<p>Looks like this thread is turning into that “How did he get in” MIT redux. Remember what happened to that thread…</p>
<p>QuantMech, people–particularly kids–do a lot of things based on a) family tradition and b) what their friends are doing. Look at the growth of youth soccer in this country over the past decades. When I was a kid, hardly anyone played. Now EVERYONE seems to, both boys and girls, starting at an early age. How would you tell a five-year-old that she can’t play on the kindergarten rec team because you want to differentiate her from her peers for future elite school admissions, and thus she is going to have to start fencing instead?</p>
<p>Now let’s take piano. In a lot of families, if the parents or older siblings play, the younger ones are going to be encouraged. Or, BECAUSE THERE IS A PIANO SITTING RIGHT THERE IN THE LIVING ROOM, they are going to open the keyboard and start on their own. They hear the beautiful music that comes out of it, and want to try it themselves. Should these families keep little Johnny from playing and say–oh, sorry, we have a different plan in mind for you, so instead of taking piano lessons from Mrs. Young you are going to be starting on the upright bass with some guy from the university. And you won’t even have time to noodle around on the piano, because you need to get very good at the upright bass.</p>
<p>For the record, I agree with you that differentiation is what gets a lot of kids noticed in college admissions. Which is why it will eventually behoove everyone to expand their consideration set from the current scarce good of the Ivies and a few other schools. Why can’t a brilliant Asian violin-playing student get into Harvard Med School (or whatever the longer-term goal is) from Lawrence or Colorado College or Ole Miss? There are many paths to success but as long as people see their choices as finite we will keep having this discussion over and over again.</p>
<p>
THIS. Amen.</p>
<p>There is no “stereotype against piano and violin playing” in elite admissions, as evidenced by the great number of kids who get IN who play piano or violin. </p>
<p>But it is only common sense that if you want to be noticed among a sea of 30,000 applicants, you will want to do something that stands out. I don’t mean stand out for the sake of standing out. It can be subtle. But good lord, you want to be a breath of fresh air to the adcoms. You want them going - oh, that’s the kid from – who – . It DOESN’T mean gimmicky or silly (I juggle with no hands!). It means finding new and novel ways to express what it is that makes you uniquely you. With sincerity. </p>
<p>So, no, you don’t tell your eighth grader who loves the violin - sorry, you better switch, it’s not unique enough. But if your eighth grader is interested in the bass - hey, that’s great. And if your eighth grader really doesn’t want to play any instrument but you think they should for the sake of elite admissions, perhaps that should be rethought.</p>
<p>
Try again.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, does piano/violin make adcoms salivate as Ms Weiss contends, or is there a stigma against them as too common, as QM suggests?</p>
<p>The answer, of course, is some of each.</p>
<p>I think that Weiss was out-of-date with her commentary. There was an era when it was an advantage to be concertmaster, but I think that has passed as Suzuki has spread across the country. Also, it seems to be the consensus on CC that brief trips to Africa or Central America for aid projects are of no admissions benefit (although they are probably eye-opening to the travelers, and might provide some marginal assistance to the communities they visit).</p>
<p>I have to laugh at my reaction to the opening of post #862, by sally305. I initially read it as “QuantMech, people . . .” as if both terms were in the vocative case–and was about ready to respond, “Hey, I’m people, too!” But then I read on.</p>
<p>And, hey, jym626, I haven’t mentioned the USAMO here once! (Well, at least not before this.)</p>
<p>sally305, could you elaborate on your comment that the whole EC issue is sincerity? As far as I could tell, Ms. Weiss was quite sincere about her EC’s. She seems to have picked the things she wanted to do, and now thinks that they were not unique enough (dumping the parts of her column that I did not like).</p>
<p>More broadly, to everyone: Do you think a tightrope walker is inherently more interesting than a soccer player?</p>
<p>Argh. There is no universal formula!! In the context of one kid, the charity trip to Belize might be read as “rich kid who took nothing away from it” and in the context of another kid, the same trip could be read as “kid who really has a thoughtful heart and in depth insights about others not like him.” In the context of one kid, a piano honor could be seen as kid-dutifully-played-but-no-passion, and in another it could be piano-gives-this-kid-life’s-meaning. </p>
<p>There are kids with trips to Belize who get accepted to fancy places (I know one at Yale, who had also been accepted at Stanford and quite a few other great schools) and there are kids with these same trips who aren’t. Can we please stop with the absolutes of “they help” or “they don’t” when the answer is “they may or they may not, depending on the total context of the kid and the total context of the applicant pool”?</p>
