I need to pick your brain for a moment. It’s about MIT Sloan’s deferral process. Is this process a new thing? (last couple of years?).
The thing is I was deferred to Round 2 AFTER an interview, which is very strange. I would have thought they would do this before but not after the interview. Now, I won’t ask you to guess why this happened to me (no way to really know) but I do want your opinion on something.
It is common knowledge on this board and elsewhere that MIT Sloan’s acceptance rate after inteview is very high, around 70% or so. Now, if this deferral is a new thing does this mean that their acceptance rate most likely has declined? Or do you think they still have that very high acceptance rate and instead of outright rejecting people they decided to defer some percentage of the 30% not accepted?
Any insight on this extremely excruciating process would be greatly appreciated! Cheers!
HMMM, a lot of Sloan practice seems new this year, at least what they are calling things. Deferred to R2 seems the new WaitList, and WL’s at most schools including H/S/W in effect means deferred to round 2, see HBS letter to WLers, posted above, where they say, well, nothing will happen to WL until Round 2 decisions are firmed up. So what is the diff? Did anyone in MIT Round 1 actually get placed on WL, or were there in fact 3 decisions, 1. admit, 2, ding, 3. deferred to R2. As to deferral after interview, dunno what diff that makes–lots of kids at schools w. selective interviews (HSW) put kids on WL who have been interviewed (in H case WLers have and have not been interviewed, in W, all the WLers have been interviewed, I think Stan may WL a couple of kids w.out inter, not sure). As to your odds now? hmmmm, we are now getting above my pay grade. First, where are you getting the 70pct post interview admit rate??? I thought it was lower and several years ago, at a Forum, Rod Garcia gave numbers like 900 kids interviewed for like 380-400 admits (to yield class of 328) They may have changed this recently and interviewed fewer kids.
As to stats, lets say X is percent admitted after interview (if 70, well good, but let’s just say X), where X is just raw percent derived from total number of kids interviewed and total number of admits last year. On day you get interview invite, your odds are X, after you get deferred, what are your odds??? Assumming we do not have data about what happened to similar kids last year(e.g how many interviwed kids on WL were there, how many got it), it would seem to me, just speculating and no longer calculating, that odds are now less than X, and sorta more in line w. odds of any kid getting off WL or deferred status. You used to be part of the X group, but fact you were deferred now puts you new group, and halo effect of being graded an X grouper, at one pt, dunno if that is better or worse. By hunch is, MOST kids in deferred group have been interviewed, or is there evidence contra to that??? Also keep in mind a new kicker, moving kids off WL or deferred status, is something of a wild card, depending on Round 2 numbers and quality, and yield of ROund 1. all of which move around a bit. IN some years, schools take x kids off WL, in others 1.2, or even 1.5 or 2 X –and in famous cases, in some years ZERO. (e.g HBS 3 or 4 years ago). Another reason why odds for you are now longer X. Sorry, but that is the way I dope this out, based purely on the same speculation available to anyone. Unlike H and S and W, I dont really have a private, large, and powerful database about MIT.
