<p>Heard this on NPR this morning. If a teen brain is rapidly growing and his/her acts are sometimes “abnormal”, do current college admissions seeking mature/well-rounded kids miss the right ones, i.e., the majority of future greats?</p>
<p>[The</a> Teen Brain: It’s Just Not Grown Up Yet : NPR](<a href=“http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124119468]The”>http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124119468)</p>
<p>Perhaps they pick up those kids later on as transfers after they’ve matured and proven their academic abilities at community colleges or less selective colleges.</p>
<p>Of course they do. In fact, any admissions officer will tell you that admissions is certainly far from being an exact science. At every school there are kids that admissions probably wished they never accepted.</p>
<p>Moreover, the SAT is a very flawed exam for many reasons,which is why many more schools are making these exams optional.</p>
<p>In addition, no program really can evaluate drive and evaluate how well kids will be immune to the distractions of college. There are many kids who are NMS or who receive some great merit scholarships who blow their scholarships. </p>
<p>Finally, as you noted, student mature at different ages. There are a number of kids who emotionally and intellectually mature past age 18, which is usually after they apply to colleges.</p>
<p>In short: Yes, many kids fall through the cracks at top schools. The good news is that there any candidate can find a decent school that would be a good fit and, if necessary, can transfer if their college grades are good.</p>
<p>*Jensen says scientists used to think human brain development was pretty complete by age 10. Or as she puts it, that “a teenage brain is just an adult brain with fewer miles on it.”</p>
<p>But it’s not. To begin with, she says, a crucial part of the brain — the frontal lobes — are not fully connected. Really.</p>
<p>"It’s the part of the brain that says: ‘Is this a good idea? What is the consequence of this action?’ " Jensen says. “It’s not that they don’t have a frontal lobe. And they can use it. But they’re going to access it more slowly.”</p>
<p>That’s because the nerve cells that connect teenagers’ frontal lobes with the rest of their brains are sluggish. Teenagers don’t have as much of the fatty coating called myelin, or “white matter,” that adults have in this area.*</p>
<p>Yes! And that area of the brain that deals with wisdom and discernment isn’t fully complete until about age 25. Addictions can form more easily before age 25.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, we have a test that has a 0.62 statistical correlation to college graduation when combined with high school GPA, but we consider that “flawed” and will dispose of it and hold envelopes up to our head and holisitically determine who is the “better” enrollee instead.</p>
<p>Definitely- My now 25 year old son barely graduated from high school and then bounced around from CC to CC starting each semester with 16-18 units and ending with 4. He worked all this time and learned how to lay floors, pour concrete, rebuild cars, etc. He did not know what he wanted to do, was immature, didn’t follow through on school. All the sudden and as the result of one of his many jobs, he decided he wanted to go into construction management. At 22, he buckled down and finished CC, transferred to a state school and got straight A’s in engineering classes. He got several awards thru his department as well as a full tuition scholarship his last year. He interned and was hired by a large construction management firm on graduation. The big thing they liked about him is that he is so hands-on and that he had actually poured concrete, laid floors, etc.- ha. My husband and I were at our wits ends with him and just about had given up. He just found what he wanted to do and matured in a short time. He would never have succeeded in a Bachelors program at 18 even if he could have gotten in. I’m so glad we stuck with him!</p>
<p>I’m sure they miss some great kids. But regarding the SAT, at least that’s an event that happens after at least some level of maturity. I’ve seen a lot of kids radically grow up junior year. As for maturity at the 9th and 10th grade levels - not so much! It’s unfortunate that choices made then about class performance come back to haunt these kids by the time they apply to college.</p>
<p>Of course some kids will be missed. But that is only part of the problem faced by colleges. There is another type of selection error, its called false alarms (students who should not have been admitted). By changing criteria one can decrease misses, but that is also likely to increase false alarms. Now weigh the relative cost to the school and its mission for each type of error. My guess the FA is indeed more costly for the top schools. </p>
<p>The mission of state publics (particularly the regional universities) has often been to decrease misses, thus resulting in more FAs. (Unfortunately, the trend here also seems to be increasing selectivity.) Not all colleges have the same mission and each should be evaluated for how well they do their job while operating under different decision rules.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If he’s going to start his own company and becomes a billionaire, then even the most selective schools would wish he’s theirs.</p>
<p>Who would you pick for admission? </p>
<p>A - Smart, perfect grades/test scores, good ECs, mature and done/predictable.
