Getting into MIT

[aojfifjoaisjaiosdj]

It's been my dream to get into MIT since I was around 7. I'm currently a third year student in UM Amherst (please never say UMass to me, I just hate that name) which is probably one of the best schools to be in for linguistics. I'm majoring in philosophy and minoring in linguistics, and I was wondering what I could do to get into my dream school for my last 2 years?

 

I'm not too worried about my GPA. I should have a GPA of around 3.9 for all my courses and my major by the time I graduate, and I think that's good enough. My main interest is logic. I've taken 4 logic courses in my first two years: two graduate level and two undergraduate level. By the time I graduate, I should have around 8 graduate level philosophy courses under my belt (4 logic courses and 4 in metaphysics, such as in philosophy of mind and language). I should be able to take around 6 graduate level linguistics courses by the time I graduate, as well.

 

I think my recommendation letters will be a plus over others. I can get some from my major if need be, but I should be able to get two from my linguistics department: one from a professor who is a graduate of MIT and another from a professor who was the doctoral advisor of MIT professors.

 

There are a few things, however, that I am worried about. The first is not having any research experience at all. The only areas that I'm taking courses in--syntax, logic and semantics--are theoretical, and there's not much I can do in the way of research. I've done a lot of tutoring (3 semesters worth) so I have experience with tutoring others. Would that make up for it or should I look for a research assistantship?

 

Another is my writing sample. I'm going to be doing an honors thesis before applying, which will be reviewed twice by a committee, and that will be really helpful. But I'm worried that it won't be as good as other people's writing samples since I hardly have any experience in terms of writing in linguistics compared to them.

 

That also brings me to my final point. I won't be able to have anything published or presented--I doubt my honors thesis would be good enough for that, anyway. Would that diminish my chances?

 

I really would appreciate your help!

Edited July 5, 2013 by Chiki

[ladyling]

First things first: BREATHE.

 

Second: I think you need to spend more time evaluating why you want to go to MIT. While the MIT linguistics program is certainly excellent, it's not clear from what you've said how your interests fit in there. What aspects of logic appeal to you? Would you be applying to linguistics, or to philosophy? I only see one member of the phil faculty at MIT who lists logic as an emphasis, and even for that faculty member, it's not a primary emphasis.

 

Third: you say you don't have the opportunity to pursue research because the courses you're taking are primarily theoretical, but this isn't a barrier to doing research. If your interests are centered on logic, your research will be largely theoretical anyway. You should pursue research projects in your courses and outside them that allow you to develop those theoretical interests. There are number of cool puzzles in semantics which you could work on, if you're interested in the linguistics side of logic. If you're interested in more experimental work, then you should see if you can get work in a lab in your department.

 

Generally, though, I think you need to consider why you want to (a.) go to grad school and (b.) attend MIT. From this post, it sounds like you're interested in MIT less because of how your interests align with the program, and more because of its status. Grad admissions is almost entirely about fit with the program and its faculty, so unless your interests match faculty interests, it doesn't matter how good your grades or recommendations are--you probably won't get in.

Edited July 5, 2013 by ladyling

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

I agree with the previous post. Based on your interests it sounds like you'd be more interested in Carnegie Mellon. They have one of the two logic PhDs in the country and they're linguistics department is very interdisciplinary, with crosses between cognitive science, philosophy and computer science.

[aojfifjoaisjaiosdj]

Of course it's also because of the program--I'm not just interested in logic; I'm also interested in syntax and semantics. And yes, I posted this in the linguistics forum because I'll be going for a linguistics PhD.

 

And I like the sound of Carnegie Mellon as well--I'll keep it in mind in a couple of years when I apply. Thanks.

[ladyling]

It's still very unclear what *precisely* your interests are. Different programs have different strengths, and the type of research you plan to do is one of the largest determinants of fit for graduate programs. All that said, a few more things:

 

1. You're a second year undergrad, right? If that's so, and you already know you'd like to pursue a graduate degree in linguistics, why aren't you a linguistics major?

