<p>Thank you Northstarmom. I learn something new everyday here on CC, and I welcome the education even if it sometimes feels like a slap in the face.</p>
<p>
[quote]
We need to be careful that the argument doesn't become circular. Student X didn't get into Harvard. Reason: Student X wasn't 'noble' enough: student X's activities and achievements weren't based on innate intelligence, drive and passions but simply the result of trying to gain admission to an elite school. How do we know that student X wasn't following his/her passions etc.? Reason: Student X didn't get into Harvard.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree that it's easy to fall into the fallacy that admission decisions are more infallible than admission officers themselves claim that their decisions are. Even Harvard's rejection letter acknowledges the possibility that some great students are missed by their admission process.</p>
<p>"All this from three basic facts in the article"</p>
<p>Actually, we have a few more data points that aren't *in the article *per se: The dad wanted to talk to the press about details of his son's process; got in the newspaper picture with his son; and is now hanging out on another site, non-anonymously discussing more details in public.</p>
<p>I don't know what Dad is thinking here, but I can't imagine it's going to do the son any good to have all that information permanently out on the Net for future employers, friends, and dates to Google.</p>
<p>One thing I with which I would agree wholeheartedly is that participating in this kind of publicity is very, very unwise.</p>
<p>About brillance versus hard work. In a past life (not really just years ago) I worked in an M&A law firm. Hard work was essential to life there. THey might have rationed the O2 there if it would have boosted billable hours. It was necessary to produce the sheer volume of the complex work. Not being a scientist or even close to it, I can not comment on what is needed to succeed in science or at MIT. Aren't long hours in the lab kind of necessary? However, there are many other fine careers for the extremely hardworking.</p>
<p>A long way back - but if the young man wanted to be a biomedical engineer, why was he obsessed with Harvard?? He's better off with Rice and Caltech??</p>
<p>" Hard work was essential to life there. "</p>
<p>And it's essential to do well in any career. However, top colleges are looking for brilliance plus a strong work ethic. A student who has had to devote every waking moment to studying to get top grades, while admirable, isn't the type of student that the very top colleges are looking for because they want students who are able to get top grades while also having a life: The type of people who'll eventually be successes in their field while still having time and energy to devote to helping their community or profession in general.</p>
<p>Strong work ethic -- good
Hard-working -- bad
Brilliance -- essential</p>
<p>Got it!</p>
<p>Why all this negative stuff about the young man? He had the proper response, was humble and very likeable, and when he applied, he did nothing more or less than thousands of students in this country - went for the most known, elite schools just because they are the ones that many people think are the "best" or the only ones that matter. Of course we know that isn't so, but to many who have NO knowledge of the college scene, this is the propaganda that is out there, and they believe this. I applaud this young man.</p>
<p>
[quote]
There are plenty of very, very good schools that recognize that this set of characteristics, in combination with brilliance, constitutes the perfect student.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Just catching up. Midmo, I completely agree. I’d also venture that the Big Deal School does value those characteristics. </p>
<p>In fact, I disagree with the oft repeated idea that getting a ‘hardwork’ box checked is essentially a deal breaker. I don’t think that plays out in admissions, especially if it is among other outstanding characteristics fleshed out in other parts of the evaluation or application. I think Northstarmom is saying the same. More often, I think we see the high SAT scorer with a lower GPA get ruled out as a slacker. I really think the high school record is the most important aspect of the application. </p>
<p>And to be fair, the actual MIT question is: “How has the applicant achieved good grades in your class? Check as many as apply. By consistent hard work, By grade consciousness, By virtue of memory, By brilliance of mind, and Other ____________.”</p>
<p>The ‘hardwork’ label as being code for silent grinder has been discussed many times on the MIT forums. Most admits responded that ‘hardwork’ was in fact a key characteristic, but they also remarked that the best possible response would be to have both ‘brilliance of mind’ and ‘hardwork’ checked off.</p>
<p>This is one small section on a 2 page, detailed evaluation. I’m not trying to be picky, but I believe descriptors such as persistence, hardwork, or seeks challenge are excellent characteristics in higher education, especially if it is among other outstanding characteristics fleshed out in other parts of the evaluation. </p>
<p>Further, MIT has an admission information section for schools and counselors explaining what the MIT culture is about and what they look for in an applicant. There is a page dedicated to helping counselors and teachers write strong evaluations that specifically show how students impact their environment: MIT</a> Admissions | Info For Schools & Counselors: Writing Evaluations.</p>
<p>I think we would be steering applicants wrong if we didn’t give a more complete picture of how hardwork might play out in an application. I do agree with Curmudgeon that just being a hardworker can be seen as one dimensional and would not generally help an applicant into the admit pile.</p>
<p>I really think that the most common hurdle for students with strong numbers is how to reveal something about themselves beyond their numbers. Once the academic credentials are established, adding another top score adds little value. There are so many students with similar profiles. They often believe their scores or their research are their distinguishing features. Yet they fail to understand that colleges select people. And a strong application should reflect a more complete picture of who they are (there are so many excellent posts on this topic already). </p>
<p>Every student has a life, a personality, and a unique view of the world. They don’t need to manufacture some artificial quirk; they need to open up and share their world view and reveal what informs it and how they operate in that world. Certainly Dad II’s D did an excellent job with her socks laying around and her squirrel at the bird feeder metaphor. Even then, not all excellent applicants get selected. And they did nothing wrong. You win some; you lose some. Learn something and go forward. Little consolation, but true. </p>
<p>(And personal to midmo, your S rocks! He knows himself, and he knows how to go after what he needs. His excellent admissions certainly point to how well his characteristics were valued.)</p>
<p>See. Told you. Secret code. And this from a Harvard alumni interviewer no less.
