MIT DUSP Power & Resource Sharing Essay Review
This essay explains a relationship involving power, authority, access, allocation, or influence; why you approach that relationship as you do; and what that approach means for the study you intend to pursue. It should give the reader a clear, connected argument rather than relying on broad values, labels, or a general statement of career goals.
What We Check
Whether the essay explains the power or resource relationship at issue in its chosen area of study.
Whether the essay explains why the applicant approaches the power and resource question as proposed.
Whether the approach informs the contexts, processes or outcomes the applicant plans to study.
Mistakes We Flag
- Using equity language without explaining the relationship
- Saying you want equitable or better cities does not show who holds authority, who has access to resources, or what decisions are at stake.
- Saying communities need a voice without defining influence
- Explain what communities would be able to affect, such as decisions, allocation, control, or competing claims.
- Treating a label as its own reason
- Terms such as participatory, efficient, or just need an explanation of why that approach fits the power and resource question.
- Naming a scholar or professor instead of giving your reasoning
- A reference can provide context, but the essay still needs to state the reason you accept an approach.
- Describing goals or recommendations without an intended inquiry
- A destination, policy recommendation, or summary of preparation does not explain what context, process, or outcome you plan to examine.
How this rubric reads your essay
- Uses an applicant-supplied prompt, with official MIT program context and faculty scholarship informing GradPilot’s independent review. This is not an official MIT scoring rubric.
- Scored per section against defined criteria, not general impressions.
- Calibrated for consistent scoring, so a better draft shows up in the score.
References
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this essay need to address?
Address the power or resource relationship in your chosen area, explain your approach to that relationship, and connect that approach to the contexts, processes, and/or outcomes you intend to study.
Do I need a completed research question, methods plan, or prior fieldwork?
For this independent writing review of the applicant-supplied separate supplement, no: you may make a conceptual, historical, normative, empirical, or practice-based argument. A finished dissertation question, named method, or completed project is not required by this review, rather than being a verified official MIT admissions requirement.
Do I need to name faculty, discuss why MIT, or include personal adversity or positionality?
For this independent writing review of the applicant-supplied separate supplement, no: faculty names, a why-MIT paragraph, personal adversity, and a positionality statement are optional rather than required by this review, not verified official MIT admissions requirements. The main SOP and other application materials are separate, and their current instructions remain separate and must be followed.
How long should the response be?
The applicant-supplied instructions list 250–500 words, but current application instructions govern if they provide different directions. Verify the final portal requirements and word count.
Prepare your application
Explain your approach to power and resource sharing →Get AI feedback on your draft with a free Quick Review. Full Reviews add rubric scores and revision suggestions. Follow your program’s current writing instructions and assistance policies.
See how phd statement of purpose review works