Help concerning application to EECS at MIT

[Andrew Skood]

Guys,

I need a hand from you here. This year I've applied only to EECS @ MIT due to professional and research reasons. I mean, I am already a graduate student of a nice U.S. university (top 5 in Engineering at least). However, it has been very difficult to take my research forward, since I don't have a proper interdepartmental support here (I fought a lot to have it, but... well, no deal). And, after a loooong search and many talks, I found a wonderful fitting in a department (Brain and Cognitive Sciences) at MIT to give me that interdepartmental support. I then applied to EECS and guess what happened: I was not admitted. The point is that some people, some distinguished people I have contacted told me that, in their opinion, I should have been admitted. I mean, I am afraid of what could has happened, so I ask you guys to take a look at a brief summary of my application as follows:

- 2 research projects with a big nationwide impact in my country + 1 big project to Hewlett-Packard;

- 2 Journal Papers + 2 Thesis (Grad and Undergrad) + 2 other Journals Papers underway;

- Best Student at (possibly) the best University of South America in Engineering (A very important note here: many times during my studies I had to work in 2 different jobs at the same time to pay my bills. I really don't know how I did that, really don't know...);

- 4+ years of TA experience;

- 5+ years of RA experience;

- Fulbright Fellowship (for next 3 years);

- Research Proposal at least suitable and convenient;

Also, a Professor from the EECS department was willing to have me as his student, but anyway... Well, I'd be very glad if you all make comments about the situation (especially from those who know that department better than me, or from those who have been admitted). I mean, please tell where I could have failed, and, if not, tell me if I should talk to someone to the committee or whatever. I really don't want to drop my research nor do it in a "lame" way.

Please guys give me a hand here.

Thank you all in advance.

[terryz]

your huge experiences look results from long time you spent

there are a lot of guys in the world who shows nice performance even though younger than you

plus luck is also very important to go there

maybe age also be a problem

Edited March 10, 2010 by terryz

[mojojojo]

I've got a similar problem. I had a professor at MIT who really wanted me in her group. She even flew me over to visit her group. But in the end, I too was not admitted. I graduated with 4 refereed papers (all first author), and 3 conference papers, plus a GPA of 3.97/4.0 from a top 5 undergrad EE university. GRE was 790 for verbal, 800 for quant and 6.0 for AW. I'm pretty sure my LORs are rather strong as well. I guess they are not just looking at statistics, but maybe other factors? I did get into my other schools, so I don't feel that bad. But still, I do feel a tinge of regret..

[explorer-c]

I believe that only applying to MIT is your biggest mistake. There are too many excellent candidates and too few available spots. I don't buy the 'only MIT do your kind of research' thing. I believe if you really look into it, there are a few other excellent schools that are doing the kind of research that you want. It doesn't have to be a perfect fit because you can always put your own spin to it. After all, it is going to be YOUR research. And trust me, choosing other universities won't necessarily make your research "lame". Anyway, you have a great profile and I wish you luck for your future application.

Edited March 10, 2010 by explorer-c

[fenasikerim]

Andrew I feel for you. I'm somewhat an insider so let me tell you what happened.

Your resume is nice however as you know in electronics, writing journals is not a big deal, in fact lots and lots of people write journals easily these days. Unless you have some truly extraordinary work and if it is known by people in MIT, your work will not make a lot of difference since everyone applying to MIT have those.

Also having a professor ready to take you in his/her group means very little sorry. They have a commitee and if the person you have contacted is not one of the legends then it will make very little difference. Believe me once you are in MIT no matter how good/bad you are you are pretty much guaranteed to find a professor to work with and that's how they look at it that's why the guy you contacted probably told you that he would work with you IF you get admitted(this is an important statement)... Again if you are not lucky or really extraordinary they won't hesitate to reject you since they feel like they can find another person who will do a similar job for them and most of the time they are right.

Finally, today the signals they are using are extremely noisy, I have seen lots of people having below average intellectual ability (sorry but that's it) BUT having 3.9-4.0 averages , and\or meaningless papers (again sorry but really most of the papers are written just to write it without a lot of meat or thought in it) and you have to compete with them.

It is not fair and it will be worse since number of engineers increased exponentially (their quality did not go up but their signals did) for the last 10 years. If it was me who decided these admissions today I would NOT admit someone who comes with 3.99 gpa and 5-10 papers out of ug or 1st year of masters because this %99 of the time this shows that this person did all those things to give signals rather then for the love of research, instead of deeply understanding a subject he/she understood every subject at a level enough to get an A (means nothing) and from the number of papers it is nearly certain that all of them are the result of very little thought and they are only good for showing on cv.