 

2. The two things you've mentioned as your weaknesses will be major barriers to getting into a top flight program. Graduate school in linguistics is about two things: writing, and research. If you can't demonstrate your ability in these two areas, adcoms will have little reason to believe you can succeed as a graduate student. Period.

 

3. I'm confused as to why you think you have less experience writing in linguistics than "most" people who will be applying. Even as a linguistics minor, you'll have a fair amount of experience with linguistic argumentation and writing. If you're concerned that your writing in general is not up to snuff, you should seek the help of a tutor or professor. You're still early in your undergraduate career, so you have plenty of time to improve.

 

4. I still think you need to give thought to why you're so focused on MIT. It's a wonderful school, and it may be (though it still isn't clear to me) that it's the right place for you. However, there are many other wonderful schools, and graduate school operates very differently from undergrad. Research comes first in grad school, and you should pick a grad program based on how it fits with your research interests. Syntax, semantics, and logic are all very vague interests, and while there are certainly people who apply knowing little more about their interests than that, it will help you substantially--both in terms of putting together a successful application and, more importantly, in finding a program well-suited to the type of work you want to do--to refine them a bit and to pursue research projects in those areas before you apply.

[Werner]

Applied to the PhD program in Linguistics at MIT. Got rejected on February 14th. Not only that this was surprisingly early, they didn't even send a letter, I just received an email. Disappointing.

[fuzzylogician]

Applied to the PhD program in Linguistics at MIT. Got rejected on February 14th. Not only that this was surprisingly early, they didn't even send a letter, I just received an email. Disappointing.

 

No one ever sends paper letters for rejections. Nor for acceptances, normally. I only got paperwork from the school whose offer I accepted, I believe. 

[pangur-ban]

No one ever sends paper letters for rejections. Nor for acceptances, normally. I only got paperwork from the school whose offer I accepted, I believe. 

 

I got a couple of paper letter rejections when I was applying a few years back. One school was even kind enough to mail me two identical rejection letters a week apart, but it didn't do anything towards making me feel better.

[fuzzylogician]

I got a couple of paper letter rejections when I was applying a few years back. One school was even kind enough to mail me two identical rejection letters a week apart, but it didn't do anything towards making me feel better.

 

My personal favorite was the school that emailed me with two rejection letters - one from the department and one from the graduate school - about a month after I told them I was withdrawing my application. Almost felt like a "Oh no you don't, we dumped you first!"

[LinguisticMystic]

My personal favorite was the school that emailed me with two rejection letters - one from the department and one from the graduate school - about a month after I told them I was withdrawing my application. Almost felt like a "Oh no you don't, we dumped you first!"

 

Same exact thing happened to me two years ago! Dis!

[Robertpt]

Same exact thing happened to me two years ago! Dis!

There was a school who sent me a rejection in another applicant's name then one more rejection letter in my name.

Edited February 25, 2014 by Robertpt

[Werner]

So after all, people do receive rejection letters. There are also a lot of rejection letters from MIT online. Maybe this was some way of MIT saying: "You are certainly not getting in. NOT YOU!". 

[fuzzylogician]

So after all, people do receive rejection letters. There are also a lot of rejection letters from MIT online. Maybe this was some way of MIT saying: "You are certainly not getting in. NOT YOU!". 

 

Well I don't think MIT is special here, and I also don't think a personalized rejection letter on official letterhead that arrives in the mail will make you feel much better about being rejected. Being rejected sucks either way. It sucks even more the longer you wait, and if the rejection itself is impolite. I fail to see how it's better if it's a snail-mail letter as opposed to an email. Personally, I just want to know so I can stop waiting, and an email is faster than snail-mail these days. 

[saw]

No one ever sends paper letters for rejections. Nor for acceptances, normally. I only got paperwork from the school whose offer I accepted, I believe. 

Someone I know got their rejection results from UBC in an actual mailed letter.

[fuzzylogician]

Someone I know got their rejection results from UBC in an actual mailed letter.

OK ok, I have learned my lesson. Sweeping generalizations are easily falsifiable

 

But I stand by my argument that sending email rejections is pretty common, and that I don't quite see why a nice paper rejection is better than an emailed rejection. They both suck.