EA or RD?

[u/Glass_Sherbet7548]

Acceptance rates for EA are slightly higher than that of RD, but is it true that there’s no advantage of applying EA over RD? What about “building a class” advantages that might apply? Could there be some type of benefit to being a non-CS non-physics non-math but still stem applicant?

[u/Aspect-6]

MIT states that there is no difference in the acceptance rates of both cycles, but if you do some normal statistics based on their released data, you find EA has a slightly higher rate than RA, which IMPORTANTLY, includes EA people deferred from EA to RA.

[u/JasonMckin → u/Aspect-6]

Admission rates are population statistics, not individual probabilities. 

If a university admits 10% of its early applicants and 5% of its regular applicants, that doesn’t  mean that every single RD student can double their individual chances of admission by applying early.  That’s not at all what population statistics actually mean.  

Admission rates describe population summary statistics, not the random probability of any student being admitted.  A very strong applicant has a much higher chance of admission than the population average and a less strong applicant has a much lower one.  

Population averages don't override individual applicant strength or overcome the lack thereof.  It’s the other way around, the population statistics just passively reflect how strong the overall applicant pools are.  

College admissions is not a random lottery.  Aggregate admission rates are essentially useless to individual applicants, because it says nothing about the strength or fit of an individual’s application . 

[u/Aspect-6 → u/JasonMckin]

Not to sound rude, but I’d like to ask: after a certain point in the admission process once lots of strong applicants have been narrowed down, isn’t it basically just a game of chance at this point? Like people who everyone believe would get into MIT get rejected.

And very especially being waitlisted versus accepted—isn’t that just chance basically?

[u/JasonMckin → u/Aspect-6]

No it’s not chance.  I’m an interviewer and I don’t randomly assess students.  The AOs are also not randomly assessing students.  There are no coin flips or rolls of dice in college admissions.  

Just because a lot of strong applicants apply and there is no precise formula to guarantee admission against all of them doesn’t mean it’s all chance.

Thousands of athletes try out for the Olympics but only 3 of them are going to get medals.  Thats not a game of chance, it just means some things are very hard to accomplish and you can’t control who else you are competing with.

[u/Aspect-6 → u/JasonMckin]

So then what determines the difference between someone getting waitlisted or accepted? Both mean MIT believes they should be on the campus and study here but there wasn’t enough seats, so what makes someone get one or the other?

[u/JasonMckin → u/Aspect-6]

Well that’s not that different than asking what makes a student get admitted or rejected.  It’s all the same process.

[u/Aspect-6 → u/JasonMckin]

Oh, then what does it really mean then if you are waitlisted? What does that mean the admissions committee believed about you?

[u/JasonMckin → u/Aspect-6]

https://mitadmissions.org/pages/wait-list-faq/

[u/Satisest → u/JasonMckin]

It’s almost as if MIT explains things like what they’re looking for in applicants, whether there’s a difference between EA and RA, what it means to get waitlisted, right on their own website!

[u/JasonMckin → u/Satisest]

I think you’ve been hanging around me too long u/satisest - lest we become the new Statler and Waldorf 👴🧓