Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let’s tee this up: how does a white boy from NW DC at Jackson-Reed, MacArthur-Thompson, SWW, or Banneker with a 1520 SAT and varsity sports experience (not good enough for DI), some volunteering experience and STEM-centric club membership (not leadership) at school and a 3.9 unweighted get into MIT?

(I ask like this because I don’t think it’s possible.)

This is just too mediocre.

Actually zero chance at any T20, let alone MIT.

Anonymous wrote:So let’s tee this up: how does a white boy from NW DC at Jackson-Reed, MacArthur-Thompson, SWW, or Banneker with a 1520 SAT and varsity sports experience (not good enough for DI), some volunteering experience and STEM-centric club membership (not leadership) at school and a 3.9 unweighted get into MIT?

(I ask like this because I don’t think it’s possible.)

This is just too mediocre.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let’s tee this up: how does a white boy from NW DC at Jackson-Reed, MacArthur-Thompson, SWW, or Banneker with a 1520 SAT and varsity sports experience (not good enough for DI), some volunteering experience and STEM-centric club membership (not leadership) at school and a 3.9 unweighted get into MIT?

(I ask like this because I don’t think it’s possible.)

Unless he's good enough for D3, and even then the chances aren't good. MIT coaches pick carefully, because they're looking for kids they think they can get through admissions. I think the 3.9, and the lack of leadership, would turn them away. But if they decided to take a chance, MIT admissions rejects about half of athletes with coach support.

My kid was offered support at MIT so I'm familiar with the process

The 3.9 is fine as long as the rigor is the highest available at your school. The single most consistent thing that we heard from the coaches during 10th and 11th grade is that you must always take the hardest course available to you for your core subjects. Mostly A's are necessary but a B+ or an A- isn't a problem for a term but the other part of the year should be an A. A little bump isn't an issue. My kid had a bit above 3.9 with highest rigor and nobody blinked.

SAT score. They say 1500 with a 750M but it really isn't sufficient in most cases. Coach told us that 1520 was probably the bar with a 750V 770M. Above 770 he said that it didn't matter. My kid had a 1560 780/780 and the coach was far more interested in the Verbal score than the math. We had the exact same experience at WashU.

They understand that your sport is your EC so there is leeway here but the feedback was that they want to see consistent interest in something. Mne kid had a couple of hundred volunteer hours at a hospital and over 100 at a foodbank.

For leadership she was a team captain for multiple years both HS and club but that was it.

In terms of athletic ability she is mid-major D1 level, she had offers from Patriot League and A10 schools in her sport. She played on a HS team that was a perennial top 30 team nationally and in the top 10 during two of her years.

Regarding chances I am supposed to say 50%-66% but I'd be surprised if you didn't make it through. The previous year a girl on her team didn't make it through with similar but slighty different stats.

Can't tell you how it turned out at MIT because mine ultimately took a different offer and didn't apply to MIT.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MIT recruits and they do pre-reads in that coaches make you submit your stats so they can tell if they're enough. which is what a pre-read is.

I dont know who said MIT doesn't recruit - everyone is anon - but one person is. I'm not the only person saying MIT recruits either.

And some MIT coaches do NOT support more than they need. This is coach by coach at MIT and at several colleges.

Someone said that MIT admissions does pre-reads. They do not. MIT coaches absolutely look at stats, and take them into account when they decide whose application to support. They have a sense of who is more or less likely to get in. But even with that support, they bat about .500. Many recruits get turned down. But ADMISSIONS does not do pre-reads. The poster who said they did was wrong. If you want to use the word pre-read for the coaches looking, I don't know what to say. That's not the way the term is generally used in athletic recruiting.

Adding on to this-- when the kid that the coach decided to support actually doesn't get accepted, the coach will scramble and find another kid to support but this can be late in the game-- like a month before EA admission are released. Ask me how I know . . .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m OP and do think females get in easier that’s why I asked if my DD has a chance without awards.

It's still a crap shoot. My DD had a 1580/ top rigor at top private / good ECs & service but no awards. Admitted to two Ivies; rejected from MIT. The only private school kids who've been accepted from our area in the past five years are all athletes.

it's a crap shoot at all these schools. my son was accepted to MIT (he's 25 now, so I know things change) and waitlisted at HYP, Penn, and Brown. luckily had the MIT acceptance before Ivy Day otherwise that would have been a depressing day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MIT recruits and they do pre-reads in that coaches make you submit your stats so they can tell if they're enough. which is what a pre-read is.

