I completely agreed with this article completely. I forgot where I read or heard it but someone said that admissions process isn’t evaluating potential anymore, but instead it just evaluates how much money that your parents have. I can obviously relate to this article because I got a few rejections that I wasn’t expecting or at least wasn’t hoping for. But I was constantly told the message that this article is elucidating. It is okay to go to a brand name school because you’re just as likely or even more likely to get a brand name education. A friend of mine whose sibling went to Harvard constantly complained about the lack of attendance that the professors had because they were always attending conferences or meetings and did not spend adequate time teaching. It doesn’t matter where you get your education as long as you have intentions of using it. – Avneet K
It's nice to see a reality check on the college situation. I think that there are number of issues with the college system. One of these issues is scarcity. The number of college applicants has gone up, but the number of high level colleges has not. This means that there are many qualified people who do not make it into the Ivy Leagues or other high level schools because they do not manipulate the system or they're simply not lucky enough. I read in Malcom Gladwell's other book Outliers that only 1 out 3 fully qualified (perfect SAT scores and grades) applicants to Harvard make it in. It's almost a lottery. It's ridiculous.
To hear that a family actually created a charity purely for the purpose of giving their children college essay material makes me sick to my stomach.
There is also another question. Should everybody be going to college? A lot of people are required to get college degrees, even when they contribute nothing to their future careers, because employers assume that non-college educated people are either stupid or unambitious. It's gotten to the point in many careers where a pure Bachelor's degree isn't enough and you have to get a Master's to make an impression. With college tuition these days, it can be expensive.
I think the article makes its best point when it talks about how personal ambition is more important than your school. Many people seem to forget that. They take high level classes or go to a high level school and they think that's all they have to do. The truth is, college isn't about where you go. It's about what you make of it.
This is a subject that I understand does not sit easy with many of my peers. The college admissions process, especially at an elite high school like Herricks and even more so among our top students, is incredibly stressful. It is a treacherous road that leads to El Dorado for some and empty despair for others. I was lucky enough to be accepted to several of my top choices but I know fortune was not as kind to my classmates, many of whom I consider my friends. I cannot deny the euphoria of being admitted to an elite university; it is a form of validation of my merit, intelligence, and hard work. No doubt, I am beyond proud to answer the question: "Where are you going next year?" The feeling of superiority is undeniable and understandably addictive. Still, I cannot in good conscience use college decisions as an accurate barometer for judging an individual's worth as doing so would mean undervaluing so many of my classmates. When acceptance rates at some schools hover around 5%, being rejected cannot be taken as an insult or a proclamation of failure. Likewise, being accepted cannot be misconstrued as a guarantee of future success. My success will derive more from my hard work than the name on my sweatshirt. I do however, refute the idea that being less privileged is a valid excuse for being rejected. As a whole, the admitted pool of students is definitely more qualified than the rejected pool. They have been admitted because they deserve to be there. Are there some students who have had more opportunities to impress the admissions committee? Of course, but ultimately cream will rise to the top. Most admitted students, myself included, are middle-class, have never had a tutor or professional essay-editor, and have no legacy whatsoever. These so-called obstacles have not hindered the thousands of non-privileged students who were admitted. I believe that true merit ultimately prevails in the end and the college admissions process, while flawed, allows for this process to occur for the most part.
I enjoyed reading this article, and I believe it holds true to the big picture of all our lives. One thing I will say, however, is that the author seemed extremely bias, excluding the possibility of hard-working and grounded students, since more often than not, somewhere around 50% of the students at these universities are receiving financial aid. This means half of the students at these universities did necessarily have parents that could buy charity x in Africa, which is a large percentage. The author makes reference to Malcolm Gladwell, but left out a very important point that Gladwell made in his book. Gladwell noted that Ivy League schools are very much like modeling agencies. They selectively choose students, but do not necessarily do anything that will transform the student's abilities. I think this is very true, since hard work and passion are inherent qualities, not ones that can be engendered with the association of a large institution to one's name. Lastly, I think the major point of this article is that life goes on. It's possible that not getting into one's top choice can be heart-breaking. It's even possible that this whole crapshoot of a process may even lead someone to believe that hard work simply does not pay off. However, we weren't born to accomplish everything we set our minds on. Our lives are destined to have failures, and when we fall down one valley, it's important to climb back up. Life goes on, but do we?
I like how the columnist mentioned that there are many CEOs who didn't go to college at "shiny schools". Seeing names like Lockheed Martin and Whole Foods is encouraging, and this article does a good job of highlighting what we've learned about entrepreneurship in class; entrepreneurs need to be ambitious, resilient, and willing to take risks, which is something that people need to find in themselves and that no school can teach. I also like that the writer points out the overemphasis on college and salary rankings. I think that kids who have been through the college admissions process today realize that the name of the college does not mean as much as some people think, and I hope our generation can be the one to end the belief that the name of a college is more important than the character of a student.
