ADMISSION
I applied in 1994, right after high school. I applied in the standard way: I wrote requests to several colleges, they sent me applications, I filled them out, sent them off, and then received many responses. I was accepted to several colleges, but without scholarships.
At that time, due to a lack of information, books, and catalogs, it was quite difficult to apply. Friends from America sent me books, and I photocopied them. I studied English using old textbooks and cassettes that had been copied a hundred times. But now everything is much simpler, and even a simple high school graduate can easily fill out forms to Form an Offshore Company to open a business. A center has opened in Kyiv that advises those wishing to apply to American universities, there is a sea of literature, and it is easy to find out which schools provide financial aid, which do not, who accepts international students, and who does not.
But along with this, other kinds of difficulties have emerged. Previously, there were not so many students from the former Soviet Union in America; there was greater interest in them, and they were more readily given scholarships. Today, representatives of the post-Soviet space are no longer exotic, and besides, they all ask for money for tuition. In a word, competition has increased.
IN ATLANTA
I enrolled in a small college in Atlanta, received a full scholarship, and studied there for almost a year.
When I arrived, I had very little money. I saved on everything, didn't buy extra things, wore one T-shirt—I was saving up for a computer. I worked illegally in a restaurant, since students are not allowed to work off-campus without the appropriate permission. They paid very little. Moreover, after the spring semester, I was left without housing. But soon the Olympic Games came up, and they needed interpreters. They remembered me, invited me, and provided housing.
I worked with the Belarusian men's artistic gymnastics team. Officially, I was listed as a guide, but actually I just lived with them, took them around Atlanta, helped the American side provide the gymnasts with everything they needed. And I also interpreted for a delegation of tourists who came to cheer for their athletes. It was difficult, as I was alone for 180 people, and they were not at all interested in the games, but rather in shopping.
But I got to see the Olympic Games, and they even paid me for it. True, my impressions of the Games were not grand. Nothing special happened, basically. Crowds of people, heat, expensive Pepsi-Cola.
DISILLUSIONMENT
Actually, my culture shock only started now. At first, there was wild enthusiasm. I immediately fit into the group, felt no discomfort, had no nostalgia at all. I don't remember experiencing disappointment, because for the most part, America turned out to be exactly what I expected. But the longer I stayed in America, the more I became disillusioned with this country, and the more I liked Ukraine.
I began to find misunderstanding in deep aspects. Don't try to pour your heart out to Americans. For example, your sister comes from another city. The next day she needs to fly out. No one will take her to the airport because everyone is busy. She will call a taxi at her own expense. And that will be perfectly normal. In a restaurant, they will all pay separately. And that will also be perfectly normal. And they won't have heartfelt conversations, which is also normal for them.
Here the lifestyle is completely different, which I eventually found boring. In the first city I lived in, Atlanta, there were practically no sidewalks; you had to drive everywhere. In America, excluding big cities, it is impossible to get by without a car, because there is no public transport, no taxis, and hitchhiking is not allowed and is punishable by law. So it turns out that you are tied to the place you are currently in, to the family you live with, to the TV, fast-food restaurants, regularity, monotony. America is all very slow—it feels like it is cut off from the rest of the world. Americans are not very interested in what is happening in Europe and the world.
Americans are very polite—that is part of their culture. But over time, this politeness starts to irritate, because you realize it is fake. Americans found me a bit rude because I would say hello but not ask about their affairs. When they asked me how I was doing, I would answer 'badly' or 'so-so'. That shocked them. They don't expect you to tell them how things really are.
They didn't want to look deeper into me, and later I no longer wanted to open up to them. I am in crisis because I don't find in America the understanding that I find at home. Sometimes I need someone to just understand my jokes.
MORES
I don't like things in America like political correctness, the fight for correctness. I strongly dislike feminism, as well as the attitude of American women towards themselves. I had a unique incident. Once at MIT, I asked two girls: 'Girls, do you have any Scotch tape?' And I got the reply: 'Don't call us girls!' I knew about feminism, but such stupidity shocked me. How should I address them? If I had called them 'ladies', it would have been much worse.
There is also such a thing as 'sexual harassment'. On this basis, everyone and their mother in America gives men a hard time. If I am persistent in inviting a girl I like to a restaurant, she might consider it sexual harassment. At best, I would get off with a fine. When people have sex, there is no guarantee that the girl won't later claim rape. Try to prove otherwise. It seems to me that they have gone too far on this issue, as American legislation protects men to a lesser extent.
They have also gone too far in their attitude towards black people. If two absolutely identical students apply to college—with the same income, same knowledge, but different skin color—they will admit the black one to confirm the absence of bias against him.
EDUCATION SYSTEM
Secondary education in America is at a catastrophically poor level. Our C student, even with poor English, will feel more comfortable in any American school. Americans mature very slowly. They are materially well-off. By age 18, they usually have their third car. They try to be independent from their parents, but they don't want to do anything themselves to achieve it. Libraries, full of information, are empty. There are many good movies, but they prefer blockbusters that don't make you think, with good special effects and lots of fights. They watch while consuming tons of popcorn. By 10th grade, many cannot add, write, or read. And yet, it is believed that students are overloaded and need more entertainment. And from an easy life, they are simply bored.
