<p>
</p>
<p>I agree with BIGeastBEAST and disagree with ksarmand in that I don’t feel that one needs to interpret the sentence so negatively.</p>
<p>Think of a 2x2 matrix with the following combinations: high aptitude, high commitment; high aptitude, low commitment; low aptitude, high commitment; and low aptitude, low commitment. The HAHC will perform the best while the LALC will perform the worst. A more interesting question is how well the middle two combos perform. In my opinion, it should go HAHC >= LAHC >= HALC. The three could all perform equally well, but I think the LAHC is likely to perform better than the HALC when it’s all said and done.</p>
<p>I admit bias; at least compared to some of my friends, I was a LAHC. They played World of Warcraft all day long during our freshman year, and yet they finished the year with a 3.8/4.0 GPA, one B per semester. I finished my first year with a 4.0/4.0, but I studied much more than they did. Yet, in the end, I graduated with a 4.0 while their performance monotonically worsened. They used to be solid 3.8 students; now, they hover around 3.0. You can last but you won’t excel without commitment.</p>