I dont know who said MIT doesn't recruit - everyone is anon - but one person is. I'm not the only person saying MIT recruits either.

And some MIT coaches do NOT support more than they need. This is coach by coach at MIT and at several colleges.

Someone said that MIT admissions does pre-reads. They do not. MIT coaches absolutely look at stats, and take them into account when they decide whose application to support. They have a sense of who is more or less likely to get in. But even with that support, they bat about .500. Many recruits get turned down. But ADMISSIONS does not do pre-reads. The poster who said they did was wrong. If you want to use the word pre-read for the coaches looking, I don't know what to say. That's not the way the term is generally used in athletic recruiting.

Yes they do, if they are trying to be fair to the kids. DC had to submit a very detailed application in the MIT pre-read phase. Athletic liaison who works with admissions has it reviewed.

Athletics reviewed it. The PP said that admissions did a pre-read. Your kid’s pre-read was done by athletics staff.

Did the athletics staff promise him a spot?

Only kids who passed the pre-read with admissions were invited on official visits and offered coach's support. Of course there was no promise which is why DC chose another path.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MIT recruits and they do pre-reads in that coaches make you submit your stats so they can tell if they're enough. which is what a pre-read is.

I dont know who said MIT doesn't recruit - everyone is anon - but one person is. I'm not the only person saying MIT recruits either.

And some MIT coaches do NOT support more than they need. This is coach by coach at MIT and at several colleges.

Someone said that MIT admissions does pre-reads. They do not. MIT coaches absolutely look at stats, and take them into account when they decide whose application to support. They have a sense of who is more or less likely to get in. But even with that support, they bat about .500. Many recruits get turned down. But ADMISSIONS does not do pre-reads. The poster who said they did was wrong. If you want to use the word pre-read for the coaches looking, I don't know what to say. That's not the way the term is generally used in athletic recruiting.

Yes they do, if they are trying to be fair to the kids. DC had to submit a very detailed application in the MIT pre-read phase. Athletic liaison who works with admissions has it reviewed.

Athletics reviewed it. The PP said that admissions did a pre-read. Your kid’s pre-read was done by athletics staff.

Did the athletics staff promise him a spot?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MIT recruits and they do pre-reads in that coaches make you submit your stats so they can tell if they're enough. which is what a pre-read is.

I dont know who said MIT doesn't recruit - everyone is anon - but one person is. I'm not the only person saying MIT recruits either.

And some MIT coaches do NOT support more than they need. This is coach by coach at MIT and at several colleges.

Someone said that MIT admissions does pre-reads. They do not. MIT coaches absolutely look at stats, and take them into account when they decide whose application to support. They have a sense of who is more or less likely to get in. But even with that support, they bat about .500. Many recruits get turned down. But ADMISSIONS does not do pre-reads. The poster who said they did was wrong. If you want to use the word pre-read for the coaches looking, I don't know what to say. That's not the way the term is generally used in athletic recruiting.

Yes they do, if they are trying to be fair to the kids. DC had to submit a very detailed application in the MIT pre-read phase. Athletic liaison who works with admissions has it reviewed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m OP and do think females get in easier that’s why I asked if my DD has a chance without awards.

It's still a crap shoot. My DD had a 1580/ top rigor at top private / good ECs & service but no awards. Admitted to two Ivies; rejected from MIT. The only private school kids who've been accepted from our area in the past five years are all athletes.

good to know!
what Ivys if you dont mind sharing?

Anonymous wrote:I’m OP and do think females get in easier that’s why I asked if my DD has a chance without awards.

It's still a crap shoot. My DD had a 1580/ top rigor at top private / good ECs & service but no awards. Admitted to two Ivies; rejected from MIT. The only private school kids who've been accepted from our area in the past five years are all athletes.

Anonymous wrote:MIT recruits and they do pre-reads in that coaches make you submit your stats so they can tell if they're enough. which is what a pre-read is.

I dont know who said MIT doesn't recruit - everyone is anon - but one person is. I'm not the only person saying MIT recruits either.

And some MIT coaches do NOT support more than they need. This is coach by coach at MIT and at several colleges.

Someone said that MIT admissions does pre-reads. They do not. MIT coaches absolutely look at stats, and take them into account when they decide whose application to support. They have a sense of who is more or less likely to get in. But even with that support, they bat about .500. Many recruits get turned down. But ADMISSIONS does not do pre-reads. The poster who said they did was wrong. If you want to use the word pre-read for the coaches looking, I don't know what to say. That's not the way the term is generally used in athletic recruiting.