As for higher education, the picture is different. In America, there are over 2,000 colleges—from very small, unknown ones to the most prestigious. In the higher education system, there is a place for everyone. In America, no matter where you are from, you have equal chances with everyone else. If you studied well, you can get into any school.
But truly good universities that open brilliant prospects are not that many. There are many more that are just good. And there is a huge number of average colleges.
AMERICAN UNIVERSITIES
Universities have always been scientific centers—Chicago, Stanford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Pennsylvania, Yale, Harvard. Initially, the government funded them for military development. The institutes gradually developed, new laboratories appeared, new professors were attracted. Harvard, Stanford, Yale, MIT—these are top schools in America. Here, the main thing is that the student is smart. It doesn't matter if he can pay for his education. Out of two applicants, they will choose the smarter one, not the richer one.
Graduates of these schools find good jobs after graduation, quickly move up the career ladder, start their own companies, and then give money to the university where they studied—either for research or just as a donation.
These universities have unreal amounts of money. They don't live off what students pay them. For example, the laboratory at MIT that deals with computer development. The research of this laboratory is sponsored by almost all world-famous (Japanese, American, Western European) companies. Any firm, to ensure the competitiveness of its products, needs the latest technologies. And who will invent them? Of course, crazy students who would rather be given something to discover than fed.
Here, a good idea is very easy to implement. For example, a student comes to a professor and says: 'I have an idea. I think we can make an engine that runs on a magnetic cushion. It will be much more economical. For testing, I need 100,000 for equipment, 200,000 for a testing ground, 50,000 for assistants.' If the professor thinks the idea is really good, he submits a request to the institute's financial department, and the student gets the money. And now he already has a prototype of a train.
They never skimp on research. If the idea is good, getting money is not difficult. That's what I like about the system: it gives smart people the opportunity to study at good universities. And graduates of good universities then have huge opportunities. Even before finishing their studies, they can find a prestigious position in a well-known company. Every year, representatives of large firms gather at the so-called career fair at MIT, where they conduct interviews with graduates and immediately select specialists for their companies.
BOSTON, MIT
In 1993, everyone thought that it was better to study in America just because it was America. Only later did I find out that it's not that much better.
I quickly became disillusioned with my university in Atlanta and transferred to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Atlanta and Boston are two big differences. Atlanta can be called a village. Boston is a city, old and somewhat European.
I studied economics. In a year of study in Atlanta, I didn't learn anything new. In my first year at MIT, I learned more than in 20 years of my life.
I studied at the London School of Economics, which is considered a top school in England and Europe. And comparing, I can say that MIT, where several Nobel laureates teach, is many times stronger. Probably, of all the universities in the world where you can study economics, this is the best.
As for subjects, at MIT there are general institute requirements. In my case, that was a year of math and physics, half a year of biology and chemistry. There are also core subjects, without knowledge of which you won't get a diploma in your specialty—statistics, basic economics, microeconomics, macroeconomics, etc. There are more specialized courses, from which I must choose 5 subjects (for example, labor economics, health economics, or international economics). And there is still room for an 'elective' (I chose French).
STRUGGLE FOR SURVIVAL
At my university, more emphasis is placed on solving problems. But the theory is also very strong. At MIT, it is very difficult to study. Students are required to do a lot of homework, tests, projects, scientific papers, reports.
Imagine: Monday—lecture, Tuesday—seminar, Wednesday—lecture, Thursday—seminar, Friday—lecture. Every week, homework—3 problems, which usually take three days to solve. One person cannot complete such an assignment. The problems are non-standard; they are not from a textbook, so there is no specific solution. The professor is interested in some real-life problem; he suggests solving this problem as homework. Students gather in groups and start solving together. Someone throws out an idea—and an original solution appears.
At the end of the seminar—15 minutes for a test. During this time, you need to solve one problem, less complex than the homework. In addition, in the middle of the semester, you take exams in all subjects.
Here, if you have fallen behind the schedule (for example, didn't do the first homework at the beginning of the semester), you may never get a high grade, even if you got an A on all the other assignments. And retaking is basically not allowed.
In addition, there is a curve, which guarantees that only the best get A's. The curve assumes quotas for grades. Imagine, at the first lecture, the professor comes and says that in this class there will be 5 A's, 10 B's, the rest C's. For example, you need to solve 100 problems and get 100 points. Only the one who solved all 100 problems will get an A. That person will be the benchmark; everyone else will get lower scores. To get an A, you need not only to objectively know the material at an A level but to know it better than others. So you have to go all out. And it turns out that around you are 50 books, and you read 50 times more than the program requires.
MIT has the highest suicide rate among American universities. I think one of the reasons is high competition. They squeeze everything out of students. Some people's nervous systems get damaged. Those who survive become stronger. It is one of the schools of life. Those who graduate from this university are no longer afraid of anything.
FUTURE
My institute will give me the opportunity to work in any country in the world. After graduation, I will receive a bachelor's degree. I don't know yet if I will continue studying to get a master's degree. With an MIT diploma, it's not that important anymore.
My sister emigrated to the States, and many envy me because I can apply for a green card. However, I am not yet sure that I would like to live in the US. Maybe only in New York or Boston—two islands where you more or less feel 'in your element'. I wouldn't mind returning to Ukraine if I knew there was work here that suits me. But it's still too early to talk about the future.