B - Smart (or smarter), uneven grades/test scores, nonstandard ECs, brain still developing.</p>
<p>I wonder if B isn’t a better bet.</p>
<p>I think you are asssuming the mature, perfect grade student is necessarily “done/predictable”.Their brain is still developing too, but is already furthur along in achievement of knowledge. That does not preclude creativity.</p>
<p>The “predictable” smart/mature kid may well become a top surgeon, gifted experimental physicist, Pulitzer-winning writer, or dedicated senator. Maybe colleges would rather see the money they invest have a higher chance of benefiting society. </p>
<p>Of course colleges will miss many late-bloomers. Like the above example, there are plenty of opportunities for them to shine later.</p>
<p>Brilliance without a mature work ethic does not support college success. Top colleges spend a lot of money on students, as tuition just covers a fraction of actual cost. It makes sense that they would like to see a positive return on their investment.</p>
<p>Ideally admissions offices try to find a mix of both A and B. Frankly, the B’s make for more interesting students, but they’re also riskier. You’re betting that they’re going to fully develop their decision making before they graduate and/or aren’t going to do anything too destructive in the process. Also, it’s difficult to evaluate “smart (or smarter)” without looking at grades and test scores or some kind of hard measure. Not a perfect system, but even the best qualitative admissions processes have to rely on some kind of quantitative data. </p>
<p>Also, I think honestly colleges have to look for kids who are ready for college at the time. in the case of takeitallian’s son, it sounds like he wasn’t really ready until he was 22, so if a college had accepted him, would he even have done well? He had to wait until he was personally developed enough before he could really come into his own and realize his potential. I don’t think going to a 4-year college sooner would have helped him in that regard.</p>
<p>Fauxnom- I agree it is sad to see the 9th and 10th grade decisions sway later opportunities. Perhaps if parents encouraged more maturity in junior high, with responsibilities to do well, and the reasoning behind that plan, families would be better prepared for the arrival of the all-powerful Permanent Record.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Um, as a parent of a 25 year old, I would say it takes even longer for some. Still waiting.</p>
<p>Sure, they miss some potentially good kids, but, frankly, there are are colleges in the U.S. who will accept any live human being, so it’s not as if aspiring college students can’t find places to attend.</p>
<p>In addition, people can apply to college at any time after finishing high school, so those who aren’t mature enough for college at age 18 or 17 may be welcomed into college at 23 or 30 or even 50 or older. In fact, some of the best students are those older than the traditional college ages.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Poor choice of words on my part indeed. But, their rate of development could be different. In the case of takeitallian’s son, he could be ready well before 22 with the right school.</p>
<p>Regarding student A vs student B, if we have 20-, 30-, or 40-year high school reunions, have the top students been doing better in life than the almost top students?</p>
<p>^^My high school valedictorian is raising emus in Minnesota 34 years after graduation. I am sure she is happy, but I wouldn’t trade with her.</p>
<p>Really if a kid can’t get his s-h-i-t together by 9th grade I don’t know if that is someone who SHOULD be in the Ivy League. It doesn’t take a future brain surgeon to know that doing well in school is important for future opportunities. I was in 6th grade when I realized I needed to start doing some ECs if I wanted to get into college and before that I realized I needed to play an instrument if I wanted to get better in math. No one needs to encourage children they should just do it on their own.</p>
<p>It is really annoying how people constantly make excuses for lack of achievement with the familiar line “late bloomer”. When in all honesty the kid is probably just lazy.</p>
<p>There’s also the kid who presents as mature with strong GPA and test scores – and it turns out that the kid has parents who closely managed course/teacher selection and SAT prep courses and EC selection. The first six weeks at college turns into a nonstop binge followed by the “October Exodus” - those kids that post under 1.0 on midterms and realize they haven’t a hope of reviving their classes by the end of the semester. </p>
<p>We definitely have a Type B. He is the sweetest guy on earth. He may not remember to turn in his paper, but he heard every (interesting) word the teacher spoke and retains it all. He’s a gem for some school, for sure. </p>
<p>I loved reading Seabiscuit about a 1920’s racehorse. Seabiscuit was pushed hard as a two year old racer and did very poorly. It wasn’t until he fell into the hands of a crafty trainer who combined lots of relaxation time with some techniques to spur that competitive drive (previously Seabiscuit had not particularly cared about winning) that the champion began to emerge.</p>
<p>Wow, Dbate, I disagree hugely. I have seen my son get his act together slowly. For him,the standardized testing is a Godsend because there his brilliance shows. No way did he have his XXXX together in sixth grade. Neither did his father. DH was a space cadet until age 20 – and now he is a well regarded researcher who has done some amazing things. </p>
<p>Some kids are daffodils that bloom early. Others are roses that take more time, more sun, and a lot more horseshxx to bloom – but are worth the effort and wait.</p>
<p>It sounds like people are just attempting to elevate mediocrity. Every kids should aim to be the best from an early age. Not every person who does well in school or gets perfect grades is going to be average, and the vast majority of mediocre high schoolers go on to be mediocre adults. </p>
<p>People would like to believe that their kid is a diamond in the rough, when in fact he is just graphite.</p>