MIT Admissions

A teammate of mine who applied to MIT last year was contacted by the coach, who told him that if he broke 4:30 and agreed to run for the team, his chance of admission would increase by 40%. Or something along those lines.

Graduated from mit in mid 80s. Got in with 4.0 avg and 1300 sats. Well roundedness counts for a lot. I was an avg varsity xc and track runner. Just apply - the worst thing they can say is no.

Actually I met with the coach, and he said he could "get me in" if I said the word. I do think that he's allowed to request a few people to help with their applications. You have to be dedicated to MIT and willing to committ though, which I was not.

Granted, you need to have the grades, etc. I have a 35 and 2270 and 4.0 but I don't think that you necessarily need perfect scores... Actually the coach seemed more impressed with my post-secondary enrollment classes than my 4.0.

MIT recruit wrote:

Actually I met with the coach, and he said he could "get me in" if I said the word. I do think that he's allowed to request a few people to help with their applications. You have to be dedicated to MIT and willing to committ though, which I was not.

Granted, you need to have the grades, etc. I have a 35 and 2270 and 4.0 but I don't think that you necessarily need perfect scores... Actually the coach seemed more impressed with my post-secondary enrollment classes than my 4.0.

This is pretty much bullshit. The upper echelon schools in DIII (MIT, CMU, Williams, WashU, etc.) can *help*, but every admissions department will tell that coach to cram it if the kid isn't even close.

Some schools make more exceptions than others (Emory is a notable one) but by and large, if you can't get in, your athletic career gets you like, 0.1+ GPA and maybe 50-100 SAT points.

One thing that I recommend is applying into an easier college within the University and internally transferring into the program you actually want. That won't work at a MIT or CMU if you try to go from English to Computer Science, but as long as it's reasonable, you could pull it off.

agreed wrote:

Lol the year I got a perfect 1600 I was one of about 150 in the country with approximately one million test takers. Trust me if you literally get a perfect SAT your mailbox will fill up with personal letters and you'll get phone calls from tons of schools.

In 2009 there were 1192 1600s (M+CR).

I applied to MIT and tried to get admission support, but didn't--he said I had to hit a certain time and I couldn't quite get it. From what I learned:

The coaches have a certain number of "flags" they can put on files, and that's really the only pull they have. Nobody's entirely sure how seriously the admissions office really takes these, but flagged files were admitted at a 30% rate, while the normal admission rate is only 9.7%. For comparison, MIT only admitted 15% of students with a 750+ Math SAT score. So it's definitely a significant aid to have athletic admission support.

I applied Early Action with a 2370 SAT, 800/800/790/740 for SAT IIs, 4.2 W/3.88 UW GPA (4.03 W/3.78 UW after junior year), from an extremely competitive prep school, with very good extracurriculars. Ended up NOT getting any athletic admission support and was deferred and then waitlisted. Admittedly my GPA wasn't that great for the MIT applicant pool, but still, that's a really tough school to get into.

MIT recruit wrote:

Actually I met with the coach, and he said he could "get me in" if I said the word.

That sounds like a very odd thing for Coach Taylor to say.

I graduated from M.I.T. many years ago, when the athletic department had no input whatsoever in the admissions process. (Athletic "recruiting" at M.I.T. consisted of sending out a brochure to anyone who checked off a box expressing an interest in a particular sport.) I understand it's a bit different now, but I'd hate to think that coaches at M.I.T. have the power to get anyone admitted.

Azaleas wrote:

In 2009 there were 1192 1600s (M+CR).

This is so far from true it's almost infuriating. Why do people just make stuff up. First of all, whether you like it or not, the SAT is now a 2400 point test. Less than 300 kids hit 2400 on the SAT in any given year.

BTW- Athletics helps wherever you go, including MIT. I just found out one of the kids I work with has been accepted there. (She did not get a perfect SAT but did hit 800 on the math.) If a coach tells you they have no pull, they mean you're not good enough for them to use it.

Well actually its not an all-white demographic who apply to MIT -- there are a ton of Indian, Pakistani, Chinese, etc. More than at other schools. But hey, if I got in, you can too!

