Getting into MIT from the UK

[Threesoundslikealot]

I have a 13 year old with his heart set on MIT. He is very gifted at maths and science, and is likely to do well in his other GCSEs, but is naturally lazy. I want to encourage him in his ambition but does anyone know what MIT looks for? I know it's incredibly competitive. Their website talks about applicants with very rounded lives, not just maths and science. Is this true? I have seen Oxbridge people on here admit that brains are the clincher, not grade 8 flute. Is MIT similar?

I did think that showing him this would be instructive, but I might have to hide my own posts if I did that!

His trust fund would cover post-doc too. It's a mighty beast. We don't live in the UK, although nearby, so UK universities will be more expensive. Lots of our friends kids go elsewhere - Canada, Australia, U.S., as well as Europe.

It would be much better for you and him to start thinking about trust fund supporting him in the years after a PhD when searching for a suitable post-doc, and then another, and then maybe a permanent academic post.

This I disagree with - there is a big difference between FoggyBottom's field o research (humanities) and STEM. If you can't get funding for post-docs in STEM, then you really shouldn't be considering staying in academia. Also post-docs in STEM are full-time (not zero hour) contracts and pay perfectly reasonable salaries. Post-docs are not "wilderness" in STEM disciplines.

Indeed. STEM post doc posts are paid decently, are often 3 year posts and are a sellers' market. If you can't get one, self funding would be madness.

Yes, I'm in Humanities - but I hear from a number of STEM ECRs (early career researchers) that things can be tough in STEM too, at the start of the post-doc stage. But I take your point about that being another point at which wheat & chaff are sorted:
If you can't get funding for post-docs in STEM, then you really shouldn't be considering staying in academia.

I think that, probably this holds for Humanities as well, but I'd always encourage people to keep trying for at least 2 years after their PhD. It's sometimes about the 'fit' of a job, not the person applying, IYSWIM.

Things are very, very tough in STEM, particularly in some subfields. In my own field we will get several hundred applications for a postdoc or permanent position, and several postdocs (in several countries) are required to get a longterm position. Very few students even from the top universities (MIT, Cambridge etc) will make it to a permanent position.

But if you can't make the next step without supporting yourself with your own money, then you almost certainly won't make the step after that. At each stage it's the top 10% or so who survive, i.e. top 10% get first postdoc, top 10-20% of first postdocs get another postdoc etc. If you can't get a postdoc the year you graduate you shouldn't keep trying for 2 years, unless your supervisor things something will change i.e. you are on the cusp of producing important work.

I don't think that's hugely different in Humanities, except that there are fewer post-docs, and a lot more requirement to survive hand-to-mouth with some part-time teaching, and a non-academic job. After 2 or 3 years, people find other areas of work.

There's quite a large movement now - especially in the US - of training & advice for PhDs who thought they'd stay in universities doing teaching & research to help them move out of academia. I know we offer professional development & training to PhD students in humanities which gets them to think about jobs other than as lecturers.

Regardless of where my son ends up studying, he doesn't want to be an academic. He wants to make lots of money. Also a thing I tell him requires effort...

I think he's just 13 and you should chill. He's going to have to realise this for himself. Failing at something might be quite character-building for him.

IME, the next 4 years will bring some sense to him - the changes can be quite remarkable.

My brother had full scholarship to MIT.

Other than top grades in the equivalent of GCSE exams and near perfect scores at A-Levels in Maths, Further Maths, Physics, Chemistry and French he offered absolutely nothing else.

Zero extra curricular activities.

Things have changed though. I was offered a full scholarship to MIT on the basis of academics alone, but I don't think I would be these days.

Esornep,

You are probably right. I have been wondering about that too.

If MIT is $70k a year, how can this be cheaper than a uk university, even for an overseas student? The Fulbright Commission is very clear that there is little funding for undergrad in the USA and needs blind is best, if it is available. I spent time at one of their events along with plenty more disillusioned parents! Beyond undergraduate , there is more funding available.

13 year olds change their minds! He might want to be an mp when he is 16!

Does he want to do a masters or a PhD?

If he does, then I'd suggest doing undergrad degree at a good Uni in the UK and going to MIT for post grad. He can get work experience as an undergrad in his area which will be impressive to post grad programs. If you're doing post grad then that's the university people look at on CVs when hiring later. Plus post grad often comes with a funding package including tuition and a stipend.

Bojorojo- we don't earn a fortune so if DD is right, we'd be due to pay about £8-10k/year, which includes accommodation and a meal plan. What we haven't investigated yet is if she'll be able to access student loans in the normal way if going abroad. Since we're still kind of hoping she'll find a free course she's happy with it's not something we've spent time on yet.

Foggy (and Bojo), I am completely chilled. Absolutely he is just 13, and is throwing ideas out there. My reasons for starting this thread were a mixture of curiosity as to what it might take, in reality, to get into MIT, and also possibly, to see whether this might be a gentle lever to get him to think about putting a bit more effort in. Others are talking about post-docs etc! And we are, and this will make us sound like dreadful people, quite keen for him to fail at something to get the message that cruising along isn't ideal. But it would be good if that failure wasn't at an enormously crucial stage of anything I guess.

As for the money, as I said, luckily not an issue for him. But of course the US is more expensive than the UK, unless you do get funding.