We each have an innate quality to classify schools, colleges, programs, and classes depending on which one is ranked the highest or classified as being "elite." We've all grown up with this quality of feeling the need to graduate from the "best" colleges or attend the "best" schools. However, on what criteria are the schools based on? What differentiates the "best" schools from the rest? Who categorizes the schools? We become so engrossed by titles and names that we forget every school is fundamentally similar. Yes, some schools may be stronger in certain areas than others, however, our college experiences collectively will be great despite what school we go to. It's psychological to believe that college won't be great because you're attending a "less ranked" school. Your college experience is what you make of it, and I believe that going forward names and titles won't matter -- your individuality, analytical skills, and ability to think/act promptly will matter. And these characteristics can only be developed if you make the most and take advantage of your college education. - Ravina
After having experienced the whole process, I believe there is not a single child in this type of environment that is unaware of these types of conditions. We choose to not believe such distinctions because if we were aware of the stupidity of the situation, nobody would have the incentive to apply. That being said, Malcom Gladwell and his book "David and Goliath", is built on a world of truth that success is not a name but a character trait.
After reading the article “Our Crazy College Crossroads”, I have to agree with most of the information Frank Bruni states. Everyone judges students for where they will attend college. The stereotype that people who attend the Ives are probably going to be the next millionaires and the students who attend community colleges or less prestigious colleges will go nowhere in life is false because its about what you have learned. I have met multiple people who haven’t gone to prestigious colleges or didn’t even go to college and are very successful. Although I believe the name and prestige is a key point on finding a job, the overall knowledge of the individual is the most important aspect.
I think that this blog is correct in talking about how unimportant it is to get rejected from the top colleges. If you applied and you were in the range of acceptance and got rejected it honestly can just come down to luck. At the end of the day you are probably still gong to end up at a college in the top percentage of schools and be just as successful. It isn't necessarily about the college, it is what you learn there. -ZL
I think this article is pretty interesting. It teaches us of how a specific school that we get into doesn't define us of who we are and whom we could be. One quote that stood out would be from Malcom Gladwell's "David and Goliath", in which he states that, a "less exclusive university may enable a student to stand out and flourish in a way that a more exclusive one doesn’t". Although some of us do not attend these "prestigious universities", it doesn't mean we cannot become the best we can be. In fact, we might be able to flourish even further. It's easier for a single plant to thrive well by itself than with other plants struggling to achieve the same goal.
I completely agreed with this article completely. I forgot where I read or heard it but someone said that admissions process isn’t evaluating potential anymore, but instead it just evaluates how much money that your parents have. I can obviously relate to this article because I got a few rejections that I wasn’t expecting or at least wasn’t hoping for. But I was constantly told the message that this article is elucidating. It is okay to go to a brand name school because you’re just as likely or even more likely to get a brand name education. A friend of mine whose sibling went to Harvard constantly complained about the lack of attendance that the professors had because they were always attending conferences or meetings and did not spend adequate time teaching. It doesn’t matter where you get your education as long as you have intentions of using it. – Avneet K
ReplyDeleteIt's nice to see a reality check on the college situation. I think that there are number of issues with the college system. One of these issues is scarcity. The number of college applicants has gone up, but the number of high level colleges has not. This means that there are many qualified people who do not make it into the Ivy Leagues or other high level schools because they do not manipulate the system or they're simply not lucky enough. I read in Malcom Gladwell's other book Outliers that only 1 out 3 fully qualified (perfect SAT scores and grades) applicants to Harvard make it in. It's almost a lottery. It's ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteTo hear that a family actually created a charity purely for the purpose of giving their children college essay material makes me sick to my stomach.
There is also another question. Should everybody be going to college? A lot of people are required to get college degrees, even when they contribute nothing to their future careers, because employers assume that non-college educated people are either stupid or unambitious. It's gotten to the point in many careers where a pure Bachelor's degree isn't enough and you have to get a Master's to make an impression. With college tuition these days, it can be expensive.
I think the article makes its best point when it talks about how personal ambition is more important than your school. Many people seem to forget that. They take high level classes or go to a high level school and they think that's all they have to do. The truth is, college isn't about where you go. It's about what you make of it.
Ellen Cooper, Pd. 5
This is a subject that I understand does not sit easy with many of my peers. The college admissions process, especially at an elite high school like Herricks and even more so among our top students, is incredibly stressful. It is a treacherous road that leads to El Dorado for some and empty despair for others. I was lucky enough to be accepted to several of my top choices but I know fortune was not as kind to my classmates, many of whom I consider my friends. I cannot deny the euphoria of being admitted to an elite university; it is a form of validation of my merit, intelligence, and hard work. No doubt, I am beyond proud to answer the question: "Where are you going next year?" The feeling of superiority is undeniable and understandably addictive. Still, I cannot in good conscience use college decisions as an accurate barometer for judging an individual's worth as doing so would mean undervaluing so many of my classmates. When acceptance rates at some schools hover around 5%, being rejected cannot be taken as an insult or a proclamation of failure. Likewise, being accepted cannot be misconstrued as a guarantee of future success. My success will derive more from my hard work than the name on my sweatshirt.