You kids are kind of missing the point. Top schools get thousands of " perfect" applicants. They are looking for driven, purposeful individuals. For instance I know a girl who got into Harvard because she was totally into dance (had straight As, but no APs and probably above average SATs, but far from perfect). She ended up going elsewhere because of cost, but that's not the point. Running could be your ticket if you show that " it's your thing". At a technical school like MIT, it might help to show a more technical side of running ( like the grad student who made a carb-loading calculator). In summary, show that you are motivated, have initiative and would probably be successful and a leader with or without an Elite education and you' ll get noticed.

By the way, talking to a coach, or even better a department head is a great way to at least get your application looked at. While a coach may not be able to admit you, they can certainly look out for you app and get a human to look at it.

This is such BS. What does "totally into dance" mean? If she was not an extremely accomplished dancer, there is no way she gets into Harvard with "above average SATs" unless you mean three or four standard deviations "above average." Since, as mentioned above, there are less than 300 perfect SATs, using 2400 as perfect even though you can miss and still get 2400, there are not "thousands" of perfect applicants. The mythology some people on this site expect to us to just take on faith is ridiculous. If you're going to make something up, at least make it somewhat believable. Say the girl gave the admissions guy a lap dance and then got in. (Although I still wouldn't believe that at Harvard, Brown maybe.)

Old academic wrote:

You kids are kind of missing the point. Top schools get thousands of " perfect" applicants. They are looking for driven, purposeful individuals. For instance I know a girl who got into Harvard because she was totally into dance (had straight As, but no APs and probably above average SATs, but far from perfect). She ended up going elsewhere because of cost, but that's not the point. Running could be your ticket if you show that " it's your thing". At a technical school like MIT, it might help to show a more technical side of running ( like the grad student who made a carb-loading calculator). In summary, show that you are motivated, have initiative and would probably be successful and a leader with or without an Elite education and you' ll get noticed.

HS Coach2 wrote:

Azaleas wrote:

In 2009 there were 1192 1600s (M+CR).

This is so far from true it's almost infuriating. Why do people just make stuff up. First of all, whether you like it or not, the SAT is now a 2400 point test. Less than 300 kids hit 2400 on the SAT in any given year.

Y u mad, bro? In 2009 there were 297 2400s, and presumably many more 1600s. A post on college confidential said it was 1192, and I'm inclined to believe that. The writing section is stupid, which is why I didn't include it. And before you accuse me, I did fine on the writing section.

Also you're wrong about MIT; the coach really doesn't have much pull at all. If he did they'd have a much better team.

I ran for MIT and had extensive contact with Coach Taylor prior to my admission so I feel that I can weigh in here:My academic stats were average as an applicant: 4.5 GPA weighted, 1550 SAT, 10 APs with scores of 5, one 4. I also had started doing independent research even before high school (including a few state science fairs), had a bunch of extracurriculars, etc. And yet I still didn't think it would be enough to give me more than an outside shot of getting in.In terms of running I was a 4:22/1:57/9:39 guy, and at the time that was pretty good for the program. (These days MIT has several sub 4:20 matriculants per year).This is what I can tell you for sure: extracurriculars matter, but only if you excel at them. It's one thing to say "I played piano for 12 years" and another to say "I performed at Carnegie Hall." Similarly, it's one thing to say "I ran track and XC for 4 years" and another to say "I was state champion."The admissions office doesn't know a 4:05 runner from a 4:50 runner. But when the Coach contacts them and gives context to their extracurricular of running in that "This applicant will be able to make a big contribution to the program" it provides context and validity to their application.In my case the Coach told me that he put me down as the "top recruit" in a list he submitted to the admissions office (a list they can choose to ignore) and that it would help give an edge to my file.Looking back on it I was fortunate that I applied at a time when the program was in a lull as these days I wouldn't be considered anything special. (In my defense, however, I did end up breaking the 1500m record did fairly well at nationals, so I feel that I earned my keep in those respects).Best of luck, hope this helped.

