Another applicant rejected from all Ivies. - Page 27

Keshira · 05-09-2008, 07:46 PM

Quote:

only the intangibles will distinguish one from another

But is it really fair to put so much emphasis on intangibles? How a student's "personality" and "authenticity" comes through? Can you really make a fair judgement of that from an application... or make a "fair" judgement of character at all? It seems to be extremely subject to the personal biases and prejudices of the admissions officer. Admissions should stop trying to judge applicants' values as human beings, but judge their academic ability and achievement. And I think we're forgetting that the point of college is academic... so why so much focus on nonacademic, subjective factors?

The current focus with it's focus on leadership favors extroverted individuals heavily, whereas it has been shown that gifted people tend to be introverted... and so I agree in part to that person who posted that "scholars and scientists" are valued relatively low in this culture. It's gotten to the point that even admissions to college, academic institutions, is based more around extroversion, leadership, and a show of sincerity than about scholarship. And I think it's interesting how only the sincerity of the very top students is questioned. I wonder how many students whose parents weren't as involved, who consequently achieved less, were more sincerely in love with school than this applicant?

The number of applicants with, 2400 and 4.0 [reference to another poster] is definitely not so high that we can't start judging applicants on achievement, something clear and tangible, instead of trying to psychoanalyze their 'inner motivations' and potential.

Professor101 · 05-10-2008, 02:18 AM

What are the kid's SAT II scores?

Keshira: I agree that there is too much subjectivity in the admission process

epiphany · 05-10-2008, 09:52 AM

The same can be said for hiring employees, and for voting for political candidates.

A college is admitting a person with multiple attributes, not a machine or a scantron. Clearly it's not possible to be assured of *accurate* evaluation of those multiple attributes, certainly not 100% of the time, anyway. Naturally there will be mistakes: just as in hiring employees, just as in electing political candidates who sound good and look good. And clearly from a statistical point of view, the larger an applicant pool within a predictably small time period, the greater likelihood of error.

It's one reason that some of us elsewhere on CC have suggested a match system, in which one of the benefits would be more opportunity to evaluate both for qualification and for 'fitness' for that institution.

If colleges wanted to admit test scores and grades, they could do so; they could be like certain Asian institutions. But they prefer to admit people.

Some of you are quite unrealistic.

coureur · 05-10-2008, 10:08 AM

>>If the kid in question wasn't the real thing, he wouldn't have gotten into Caltech.<<

Getting into Caltech proves only that he was the real thing in the way the Caltech defines the "real thing." Other colleges have their own criteria for determining the real thing. In other words, admissions success at one school, especially a highly specialized place like Caltech, does not necessarily predict success at another school.

Pizzagirl · 05-10-2008, 10:08 AM

Interesting discussion and jazzymom makes some good points.

To me, the difference is that it seemed as though G defined "success" very narrowly - Ivy or bust - such that he didn't even realize / recognize that for goodness sake, Caltech, Duke, and Rice - 3 top 20 schools - are just as much of an accomplishment.

The Chicago girl, on the other hand - one gets the sense that if she had "just" gotten into Duke or Rice (she didn't seem the Caltech type), she would still have been happy about it.

I agree both families obviously devoted a lot of time to nurturing two obviously smart and talented kids. I think there's an inherent obnoxiousness in thinking that one is "entitled" to be admitted to an Ivy and an inherent obnoxiousness about the mentality that Ivies-and-only-Ivies are the brass ring, and maybe that's what picked up on here.

Professor101 · 05-10-2008, 11:04 AM

"Some of you are quite unrealistic".

Epiphany:
Reality is created by people. The great Chairman Mao of China created a reality that college admission was controlled by workers and peasants in the 1970's. They selected college students from farmers, factory workers and janitors. The result, of course, was a disaster. I am sure that a lot people on this board may think that is ridiculous, but that was the reality in China, some 35 years ago. Do you want to select students the same way as companies select employee or like a election by popular votes? That would be very interesting.

epiphany · 05-10-2008, 11:45 AM

Correct. Reality is created by people. What's your point, exactly?

"Do you want to select students the same way as companies select employee or like a election by popular votes?"

You know, I really wish people would read for content, not for their own spun agendas. I said that the model of results is similar (i.e., subjective, risky), not that the process is identical, or should be.

Too bad that analogies are no longer part of the SAT. It's obvious that they should be. But then again, logic is also no longer part of formal K-12 curriculum. And here on CC one sees the legacy of that.

Professor101 · 05-10-2008, 11:55 AM

^^ Haha, calm down.
"The same can be said for hiring employees, and for voting for political candidates."

Apparently, you are comparing the college admission process to hiring employee and voting for political candidates. The logical question is: "Do you want to select students the same way as companies select employee or like a election by popular votes?"

"Correct. Reality is created by people. What's your point, exactly?"
My point: Reality is created by people. Apparently, you agree.

emeraldkity4 · 05-10-2008, 12:03 PM

Admissions should stop trying to judge applicants' values as human beings, but judge their academic ability and achievement.

yuck
I think students should quit trying to pick colleges by the ones that they think will add to their portfolio of numbers and look to the ones that will help them mature and grow as human beans.

latetoschool · 05-10-2008, 12:26 PM

EK did you really mean human "beans" or was that a slip...

collegealum314 · 05-10-2008, 12:43 PM

"Getting into Caltech proves only that he was the real thing in the way the Caltech defines the "real thing." "

Well, people were saying that the kid was probably not really an outstanding intellect and that his recs were probably lukewarm. Since Caltech only cares about academic talent and work ethic, I was saying that Ghosh must be the "real thing" in that respect.

But yeah, if we were talking about leadership or athletic ability, something which the ivies value, I agree that Caltech admissions doesn't say anything about that.

jazzymom · 05-10-2008, 12:45 PM

PG:

How can we ever know how the young woman in Chicago --- who virtually swept the field in acceptances to the several Ivy League colleges she applied to --- would have felt had she not been admitted to any of them?

Perhaps she would have been perfectly happy with one of her nonIvy choices, but honestly given where she applied, it isn't farfetched to imagine that she had her own dreams of attending an Ivy and that she too might have felt, as Ghosh did, deeply disappointed not to be admitted to her favorite one. I'm sure she would have been sensible and intelligent enough to get over it and be pleased with a nonIvy admittance, but I also think that young Ghosh will recoup and be happy to attend one of the fine universities that admitted him. Won't be a news story at that point, though.

Disappointment, even being temporarily devastated, over not getting the admission one had hoped for is pretty understandable to me. I didn't think their reaction was obnoxious, just a bit overblown considering the Duke-Rice-Caltech acceptances.

epiphany · 05-10-2008, 01:12 PM

No, I am not comparing processes, but comparing *results* among different processes that are similarly subjective, because they must be.

No one's not calm but you. You're making a big deal out of nothing, but then so are many people on this thread. Folks, when there are multiples of more applicants than there are spaces -- for *anything* -- 2 things will happen. (1) due to time & statistical realities, some errors will be made; (2) equally qualified candidates will not be chosen. If you don't understand this, and are trying to make life a Utopia, then you do not live in an employment impacted region, where competition for intellectually stimulating jobs is fierce, due to massive oversupply of educated, skilled workers. It is a casual fact of life in my region that brilliant people are regularly laid off or not hired in the first place, due to no supposed blind spot or fault of the people doing the hiring but due to (please listen) OVERSUPPLY.

Professor101 · 05-10-2008, 01:35 PM

^^If you say life is unfair, I agree. In this case, if the kid didn't get close to 2400 in SAT II and he is only ranked 4th in the class, the admission results can actually be considered normal for an Asian kid.