleges. She seems to be more knowledgeable about liberal arts than math and science. Unfortunately, ds cannot switch to a different counselor. Eh. I wasn't planning on relying on her advice anyway, but still, she should at least know a little more about university math departments.

[quark]

If you're interested in the topic of MIT admissions, I'd recommend reading the following blog post by Chris Peterson, an admissions counselor at MIT:

http://mitadmissions...plying_sideways

 

 

I loved this too. Thank you for sharing it, RaviB.

[Nan in Mass]

I just wanted to add, for the sake of people reading this thread who don't have children headed for MIT, that there are many, many colleges that ARE able to tell you what they want beforehand. They will even offer advice if asked questions about whether they would rather see physics or chemistry, or whether it will put a candidate at a disadvantage if he doesn't take an SAT2 (two questions we've asked). Some admissions offices do seem to make an effort to be transparent and straight forward. They just tend not to be the colleges that have enough academic super-stars to fill their seats several times over. There are even colleges, ones that don't have open admissions, that post, on their websites, their criteria (usually a combination of SAT and GPA). After that, they fill their seats on a first come, first serve basis. There is no need to panic unless you are looking at the very selective schools. Even then, panicking won't help. What will help then is to be interesting, to do things, to be academically curious, to have excellent test scores and gpa, and to apply to lots of school in the hope that one, at least, will want you for your particular interests.

 

I wonder if the ivies and places like MIT wish they could line up all the applicants together in one big line according to interests and take turns choosing them, like choosing teams in gym class. Then they wouldn't have to play guessing games about who was going to accept which offer.

 

Nan

 

Nan

[RootAnn]

I'm pretty sure I put Math Counts on my college application. :tongue_smilie:

The one guy I knew who got into MIT did Math Counts, didn't do CTY, and did well in a variety of things, but didn't have any one passion. He was one of the Chem lab assistants, though.

 

High school guidance counselors take the cake. Mine told my sister she would always regret dropping Pre-Calc after one semester. As an entrepreneur who does Public Relations, she never has. Same guy told me I'd regret not taking Composition in high school. As an engineer, I never have. The local flake here doesn't encourage the top students take the PSAT their junior year because it is just "practice" for the SAT, and we take the ACT around here in these parts. (There goes their chance for National Merit!)

[Dana]

High school guidance counselors take the cake. Mine told my sister she would always regret dropping Pre-Calc after one semester. As an entrepreneur who does Public Relations, she never has. Same guy told me I'd regret not taking Composition in high school. As an engineer, I never have. The local flake here doesn't encourage the top students take the PSAT their junior year because it is just "practice" for the SAT, and we take the ACT around here in these parts. (There goes their chance for National Merit!)

 

Head guidance counselor at my hs told me not to bother filling out the circle about Telluride on PSAT because "Nobody here would get accepted anyway." (I wasn't... but I was invited to apply... I filled in the circle anyway :) )

[Sebastian (a lady)]

 

 

I wonder if the ivies and places like MIT wish they could line up all the applicants together in one big line according to interests and take turns choosing them, like choosing teams in gym class. Then they wouldn't have to play guessing games about who was going to accept which offer.

 

Nan

 

Nan

 

 

I think they would only agree to this if we first pinned marked envelopes of cash to their shirts to represent our ability to pay without aid.

[jhschool]

I actually agree with Nan and the other person. Everything they say

makes perfect sense to me. I do think the admissions essay

from the guy is cool, and his essay is pretty cool (and very well written).

It's an interesting thing:

 

We all clicked on this thread, and clicked on the essay, thinking there would be

answers. And when we are told there is no answer, at least we had a happy feeling.

I am not complaining about the essay--I liked getting the happy feeling too! I also felt

relief--and I wonder: why should I feel relief from being told by an admissions officer that

my kid should be smart, good and passionate? I knew that already...but I did feel the

relief...why?

:)

I also wonder why we care about MIT admissions. I do care, to be honest, and I wonder why.

Is it the prestige? Is it the better education DS would receive there? (Would he?)

There are good questions to ask myself here...

I did like his essay and thought it was cool. :thumbup1:

[FaithManor]

 

I wonder if the ivies and places like MIT wish they could line up all the applicants together in one big line according to interests and take turns choosing them, like choosing teams in gym class. Then they wouldn't have to play guessing games about who was going to accept which offer.

 

Nan

 

Flashbacks to gym class :svengo: !

 

X teams of Dodge Ball, the team with the most kids still standing, gets to be the new freshman class.

 

SHUDDER!!!!

 

Faith

[Nan in Mass]

 

 

I think they would only agree to this if we first pinned marked envelopes of cash to their shirts to represent our ability to pay without aid.

 

No need to do that, just line them up in order with that as the criteria, like making students line up according to height. : )

Nan

[Nan in Mass]

 

 

Flashbacks to gym class :svengo: !

 

X teams of Dodge Ball, the team with the most kids still standing, gets to be the new freshman class.

 

SHUDDER!!!!

 

Faith

 

Terrifying.

