It’s perhaps helpful to consider that the UK education system depends entirely on summative tests (at 16 and 18) and your grades in these exams determine which college you will attend. Essentially no attention is paid to all the ECs that are so influential in US holistic admissions (so for example Malala Yousafzai still had to get top grades in her A levels to get into Oxford). A more recent development is contextual offers where students from disadvantaged schools have that factor taken into account in the grades needed for college admissions.
I have a hard time seeing why that sort of “test-based meritocracy” is so problematic for society. It’s just different, and many in the UK would argue that it’s fairer than the US system, because they can see that children of the wealthy can’t just buy their way in without testing. Yes they may have private tutoring and better schools, but they still have to study for their exams like everyone else.
Implementation of similar admissions criteria in the US would certainly be difficult due to the smaller size of top US colleges relative to the population, but I don’t see such a system as inherently bad. The US also likes to think of itself as a meritocracy, but the biggest problem from a public relations viewpoint is the ability of the very wealthy or influential to manipulate and bypass the constraints that apply to the rest of the population in college admissions (via legacies, sports, ECs, Z list etc.). It’s just assumed that the children of billionaires or powerful politicians will be able to attend top colleges, and that gives the perception to outsiders that the US educational system is corrupt (which is a pretty universal view in the UK, amplified by things like Varsity Blues and the debate over race-based admissions). Outperformance on standardized tests by students in wealthier families is way less of an issue than addressing those other factors.
I think Japan has a similar system where HS students take a comprehensive exam that determines which university they attend, or even if they can go to a Japanese university. University of Tokyo is like their Harvard, Stanford and MIT combined, and graduates become leaders in industry and government there. Needless to say, this test is a huge source of stress for Japanese students and preparation courses make US SAT prep pale in comparison.
Are there members here who went through the testing in Japan who can shed light on this?
The personal statement is a simple statement of why you want to study a particular subject (much shorter and with nothing like the level of iteration typically seen for US admission essays), recommendations are also about your abilities in that subject. But the major part of the recommendation is the prediction of your exam grades (since offers are given before the A levels are taken), not your personal qualities let alone your ECs. UK schools give a great deal of attention to making sure these predictions are accurate since it determines their credibility in the eyes of the universities in future years. And interviews are only a thing at Oxbridge (and a little at Imperial/UCL) to distinguish between the surfeit of highly academically qualified students (again on academic grounds).
Using standardized population-wide tests to “place” kids in university reminds me of the movie “Starstrip Troopers” where your placement in society/military is based on your test score. And we all know we need people to fight them giant Ants!
I am too idealistic perhaps but, I just feel that there is so much about a student’s “character” that cannot be captured on a test.
Is one as valuable without the other? What good is being smart and educated if you’re a jerk? I realize many people are just that, but as society, I do hope we would support a different trajectory. But as speak as someone who attended a Jesuit university where this idea is embedded in all they do. I suppose not the same everywhere, sadly.
I will take the skilled surgeon with compassion and empathy for their patient. And, in fact, as a cancer survivor who has been in precisely this position, that is just what I did. So I do actually put my money where my mouth is, so to speak.
My point is that those qualities need not be mutually exclusive and, if it were up to me (which it obviously isn’t), we as a society would try to foster more of this combination of skills and character by rewarding those who demonstrate both.
I agree. But I think that academics trumps compassion when it comes to admissions. I lost count of how many of our kids friends padded applications with manufactured “compassion projects” all coin operated. BTW, just about all of the academic achievers I’ve know have also been very compassionate.
Well, yeah. The smart kids who were capable of the technical aspects of piloting interstellar craft got those gigs, the ones who weren’t capable got to shoot bugs. Wouldn’t make much sense otherwise.
These aren’t mutually exclusive, but c’mon. Given the choice between a gruff, “jerk” mechanic who knows what he’s doing to work on my brakes, or a “nice” guy who has no clue, I’m taking the jerk every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Don’t need to go careening over a cliff screaming “but he was such a nice guuuuuyyyyy!!!”
What you will do in the US military is determined by the ASVAB. In Canada, there is the Canadian Armed Forces Aptitude test.
This whole discussion is only about the most selective universities. Most universities in the US accept just about everyone. For those selective institutions, since there are so few spots, they have no problem finding very bright students who test well that have creative minds that are also high character individuals.
Another false choice. And one that devalues the role of education/experience in creating (in your example) competent mechanics.
I take my cars to a competent mechanic who is also I nice guy. I have no idea whether my mechanic was naturally gifted as a mechanic when he began his apprenticeship decades ago, and I don’t really care. What I do care about is that he is not only knows how to fix brakes, but that he is also honest, reasonable, reliable, a good listener, flexible, etc. That’s why he has my business. It is a lot harder to find a mechanic who fits that description than it is to find one who is merely competent to fix my brakes.