<p>My friend once mentioned to me that high-schoolers who want to go to Ivies are so perfectionistic and afraid of failure that they tend to stay in their “comfort zone,” afraid to try those things in which they believe they won’t excel. For example: A high-schooler my friend knows, who wants to go to an Ivy, would really like to learn how to do woodworking, but he refuses to take a woodworking course because he’s afraid he will not do well in it, and it would hurt his GPA.</p>
<p>Is this unusual, or is it really true that some Ivy-bound high schoolers worry so much about their GPA’s that they are afraid to try those thing in which they might not excel?</p>
<p>Not at all, if he really wants to take the woodworking class, he should take it!
Having a GPA lowered by a small fraction of a point isn’t going to hurt him any more than having that slightly higher GPA…</p>
<p>This is a ridiculous, stupid question. On the contrary, smart, hard-working students thrive on challenges and would get bored if things were too easy. Lazy, dull people avoid challenges. Why are trying to make mediocrity a virtue?</p>
<p>Ivy applicants afraid of risks? Hardly. It might be better argued that they are some of the biggest risk takers among all college-bound kids, for they are shooting for schools with some of the lowest acceptance rates in the country. Anybody with a “fear of failure” would be foolish to apply to a school such as Harvard or Yale that has a single-digit acceptance rate. Submitting an application that has over 9 chances in 10 of failure is unlikely to comprise anybody’s low-risk “comfort zone.”</p>
<p>The risk averse Ivywannabes are not students who tend to get into Ivies. Those risk averse students are probably also grade grubbers. Ivies like students who take productive risks and who excel in academics because they like to learn, not because they are kissing up and doing other manipulative things to get good grades so as to get into an Ivy.</p>
<p>One top kid at my school took both health and gym as independent study courses just because of the fact that they are unweighted classes and would hurt her weighted GPA. On the other hand, she, and a lot of other top students in my class, genuinely worked hard in school to get where they are.</p>
<p>I’ve also noticed that the top students, even though they are “smart” (in sense that they do well in school), they aren’t really that knowledgeable about things not learned in school or an EC. I guess it all comes down to the book-smart or street-smart argument.</p>
<p>actually i think th eopposite. Sure lots of Ivy-aspirers are afraid to take risks like most high-schoolers, but all the kids I know who actually got into ivy league schools took more risks than anyone else. The kids who were afraid to take risks never did anything interesting or unusual, which hurts one who is trying to stand out in the admissions process. The kids I know who took initiative and tried new things became the leaders and the successful students who made mistakes but generally learned that that’s okay and gained alot more from it. Kids that get into Ivy league schools are the most interesting of the bunch because they take risks that set them apart from the rest of the Ivy-aspirers. Noone can be perfect, and aiming for what they think is “perfection” will probably just hurt them because they wont be able to discover their passion and uniqueness that will set them apart and make them efficient and creative people. Ivy League schools get millions of applicants with exactly the same successfully executed idea of what colleges look for, but they admit the ones that stand out and those kids take risks, which is actually much more difficult than getting perfect scores and juggling a bunch of stock activities to put on a resume.</p>
<p><a href=“Northstarmom:”>quote</a> The risk averse Ivywannabes are not students who tend to get into Ivies. Those risk averse students are probably also grade grubbers. Ivies like students who take productive risks and who excel in academics because they like to learn, not because they are kissing up and doing other manipulative things to get good grades so as to get into an Ivy
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Teaching at an Ivy would alert anyone to the extremely high level of risk-aversion and grade fixation in the pool of students. It has gone up over the years. What Ivies claim to like (risk) and what they predominantly reward (calculated resume-building) are two different things. The D students who get in for amazing devotion to lepidoptery are outnumbered 50 to 1 by wannabe investment bankers. </p>
<p><a href=“Scipio:”>quote</a> they are some of the biggest risk takers among all college-bound kids, for they are shooting for schools with some of the lowest acceptance rates in the country.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Applying doesn’t “risk” anything but the time-and-money cost of the forms, and can never limit one’s options. That’s very different from the risk of low grades discussed above.</p>