 

I was scared of the ball and very small. I hid behind all the rest of the kids until they were eliminated and usually wound up running around alone at the end while the biggest toughest kids on the opposite team tried to knock me down. It was horrible. If I'd had any sense, I would have run towards the ball when it was going slowly and gotten myself eliminated soon in the game. I wonder what that translates to in our analogy?

 

More shudders - Remember Red Rover?

 

Nan

[Nan in Mass]

I actually agree with Nan and the other person. Everything they say

makes perfect sense to me. I do think the admissions essay

from the guy is cool, and his essay is pretty cool (and very well written).

It's an interesting thing:

 

We all clicked on this thread, and clicked on the essay, thinking there would be

answers. And when we are told there is no answer, at least we had a happy feeling.

I am not complaining about the essay--I liked getting the happy feeling too! I also felt

relief--and I wonder: why should I feel relief from being told by an admissions officer that

my kid should be smart, good and passionate? I knew that already...but I did feel the

relief...why?

:)

I also wonder why we care about MIT admissions. I do care, to be honest, and I wonder why.

Is it the prestige? Is it the better education DS would receive there? (Would he?)

There are good questions to ask myself here...

I did like his essay and thought it was cool. :thumbup1:

 

I can tell you why we wish our youngest could go to MIT - the combination of people who know interesting things, lots of interesting, creative fellow students AND ALL THAT LAB EQUIPMENT is pretty much irresistible if you are somebody like my son. He drooled over their laser lab and got somebody there to test the super powered laser flashlight he made. It has nothing to do with prestige. Where I live, that isn't a big issue. Lots of people go to MIT. (The ivies are more a prestige thing.) We didn't encourage our son to apply because if, by chance he got in, we suspect he'd have to spend so much time doing his problem sets that he wouldn't have the time to do anything fun with all those interesting people and all that interesting equipment. We think he'll be better off at an easier geeky school. The school he wants to go to has open workbenches to play at. He already has interesting friends in some of the clubs. Or he'd be fine at one of the other geek schools. (One offered him a 1/3 ride and one a 1/2 ride - lol - my husband is definately more convinced than my son that he'd be fine at one of the other geeky schools).

 

Nan

[MBM]

Any college experience is only as good as the student makes of it.

 

MIT could be a wonderful place for the right student, but it isn't right for everyone nor do all students want to go there. My eldest son went to IMSA (Illinois Math and Science) and neither he nor his friends were interested in MIT. I think at least one or two of them could have been accepted. I recently saw about a dozen of them at my son's wedding, and they have all been doing interesting things since high school. Of course, many of the MIT grads do really interesting things, too.

 

My youngest's #1 choice as of now is U of Chicago. He doesn't care at all about the prestige of any school. If anything, he finds the prestige off-putting. He just wants to go somewhere where he can work on challenging math with like-minded people. U of C's math department fits the bill and, even better, behaves like a caring family. I think he would also consider a place like Hampshire if it meant he could work with someone like David Kelly.

 

There are all kinds of places where kids can go and have good experiences. MIT is just one of them.

[Dmmetler]

My thought on CTY, Math Counts and the like- I was on faculty at a good state university music program, and when we saw kids who'd done the summer camps at various universities, or camps like Blue Lake or Interlochen, we were reasonably confident that this was a kid who actually was going to make it with the workload of a music major, even if they hadn't gotten all the awards or scored slightly lower on their audition (usually because of difficulty level of selections) than another. Not because the other might not be qualified, but because the kid who'd spent 6 weeks or longer on an intense, college-level schedule, without mommy there to push them along and get them to wake up in time for class in the morning (less so for the camps, more so for the on-campus programs) has effectively already done it, and come back for more.

 

I can see the same thing being attractive to a STEM school-the kid who willingly spent the summer at Governor's Schools, or CTY engineering programs, or spent a good part of the year trying to get ready for AMC and AIME is probably the one who is going to not fall apart their freshman year without mommy there.

 

I will also say that for my university, doing it without having mommy/daddy write a big check was looked on highly, especially for scholarships. That is, if the kid was singing in four church choirs/ensembles and assisting in directing the children's choir in exchange for theory lessons at once church and singing lessons at another, that's looked on more highly, all else being equal or close to equal, than the kid who has been able to take private violin lessons since she was 4, singing lessons since she was 12, and has spent every summer at music camp. That might not apply to MIT, though.

[Nan in Mass]

...and, even better, behaves like a caring family...

 

Yes. MIT is big.

 

My son definately wanted a smaller school. The big-fish-in-a-little-pond effect is something he is trying to avoid (too much attention), but he wants someplace more managable than, say Northeastern or BU (to name some places where it now appears he had a good chance of getting in, not the case at MIT lol). And some students blossom when they are a big fish and wilt when they are a lonely little fish, whereas, some just do what they want big or small pond, and others find a small pond hampers them.

 

Nan, who feels rather silly being part of this conversation. I just jumped in because we know a number of people who went to MIT. And because we were relieved when he decided not to apply just on the off chance they wanted him.