I don't think it is as broken as many of you seem to think, at least I don't think it is stacked against the HG kid and/or the introverted gifted kid. My introvert got into U of Chicago, Swarthmore, Harvey Mudd, Carleton, and some other schools with a lot of merit aid. Her Davidson THINK friends are at places like Stanford and MIT (and I met them, they are not social butterflies).

intparent-- I agree that most of our kids are likely to land on their feet with this stuff-- but it probably matters a lot for the pointy type kids, and if the trends continue, those who have kids in middle school are going to be facing an even more challenging situation when the time comes.



Agreed with respect to a and b.

My point is, though-- what is the difference between a student who is "near perfect" across the board, versus one that is "perfect in ONE area, and just very good in others"?

Because that is the difference when the tests are hard enough-- that is, the difference between my two archetypes. The pointy ones are stratospherically good in their thing, but only "pretty good" at other things. Then there are the global types, who are "really, really good" at almost everything, but nothing really stands out as spectacular.

I don't actually know the answer. I just know that my DD and I tend to be polymaths, and that we often feel a bit insecure in groups of pointy types, since we don't seem to have a "one thing" the way that they do.

Yes. It took me a long time to find my level...absent the compelling storyline that most of my HG+ friends and family seemed to have. OTOH, making a wide range of people feel comfortable around me always came more easily to me.

And I would suspect that that quality has value in a diverse community of learners, even if it's pretty difficult to capture on a resume.

I think the institution I'd want to go to,and the one that creates the most educational value overall, would be one that tries to find a good balance between the two types (and while there won't be many ideal types and most people will be on a spectrum blah blah! I think most people in the ability range were talking about will veer clearly towards one or the other).
I do not think that an institution who tries to limit type b to only 10 percent of candidates will create as much overall educational value as one that moves the percentage closer to 50. Having pointy types dominate might not be good for either type of student.

Indeed, Tigerle. And I'd add to that: why are colleges looking for leaders? Shouldn't they be looking for collaborators, too?

As said above, only one person can be the editor of the school paper, or the drum major of the marching band. Colleges have to fill those other positions, too.

Not that I disagree with you (I don't), but I suspect that JonLaw would answer that people who aren't Leaders (tm) aren't relevant, and so aren't worth considering. From the perspective of the colleges, Leaders (tm) are more likely to earn enough to make big donations someday. And donations are very, very relevant.

" I just know that my DD and I tend to be polymaths, and that we often feel a bit insecure in groups of pointy types, since we don't seem to have a "one thing" the way that they do."

Interesting comment... my D says she picked Harvey Mudd to attend because she felt it was the college that would feed her polymath tendencies more than any other. Note it was NOT the Ivies she felt this way about. Too many parents and students are asking the wrong question ("How do I get my kid into an Ivy?"). The right question is, what schools will allow me to achieve my goals and be a good fit for me?

The question I am asking myself is how do I convince my DD not to even consider the Ivy option. If less than 10% of entrants are selected based on academics this isn't going to be a place where she will flower.

Yes, but once you bathe in the shining relevance of the Ivy League, you may yourself become relevant.

At that point, the very relevance you now radiate may effortlessly sweep away obstacles in your path like dry leaves faced with the autumn winds.

However, if you choose a place like Harvey Mudd, the name itself tells you what you may gain.

Obstacles will cling to your feet, blocking your path, as your feet sink deeper into the mire...until at last you sink beneath the soil and join the mass of humanity who know that permanent irrelevance is their fate, and the fate of their children.

Woe to those upon the light of relevance will never shine.

The tragedy of our age is that there are so few places in the hallowed halls of truly profound and meaningful higher learning. And there are so many who cry out, begging to be given the Golden Ticket that will allow them to fit through those narrow gates to ascend the stairway to relevance.

WHEW-- after that, I can almost hear the strains of Led Zeppelin in my mind. Or maybe it was Pink Floyd.



PG kiddos are pretty smart.

Mine figured out the same thing that intparent's DD did-- that the Ivy league was not for her anyway. So she knew better than to bother by the time application time rolled around. She was interested in large research institutions that provided a smaller instructional environment, and small highly selective STEM schools that supported cross-disciplinary learning.

HMC and MIT were on her short list, too. She chose based on a host of factors, only some of which were GT related. Free-- free is good, especially at the undergraduate level.