<p>Have you taught at an Ivy siserune? If not, what leads you to make this judgment? My mom is a professor at UC Irvine, and based on what she tells me, the undergrads there are much bigger grade-grubbers than my classmates at Yale.</p>
<p>“My mom is a professor at UC Irvine, and based on what she tells me, the undergrads there are much bigger grade-grubbers than my classmates at Yale.”</p>
<p>I agree. I taught at two third tier colleges, and saw more grade grubbing than I ever saw when going to Harvard. At the third tier colleges, what seemed to inspire most students to work was getting a grade, not any love of learning. At Harvard, I rarely remember students talking about their grades. They did, however, talk a lot about what they were learning in class.</p>
<p>I studied and taught at several Ivy-level schools, including Harvard. The environment has changed tremendously for the undergrads since the time Northstarmom was there, in favor or more grade obsession. You see a very different side of things as a teacher. A disturbingly large proportion of students come in to request adjustment of trivia in their homework and exam grades.</p>
<p>Many factors are to blame, including the administration, admissions policies, the number of applicants, and the dilution of the SAT. It was once possible for an extremely intelligent risk-taker to not worry about high school grades (if they could make a B+ or better average without much work), devote themselves to the “risk”, and then blow away the SAT’s to demonstrate that their applicant rank should be much higher than their class rank. </p>
<p>Now that there is no such thing as an amazing score on the SAT, people who don’t hunker down and get good grades are toast come application season. Because masters of grades are in large supply, this in turn causes an arms race for further credentials by the risk-averse looking to hedge their bets,
which further squeezes down the value that in earlier years would have been assigned to the natural activities of the risk takers. Debate, math competitions, musical instruments and so on have become stereotyped credentials rather than an outlet for those interested or obsessed to a “risky” extent. </p>
<p>The fact that similar cultural changes have happened at universities below the top doesn’t diminish the extent to which it has happened at Harvard.</p>
<p>I’m going to have to go against the majority opinion here…</p>
<p>I’d say that when it comes to permanent records, such as GPA, standard tests, and the like, many top students ARE afraid to take a risk. Let’s face it: a lot of people who aspire to go to the Ivy’s are perfectionists or people who think about their future before their present. If the risk was something the student really wanted to experience, and they had no other way to experience it, they might take the leap. If it was something they were vaguely interested in, they would probably steer their interests in a less long-term-effecting direction. </p>
<p>Many of these students are not willing to weigh a bit of fun against a blotch on their near-perfect records.</p>
<p>I’m afraid I kind of fell victim to this. Senior year, I could have taken AP Biology or AP Art History. I knew I was going to apply to Penn ED, so I thought I should take the “tough” class, in AP Bio. 6 months later, I am denied from Penn and hating bio, wishing I took art history. My best advice would be to find a balance between challenging yourself and actually enjoying your classes, which is what learning is all about in the first place.</p>
<p>I am also going to argue against the crowd here. I go to a highly competitive high school that sends a lot of students to some good schools, and I myself am highly ranked. I care about my grades, as well as every other student, and to a certain extent, yes, we are not courageous enough to take either really hard courses or courses that interest us that are not weighted or would look bad to colleges. It is just the way it is. Take it from a high schooler himself. I worry about my grades a lot, primarily because I really want to attend a great college, where I won’t have to worry about grades, just worry about becoming a more intelligent person and actually focusing on what schools are supposed to be designed for - learning the subjects. Schools these days are so focused on grades and test scores that learning has become a second-tier objective to schools. Thats why when November 2008 rolls around next year, I will more than likely apply ED to Reed College, where the first objective for the school is to educate, not where every student is focused so much on their GPA that they entirely forget to analyze and actually learn the subject.</p>
<p>and to add on, standing out in the admissions process by being a leader is not taking a risk. im vice president of key club at my school, I definetely don’t consider that a risk. its just me being a good citizen and a solid leader. and applying to ivy’s does not in any way mean taking a risk. applying is not a risk.</p>