ReplyDeleteI do however, refute the idea that being less privileged is a valid excuse for being rejected. As a whole, the admitted pool of students is definitely more qualified than the rejected pool. They have been admitted because they deserve to be there. Are there some students who have had more opportunities to impress the admissions committee? Of course, but ultimately cream will rise to the top. Most admitted students, myself included, are middle-class, have never had a tutor or professional essay-editor, and have no legacy whatsoever. These so-called obstacles have not hindered the thousands of non-privileged students who were admitted. I believe that true merit ultimately prevails in the end and the college admissions process, while flawed, allows for this process to occur for the most part.
I enjoyed reading this article, and I believe it holds true to the big picture of all our lives. One thing I will say, however, is that the author seemed extremely bias, excluding the possibility of hard-working and grounded students, since more often than not, somewhere around 50% of the students at these universities are receiving financial aid. This means half of the students at these universities did necessarily have parents that could buy charity x in Africa, which is a large percentage. The author makes reference to Malcolm Gladwell, but left out a very important point that Gladwell made in his book. Gladwell noted that Ivy League schools are very much like modeling agencies. They selectively choose students, but do not necessarily do anything that will transform the student's abilities. I think this is very true, since hard work and passion are inherent qualities, not ones that can be engendered with the association of a large institution to one's name. Lastly, I think the major point of this article is that life goes on. It's possible that not getting into one's top choice can be heart-breaking. It's even possible that this whole crapshoot of a process may even lead someone to believe that hard work simply does not pay off. However, we weren't born to accomplish everything we set our minds on. Our lives are destined to have failures, and when we fall down one valley, it's important to climb back up. Life goes on, but do we?
ReplyDeleteI like how the columnist mentioned that there are many CEOs who didn't go to college at "shiny schools". Seeing names like Lockheed Martin and Whole Foods is encouraging, and this article does a good job of highlighting what we've learned about entrepreneurship in class; entrepreneurs need to be ambitious, resilient, and willing to take risks, which is something that people need to find in themselves and that no school can teach. I also like that the writer points out the overemphasis on college and salary rankings. I think that kids who have been through the college admissions process today realize that the name of the college does not mean as much as some people think, and I hope our generation can be the one to end the belief that the name of a college is more important than the character of a student.
ReplyDeleteWe each have an innate quality to classify schools, colleges, programs, and classes depending on which one is ranked the highest or classified as being "elite." We've all grown up with this quality of feeling the need to graduate from the "best" colleges or attend the "best" schools. However, on what criteria are the schools based on? What differentiates the "best" schools from the rest? Who categorizes the schools? We become so engrossed by titles and names that we forget every school is fundamentally similar. Yes, some schools may be stronger in certain areas than others, however, our college experiences collectively will be great despite what school we go to. It's psychological to believe that college won't be great because you're attending a "less ranked" school. Your college experience is what you make of it, and I believe that going forward names and titles won't matter -- your individuality, analytical skills, and ability to think/act promptly will matter. And these characteristics can only be developed if you make the most and take advantage of your college education.
ReplyDelete- Ravina
After having experienced the whole process, I believe there is not a single child in this type of environment that is unaware of these types of conditions. We choose to not believe such distinctions because if we were aware of the stupidity of the situation, nobody would have the incentive to apply. That being said, Malcom Gladwell and his book "David and Goliath", is built on a world of truth that success is not a name but a character trait.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article “Our Crazy College Crossroads”, I have to agree with most of the information Frank Bruni states. Everyone judges students for where they will attend college. The stereotype that people who attend the Ives are probably going to be the next millionaires and the students who attend community colleges or less prestigious colleges will go nowhere in life is false because its about what you have learned. I have met multiple people who haven’t gone to prestigious colleges or didn’t even go to college and are very successful. Although I believe the name and prestige is a key point on finding a job, the overall knowledge of the individual is the most important aspect.
ReplyDelete~Joshua.O (Period 4)
I think that this blog is correct in talking about how unimportant it is to get rejected from the top colleges. If you applied and you were in the range of acceptance and got rejected it honestly can just come down to luck. At the end of the day you are probably still gong to end up at a college in the top percentage of schools and be just as successful. It isn't necessarily about the college, it is what you learn there.
ReplyDelete-ZL
I think this article is pretty interesting. It teaches us of how a specific school that we get into doesn't define us of who we are and whom we could be. One quote that stood out would be from Malcom Gladwell's "David and Goliath", in which he states that, a "less exclusive university may enable a student to stand out and flourish in a way that a more exclusive one doesn’t". Although some of us do not attend these "prestigious universities", it doesn't mean we cannot become the best we can be. In fact, we might be able to flourish even further. It's easier for a single plant to thrive well by itself than with other plants struggling to achieve the same goal.
ReplyDelete-William Chung