<p>I’m sure Ms Weiss was perfectly sincere with her ECs. However, there is just not enough room at the elite colleges to accommodate all the good students with sincere ECs. So choices are made. And of course there is an element of capriciousness and unpredictability about it from the observer’s POV. Maybe Ms Weiss was fully qualified for Yale (or wherever). So were thousands of other kids. They have only so many seats. That’s all there is to it. There is no way to squeeze 30k applicants into 2k seats. The Weisses of the world are going to be disappointed. There’s no way around it.</p>
<p>QM-
One of the side vegetables may have changed, but the main course here is still the same!!</p>
<p>Gawd. It’s not sincerity or differentness or what an Asian can or can’t do or which instrument or whether or not a kid mentions a service trip or hides it. Do you all understand holistic?</p>
<p>And Suzy didn’t say she should have played Euphonium. She said she should have made useless efforts.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not unless he loved the bass more. I would assume that any kid who was first chair in the city IB school’s orchestra loved playing the violin. I personally hated playing the violin, so let’s get that out there right away. I could not quit playing the violin fast enough in high school. So much so that when suzuki started here I made my D play bass since I was going to have to play too.</p>
<p>So, what I am saying is, if the kid loves the violin, they should play the damn violin, even IF they have no chance at first chair. If the kid loves tightrope walking and can talk the parents into it, fine. If the kid loves soccer, they should play soccer.</p>
<p>And, they should do these things because they add quality to their life, to their childhood, because, while I am not an Ivy hater, I am also a big fan of … childhood! Good old fashioned tree climbing, summer camp, sleepovers and going out to the movies with a few friends, arts and crafts and snowball fighting childhood, as well.</p>
<p>If you can do the things you love and get into UChicago, Vanderbilt, Carnegie Mellon, or Brown, great. If you can do the things you love and get into UVA, UNC, UWashington, UMich, Suny Geneseo, great.</p>
<p>I don’t think a kid’s life should somehow be “orchestrated” (pun intended) around college admissions.</p>
<p>Also, at the risk of sounding like Corbrat, I did have a cousin who played Tuba in his college orchestra who is currently a banker. He’d rather be a Tuba player, but such is life. ;)</p>
<p>I tried to find a profile for her high school. Closest I came is it’s a magnet, possibly with a large core of underperformers. I’d like to know “% of kids off to four year colleges” and about the kids who got into YPPV. She may not have been a true top performer.</p>
<p>Apparently not, since “the formula” is still being sought. X points for tuba, y points for violin … X points for Belize, y points to newspaper editor …</p>
<p>lol, jym626, #873, I happen to be utterly committed to the cultivation of rutabagas, and will not waver from this course!</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, there probably are people who are looking for a formula. I am asking why all EC’s should not be treated on the same basis, if they are equal in terms of depth, sincerity, and accomplishment? </p>
<p>Perhaps there is no extra benefit at all in an uncommon EC. However, the highlighting of the unusual admitted students, which you can find on a number of admissions sites and in speeches during Admitted Students Days at multiple places, does tend to give an impression to the contrary. It could be a false impression.</p>
<p>I can tell that some of you are not experienced string parents. 
The VIOLA is the strategic choice, folks. There are never enough violas in middle/HS ensembles, and the standard for viola-playing entrance into string quartet camps and ensembles and so forth is therefore lower. I have known a youth symphony conductor to actually plead with violinists to switch the viola. The reason for this is pretty simple: unlike the violin and the cello, the viola does not take to being sized to something that a small kid can play.</p>
<p>My kid was a contrarian. He insisted on playing the violin, despite the piano sitting right there in the house. (“The violin sings,” he said, age 6.) He had no interest in the cello, despite my blandishments. When he got to college, he decided to teach himself to play the piano, and ultimately took lessons. </p>
<p>And no, he was never the concertmaster. Probably why he was only able to get into what some here like to call the “lower Ivys,” while his friend the tuba player got into HYM. :rolleyes: (Actually, in that case I think the real clincher was that he was an experienced a capella TENOR, who later went on to become a Whiffenpoof. Being the val didn’t hurt, either. 
)</p>
<p>I mean, if I think of all the really great private and public universities and add in all of the really great LACs in this country, in addition to the amazing specialty schools like, for example, Juliard or SAIC? I’m having a very challenging time coming up with a number small enough to put into a post without taking up too much space.</p>
<p>Carry on.</p>