orchestramom

It seems to me that the college or university (certainly a private institution, if not publicly funded ones) has the right to determine the standards and criteria by which they will determine admission. If a prospective student doesn't agree with those criteria, perhaps that's an indication that the school is not a good fit , academically or philosophically.

Fanatic517

I find it amusing that the historical reason for the change from simple grades and test scores (in other words, objective academic achievement) to things like extracurriculars, and the subjective 'qualities of leadership' in college admissions originated in anti-semitism, so colleges could have an excuse in limiting the number of Jews who attended.

The more you know...

myusername

When you compare America's test score averages with other countries, it seems obvious to me that less emphasis should be placed on sports and clubs, and more should be placed on academics (okay...maybe not sports...there are a lot of fatties!).

Narcissa

lol. maybe schools are looking for the most intelligent people. anyone, really, can get a 2400 and 4.0 by studying all day in an American school; it's only those that can do that PLUS have lots of ECs that are really smarter (than the ppl who get those scores but don't have ECs). In other countries, however, it's nearly impossible to do well on their tests AND have a life + other activities. They learn everything that we learn in HS and college in...HS...plus more. So in the end, I guess it evens out--the people who attend top colleges are basically, on average, smarter..............

but I have cousins in Asia, and their colleges are nothing like ours. They work super-hard in HS to get into a good college, and their futures are pretty much set...you don't do crap in college. Therefore I guess those kids will have time to go out and join clubs and do things they like to do for fun (after all, who actually likes to study 24/7?)

Determind15

Tests don't give insight to who you are. There are other coomponents and thats the point of the whole college process...even if it means stress for us to get leadership positions and do a whole lot of other crap, while staying on top of our grades.

itsover9thousand

Tell that to the government. Universities don't use affirmative action because they feel bad for the applicants, they use it because they receive money by being "diverse." Additionally, the reality is that many aspects of academia are prestige-based, and future employment will be affected by which schools the applicant attends and what kind of education those schools offer. Not agreeing with the admission criteria would only be valid if every university was equal and there were such a large number of them that they could cover virtually every academic/philosophical viewpoint.

Historically, all of the unobjective parts of the application process have been used to enforce social norms or to evade meritocracy. Look at, say, George W. Bush, who got into Harvard before the SAT was a major factor in admission. Currently, I see the subjective aspects of the application as no more than a way of enforcing social norms/conformity on the student.

If you want to get the smartest students, ask for their IQ; that's the only surefire way to do it, however controversial it may be. You're really just guessing that students who do get these scores with good ECs are smarter, but there's an entire field of research to back up the IQ stance.

887s

I think a lot of this has to do with cultural differences between America and say, China. China has a long history of bureaucracy based on merit--you take tests to determine your place in the socioeconomic hierarchy. That will probably change with Beijing's unprecedented economic boom, but for now the system is what it is. "The American Dream" is much more about individual ingenuity and pioneering new fields. It makes sense that American universities, therefore, like to see kids who can take initiative, carve out their own niche, and find their own definition of success from an early age.

zhvxoxqew

thats a f-load of bull you got there. JPN has a growth rate of 5.5% and CHN is growing at 10%+. The US unfortunately is at the danger of recession. Also, CHN has MANY regulations on the mainland (due to the socialism crap), but not on shenzhen or hong kong. Plz do your hwk before posting sth that you don't know.

citygirlsmom

well, firstly, China's economy isn't all the great- their reporting system, well, its ain't all that honest

and it is doing what it is doing, not based on its OWN "work" but the inventions of other countries, but the manufacturing may be done there

As for Japan, there is a serious suicice rate among teens and adults....

and if you think that you need to be a "leader" to make a difference, think again

its the people that do the WORK that make a difference- does it take a "leader" to help a cancer patient, to read a book to a homeless child...making a difference can be one person at a time

citygirlsmom

the percentages that were reported here for the Chinese economy have been shown to be a bit, well, exagerated...do you trust that government to honestly report the facts? if so, well.....

ps- the disparity between the haves and have nots in China is huge, corruption is rampant, pollution is dire, and much of what they do is poorly made and manufactured by slave labor

btw zth....we do know what we are talking about...and it is not so much "socialisn" crap anymore, its a dictatorship, with some "capitilism" bantered about, and lots of facism

Narcissa

It's probably both. Yes, the chinese government does like to exxagerate, but there's no doubt that their economy is doing a lot better than the US no matter what.

qwert1

Why would they try to lie about their economy boost? It's already shown that China will become a world "superpower" soon..

And China isn't "facist" or much "socialist" anymore, it turned mainly capitalistic with a communist tag after Deng Xiaopeng stepped in.

Some of China's issues are quite serious (pollution, some cases of forced labor, censorship) , but its just hyped up by American media, which causes you to say and assume "we do know what we are talking about...and it is not so much "socialisn" crap anymore, its a dictatorship, with some "capitilism" bantered about, and lots of facism".

Narcissa

the pollution is horrible; i was in shanghai this summer and you can't see the tops of buildings cuz of it

Newjack88

chill out there big guy. you are the one who has no idea what you are talking, "Also, CHN has MANY regulations on the mainland (due to the socialism crap)," sorry but that was funny! :P do you even know what socialism is? to be fair though, when people talk about regulations in regards to economies, they are more than likely talking about regulations on industry, etc.

i said that China's economy is growing more rapidly than the United States' economy, so i'm not really sure why you gave me that stat on China. anyways, it is a fact that there is less regulation in China. if you follow the stock market you would know that Chinese stocks were all the rage last fall and winter. Chinese stocks are typically volatile and post huge gains of like $3or $4 a day or huge losses of the same magnitude. i remember in October, STV went from $39 to $51 in like a week and then fell back down to $39 by the end of the month. usually, such instability in stock prices is caused by an illegal activity called "insider trading." the magnitudes of the gains and losses indicate that it is highly likely that insider trading is highly prevalent activity in the Chinese stock market. in a country that has more regulations, insider trading is much more difficult to do and most who do it end up getting caught. *cough* Martha Stewart *cough*. also, China has almost no regulations on labor practices just look at it's mining industry and it also has a huge problem with corruption: all are symptoms of a lack of regulation.

also, i would like to know where you got that growth percentage for Japan from. i couldn't find it anywhere except for in an article that said the Japan's economic growth rate was 5.5% in 2005. in addition, i would like to point out that if the US goes into a recession a lot of other countries will more than likely enter a recession with us. hence, by saying that, "i doubt that Japan's economy is doing any better than ours," i was highlighting the fact that they are in a similar situation of that of the US.

Narcissa, and zhvxoxqew:
just for your future reference: RAPID economic growth is not necessarily a good thing. hence, it's not as easy as looking at growth rates to determine the condition of a country's economy. there are a lot of things to consider.

haha. well they would lie about their economic growth to show that they are going to become a world superpower soon.

i don't think that's quite true. what is true is that they aren't as facist or socialist anymore. look up what a "socialist market economy" is; you'll see that you basically had the right idea but not quite.

asdfjkl1

I don't think IQ would be a good thing to include in college admissions for the simple fact that a person who has an insanely high IQ may not have the social skills to be 'smart' in other realms. IQ doesn't necessarily measure someone's success. It just measures their logic ability. I think social skills and street smarts definitely outweigh IQ in the long run because in the long run, the ability to go to a job fair and get a job (based off how you present yourself) overruns cold logic. And the ability to know how to get out of a back alley so you don't get killed/mugged is pretty good, too.