He has been focused his whole life on this sort of thing though. I'd be surprised if he doesn't go into science or maths at undergraduate level. It's just a question of exactly what he comes out of A levels passionate about.

Job prospects are much better and options for post grad are much better in the sciences than in maths, FYI. He could have a maths based career after a science degree if he wants but not vice versa. I would advise a good well rounded course in the sciences for undergrad where he can do a bit of maths as well as a broader scientific area, like bio with statistics for example. Just widens his career and postgrad options.

It is wise to consider postgrad before undergrad when choosing a degree as well because if he doesnt want to do a masters or PhD he will be limited for jobs in the sciences as almost everyone has one or both of these degrees. Options for jobs for people with just a BSc are now very limited in science. Even lab technicians tend to have a masters. So he needs to think about what he really wants and if he wants to commit to 10+ years of education or if he wants a career from an undergrad degree. If he wants a career from undergrad, he needs to do a course from which people are hired regularly without postgrad training.

and re failure, that's going to happen at some point as it does to everyone, so if I were you I'd put that out of your mind for now. some people do just fine cruising along without much effort, or at least without what observers think of as effort. I put no effort into school or undergrad as far as studying and spending hours on things was concerned because I didn't need to. I got the best marks and a first class honours degree without hours of studying so why do more than I had to. Your son might just be one of those kids who gets things and doesn't have to put in extra effort.

if he is, when he reaches the stage in his career where effort is required, he'll know it and change. that point for me came in postgrad where I almost failed a course, I realised I had reached the end of my coasting along capacity and knew I had to start properly studying. everyone reaches that stage at some point, even the most intelligent person will get to a point where things are no longer easy. let him find where that point is for himself.

minatiae - I am no expert but would not be sure that job prospects are better for science grads than maths grads. Though obviously it will depend on what science, and what maths and how good the degree.

From observation, and a significant proportion from DC's school go on to top American Universities, is that American Universities are looking for different things. Students are discouraged from applying to both systems at the same time because of the time needed to prepare properly for American University applications, but there have been some maths science types who have got into places like MIT who would have been a very long shot for Cambridge, and vice versa. Its not just that American Universities are looking for breadth, eg writing as well as maths skills, good personal attributes and strong extra curricular, but consider other things like being from an under-represented ethnicity or being the first from your family to go to University. (Or being a legacy...)

Being on something like a international maths Olympiad team would probably still cause doors to open in the ways described by GoMilou and esornep, but that level of talent would probably also get you a bursary to a top sixth form with good experience of American applications.

needsmoresleep I wasn't really clear about what I meant re maths vs science -- I should have said job options are more varied, not better. If you do a maths degree and decide you don't really want a maths based job you're a bit stuck, but if you do a science based degree with some maths you have a wider range of jobs that you can do. Same with medical school - I always advise anyone who wants to be a doctor to do an undergrad degree in something else first or a program that allows you to get a secondary degree alongside becoming a doctor, because of you just do med school and decide at the end you don't actually want to be a doctor it can be harder to go into a different area.

ps I'm a researcher (in academia). I'm no expert in anything beyond my focus field, but I have a lot of experience with undergrad and postgrad degree issues in the sciences.

Things have of course changed in a couple of decades, but when I was applying for universities... You could get into Harvard or any of the Ivy League schools if you knew the right people or dedicated the new wing. MIT was always seen as the kind of place where you actually had to have talent and brains to get in, no matter how rich and who your daddy knew.

He's 13, so what? Year 8? Seems a bit premature to be worrying about the ins and outs of PhD funding post Brexit and the details of MIT. I guess if US uni is a possibility get saving and then think about it in year 11.

I think a lot of good points have been made on this thread.

Some observations:

a. Consider doing an undergraduate degree in the UK at Cambridge, Oxford or Imperial. It will be much cheaper. The real value of MIT is at postgraduate level.

b. Consider MIT for postgraduate level. Prospects in the UK won't remain as they are currently. Brexit will have a negative impact on investment as a lot of research projects are collaborative.

c. Right at this moment, maths offers the better prospects but this was not traditionally the case. There are significant developments in the areas of machine learning, artificial intelligence and data analytics currently.

Job prospects are much better and options for post grad are much better in the sciences than in maths, FYI.

I don't believe this. There are lots of opportunities in lots of areas for maths graduates. Maths graduates from top universities such as Oxbridge do very well. Maths PhD graduates can walk into highly paid jobs in quantitative analysis, financial modelling or into a wide diversity of other jobs.

Hi Sturm - no, you cannot get student loans from this country to study in the USA. Therefore you would have to find the £8-10,000 pa. Trying to get loans from the USA is not possible and trying to get additional scholarships from outside bodies is also a problem. The Brits just do not qualify! You also have to factor in flights home, socialising, everyday costs and you really cannot guarantee what size of scholarship you will get from a USA university. My DD got a scholarship but it was not very much. I know DH earns a lot, but do not forget that Americans have saved for years for their DC's education. They have known all about university costs for generations. It is not impossible to get in, but there are no loans. This information was clearly spelt out at the Fulbright Comission info evening I went to. Therefore taking out a loan here, is way cheaper than funding a USA university up front. You also need to compare costs accurately, assuming she wants to see you several times a year of course.