At this moment your best strategy is to finish phd in you current university, you are saying that it is a top 5 university then just be patient and finish it, and if you are close enough find a coadvisor in MIT or whatever university you feel suitable.

And don't think about it, in your situation it won't make any difference if you graduate from Mit or your top 5 university...

Edited March 11, 2010 by fenasikerim

[Andrew Skood]

Guys,

thanks a lot for your comments. You gave me both direct and indirect clues of what could have happened. I also have many important things to write. So, as Jack the Ripper would say: let's split into parts!

Terryz, I'd be happy if my "huge" (?) experiences were due to age, but that is not the case. My experiences come from a lot of hardwork due to life circumstances. I mean, I lost my parents when I was young, so I had to work really hard to pay my bills. Even though I was a good undergrad student, it doesn't really mean anything in terms of financial support in Brazil. An undergrad RA for example gives a stipend of less than US$ 200,00 per month. Yes, that's exactly what you just read: LESS THAN TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS PER MONTH. So it's impossible to study without parental support or without a job, or even two jobs. Now I see that maybe I should have emphasized that I am not 30ish, old or whatever in my statement. If you Terryz thought that way, they could perfectly have thought the very same way.

Mojojojo, that kind of situations really saddens me. I mean, it is a lose-lose game. You and I lose our time and energy in this process. On the other side, the Professors lose their time and opportunities to work with whom they prefer to. I really don't agree with that kind of selection. I mean, I am not saying that the Professors should decide totally by their own who should get admitted or not, but I do not agree with kind of selection of EECS at MIT either. There should exist something in between. I almost guarantee that there are less than 10 people with your profile, and unless you are a jerk, what I think is really improbable (otherwise you wouldn't get good LORs), in my humble opinion there seems to be no plausible explanation to let you out. For me, if you are an awesome student, have a consistent enough research background, and a Professor who wants you to work with him, you are in. Period. What else could they want? Unfortunately (veeeeeeeeeeery unfortunately), they are "asking" us to think about them as a "Castle of marked cards", as we say in Brazil. I really hope I am wrong here, but they are playing really hard to let me think such things. I guess you haven't even talk to someone in the department, have you?

Explorer-c, I have applied only to there because I already am in a good University, and more important, with an advisor that I like pretty much. But the point is: if we will not harm nor prejudice anyone, we always should look for what is better to us. I am saying that, because it was my advisor who suggested me to look for a specific Professor of the Brain and Cognitive Sciences Department at MIT. My advisor told me that he (my advisor) was really excited about my research proposal, but he told that neither he nor anyone here could give me a hand on it. He also told me that it was a great opportunity for me to learn about the subject of my research with others and share it with him, since that research would be a novelty in our field. And usually, to my life experience, when we go this further into something, there are just a few (sometimes just one or two) people who really knows about it, or at least, are available to share his knowledge, and that is the real point here. Explorer-c, make sure I will do my best to do this research, but my advisor already asked me to think about a plan B. That's why I used the word 'lame', because probably I'll have to do it entirely by my own.

Fenasikerim, thank you A LOT! You made lots of things clear to me. I TOTALLY agree with you about almost all the points you have mentioned. However, there are certain things that I should write about. First, it would be really nice if I could have a coadvisor from the Brain and Cognitive Sciences Department at MIT. As you probably inferred above, that was one of my primary objectives. To graduate itself is not the issue. To do my research properly is the REAL issue. And I will not be able to do it properly without a proper support. One other important thing about me is that people who knows me, knows pretty well that I never wanted to publish anything that does not give a REAL contribution. That's why I never published anything (but my undergrad thesis of course) when I was an undergrad. I mean, I think I should learn things deeply before publishing something. I just started to publish articles during my Master's last year, after I got some real practical and theoretical knowledge about some subjects of my field of study. Also, you talked about "give signals rather than for the love of research". I TOTALLY agree with you, but maybe the committee does not agree with us. That's because in my statement I emphasized a lot my passion to research, and that life is not only about rationality; it is about love and passion as well. I told that I learned how to play chess when I was 4 years old only, and I asked them to ask to keep that in mind as it reflects an essential characteristic about me since I was a kid: an appetite to think deeply about something. I wrote that I studied a new language just make a video for a woman, telling that I loved her, in her language. I said that I dropped opportunities to become a Professor, an Entrepreneur and an Engineer because I thought life (as I wrote before) was not only about rationality, that was about love and passion as well, and I love what I do. So I dropped all that opportunities, and decided to do my research. Only then, in addition to that, I wrote about my achievements and research experience. Tell me, honestly, if they really think that way, how could they have not accepted me? I think now, after you just read what I wrote here and above, you and everyone else probably think it was not a fair decision. So I ask you all again nicely: should I talk to someone in the committee about it?