Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Selective colleges and "well-rounded" applicants

Ok, now I'm just poking around on the Harvard article and there is some poor person that applied to 32 colleges and was only accepted to 2. One was Harvard.

http://features.thecrimson.com/2014/freshman-survey/admissions/

Just wondering how accurate this is.

See, I find this information to be really depressing. IMO, these colleges are basically saying that there's no room for making mistakes, with B+ grades (or really, even A-'s) apparently counting as "mistakes."

Personally, I believe that our society really, really needs people who screwed up, dusted themselves off only to mess up again, and eventually learned from their mistakes and made something out of them.

This perfectionism-itis is especially bad for STEM aspirants. Given that tenure and grant funding decisions work on basically the same principle as above, the message is, "Don't do anything risky." Which, of course, is where all the interesting stuff is. Oh well.

I wonder how much they accommodate school variations for GPA. Looking at Naviance scatter grams, I can say that nobody in our high school who takes all honor classes has gotten a 4.0 unweighted in the last ten years, including the IMO gold medal winner.

I don't think it is as bad as it seems, as Harvard at least takes our school kids regularly without the 4.0 unweighted.

This works well in the tech industry, where VCs do give people second chances. Sad it doesn't seem to happen in academia.

Interesting yet depressing article that may be relevant to the discussion: Former Ivy League admissions dean reveals why highly qualified Asian-American students often get rejected

http://www.businessinsider.com/sara...an-american-students-get-rejected-2015-6

Asian American girl who did get into Harvard:

http://www.usnews.com/news/the-next...t-looks-forward-to-a-long-future-in-stem

A possible cure for cancer at age 17. Now, that's a hook.

As the U.S. population grows while the class size of Ivy League schools hardly changes, inevitably the bar for admission to those schools is raised. Increasing numbers of very bright students will need to brush off rejections from elite colleges. I like MOOCs because students who don't get into Shiny U can still learn what is being taught there. Even without MOOCs, the Internet makes it possible to see what resources students are various universities are using. For example, Harvard physics majors are using books by (or updated by) David Morin for classical mechanics and electricity and magnetism. Before I went to college to major in physics I had no idea what "Purcell" (the classic E&M textbook) was. Now such information is easily available. My children will be playing the selective college admissions game, although I'll try to stay rational about it. But I want them to understand that there is very little that can be learned *only* at Shiny U.

I think what everyone is saying is that you need to be well rounded, an exceptional student and be really gifted at a particular thing. All of this needs to be done by the time you are 17 (or younger if you have grade skipped) but no pressure! All the while research indicated that you will most likely be more successful long term if you are one of these students and choose to go to a less prestiges school where you are in the top 2% versus going to one of the ivy league schools and being in the middle 50th or even the top quartile. Why are people trying to get in these school's again???

My guesses:
American love of all things that are "popular"
Lack of critical thinking skills in the general population
Excellent marketing by said shiny schools
Little focus on allowing students to discover life and what they want from it

I have zero interest in DD going to any university except one that a) is the right fit for her b) accepts her and c) we can pay for. I hope that venn diagram has an intersection.

The arms race of college admission is a symptom of some significant economic and social problems here in the US. The environment is unhealthy and that supports unhealthy behaviors. It's a challenge, but a worthy one in my opinion, to try to find balance between making sure your kids are set up for the possibility of a successful life in a broken system and not buying into the broken system more than you have to.

And FYI, my username comes from a plant that I admire for it's beauty and tenacity. Another interpretation never occurred to me when I signed up on the site.