I have no doubt that the characterization above represents (often untrue) stereotypes which have more to do with personality than LOG.
However, the point IS well-made that statistics alone dictate that there are many, many more MG people applying to colleges than PG ones. Period.
Naturally, the elite institutions should (hypothetically) be much more interested in PG applicants (who have extraordinary potential) rather than MG ones (who have "merely" great potential-- poor choice of words, perhaps, but you all know what I mean there, I hope).
Since there is a perception of scarcity (slots available at top institutions) and value (that a seat at HYPS is very much better than one at Sacramento State), what's a MG student to do?
That's right-- work hard enough to at least appear plausibly HG+ on paper, and therefore... more RARE... and desirable.
Truly EG/PG students, I think, are not really the ones suffering for this development. I think it is MG students, for whom the bar of "acceptable" has been moved into HG performance territory, causing them and their parents anxiety and terror.
As someone else noted above-- it's not the students in the top whatever-it-is percent (locally, I'd estimate top 2%) who are panicking and running like caffeinated hamsters for all of high school-- it's the top 8-10% who are.
Of course, as I've stated before, the only (selfish) objection that I have to that is probably blatantly elitist on the face of it-- I don't think that the kids in the top 10%ile belong in some of the coursework that my kid (top percentile) belongs in and NEEDS-- and putting them there just means that my kid gets LESS of what she needs, because what she needs is incompatible with what the top tenth is capable of doing.