HS Junior wrote:

Provided one has the grades and the resume, can running help a person get into an elite tier school like MI? Its DIII, so how fast would one have to run in order for recruting to affect admissions?

Azaleas wrote:

Y u mad, bro? In 2009 there were 297 2400s, and presumably many more 1600s. A post on college confidential said it was 1192, and I'm inclined to believe that. The writing section is stupid, which is why I didn't include it. And before you accuse me, I did fine on the writing section.

Also you're wrong about MIT; the coach really doesn't have much pull at all. If he did they'd have a much better team.

Well, you're wrong about both. There were not over 1000 people who got over 1600 on the two tests and like I said, whether you like it or not, the writing is part of the test so getting 1600 and then 750 on writing is still not perfect. Maybe perfect wasn't on the SAT you took, look it up. As has been specified by a few actual MIT recruits, a flag in your file for being a 4:10 miler does help, as does playing piano at Juliard.

Do you have any proof that there weren't 1000 people with perfect scores on the legitimate sections of the SAT? I see 300 perfect scores. Everyone knows the essay section is poorly scored and nearly random, which makes it nearly impossible to get a 2400. Regardless, there were 300 perfect scores, which is way more than the 150 you originally said for 1600. Kids with perfect SATs routinely get rejected from MIT, because the SAT isn't a great predictor of future success.

Anyway, compare MIT's team to Princeton's and tell me they get much help on admission. So far we have people with 1550's and research experience saying the coach helped them some, not 1300s and mediocre grades. Yeah, if you're a very good candidate, being a good runner will help a little bit. A kid with a 1250 SAT won't get in short of being a 3:55 miler, and even then it'd be a stretch.

I see the problem now. You can't read. I never said there were 150 perfect scores. That was someone else. There were not 300 perfect scores. There were slightly less. So I guess you don't work well with numbers either. Also willing to help with a word for you to look up in addition to "perfect." Try "legitimate." For the third time, whether you like it or not, writing is a legitimate portion of the SAT. 1250 on the SAT would be pathetic as that is a little over 400 per section. People like you like to pretend all these kids are sitting there with perfect scores and getting rejected. It's just not true.

Perfect scores are a big deal, as is having a high level achievement that is non academic. I knew a guy who got 1510 on the old test (two scores) who got rejected by the top Ivy league schools. I got less than that and had a lower GPA and got in. (I didn't go as I didn't like the recruiting trips.) Since then I have called the coach at every top school that one of my athlete wants to go to and every single one has told me legacies and recruits have different admissions standards (although they are still pretty high.)

Whoa, how did you figure out that I can't read? You're actually right, I usually just respond to posts based on some advanced guessing techniques and a mild ESP ability I developed in lieu of reading during my school days.

Perfect scores are a "big deal" in that they're rare. They're not a big deal in that they don't actually tell you who's brilliant, just who's well rounded. I scored a 2350 and I'll be the first to admit that I'm not going to change the world; some of the most brilliant people I know only score 1250/1600 because they're awful at anything outside of math. I'm also confused by your story about the 1510 guy who got rejected, since it pretty much just agrees with what I'm saying here.

Anyway, I didn't say that there aren't different standards for some people, just that they don't matter much. Also, at excellent schools coaches usually only have a couple of "pull" candidates. So a coach can say to admissions: "Hey, I really want this guy to get in", and if he's a decent candidate he'll be admitted. Everyone won't get in, though, and the coach won't waste his pull on you unless you're a great runner already. From what I've heard, MIT doesn't give athletes MUCH of a pull. You'll still need to be a good candidate, which isn't true at other elite schools. I know a 4:14 miler who couldn't have scored much above 1300 on the SAT, but currently runs at Princeton.

the essay section is poorly scored, but far from random. I got a 12 and told my friend who's a mediocre student (got a 1900) how to write one and he got a 12 aswell.

Seeing as you can get a 10/12 and still get an 800 for writing and then 1-2 reading wrong and stil lget an 800, it's not that difficult. I'm fro ma sh/tty public school and we have 10 kids over 2200, 3 over 2350, 1 who was 1 question off 2400.