<p>You are right that the top colleges want brilliance plus enough work ethic to get excellent grades. If a student is so brilliant that they haven't had to work hard in high school to get excellent grades, that's fine with top colleges, which know that the student will be intellectually challenged on their campuses.</p>
<p>If a student is smart, but has to work exceptionally hard to get top grades, that is a red flag to a top college that the student probably could graduate from the college, but isn't likely to have the time to pursue any in depth ECs, something that such colleges view as an important aspect of what they offer. </p>
<p>Such students probably would be welcomed at top colleges in other places in the world, which don't value campus life as is valued in the U.S. However, here, top colleges greatly value the leadership, social and other skills that students gain by participating in depth in time consuming ECs. The top colleges here like the fact that, for instance, the biochem major who spends lots of time acting in student productions may become a top surgeon who is a major arts patron.
Not at any point did nsm suggest that a letter writer might not know that hard-working was the kiss of death. I rest my case. Alice. It's like folks think that hardworking and brilliance are mutually exclusive in high schoolers. Horse$#$%.</p>
<p>I am amazed at how easily the word "brilliance" is bandied about. In my days (I am showing my age here) it was reserved for the likes of Einstein, Gandhi and Menuhin, not ambitious teenagers with carefully crafted high school careers and resumes who have yet to make any contribution to the intellectual legacy of the world -- getting into a selective college doesnt count. Anyway, where are all these brilliant people that graduated over the past decade? Running the world's economy into the ground?</p>
<p>
[quote]
A student who has had to devote every waking moment to studying to get top grades, while admirable, isn't the type of student that the very top colleges are looking for because they want students who are able to get top grades while also having a life: The type of people who'll eventually be successes in their field while still having time and energy to devote to helping their community or profession in general.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh for heaven's sake. Of all the outstanding students my son knew and was friends with in high school, there was only one that fit your drone description and that one is at: HYP! (I won't get more specific here.)</p>
<p>The other super intellects who participated in and were the leaders of multiple school and community activities, took the hardest course loads they could because they liked the intellectual challenge, took classes at the university, in some cases played sports, won awards on their own steam--not their parents--and had dozens of great friends with whom they socialized and had a ball are at schools like WUSTL, Rice, Duke, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, a couple of well-known OOS publics; also Brown, Williams, etc. But the only drone is at one of the super elites that supposedly scorns such a student.</p>
<p>Also, NSM, your notion that there are a bunch of brilliant but unmotivated students sitting around high school bored-but-ready-to-bloom is out of date, if it ever was true. When I was in a crummy high school, there were limited options for some students, but now, even the middle of the road publics my kids attend offer a lot of course options and a lot of opportunities to participate in a variety of activities to keep themselves stimulated. Any genius who just sits around feeling superior is lazy and is no catch for HYP or any other school.</p>
<p>3Ks, good to hear from you. I have to agree with curm that the problem is that most of the people at most schools filling out the forms have no idea of what the game is about. Certainly that was true at my son's school. And I can assure you they did not take suggestions that they look at web sites kindly. For that matter, my supremely self-directed son did not take those suggestions kindly, either. </p>
<p>Thanks for the compliments about Mr. Know-it-all. I'll send you a PM with an update.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I just think that statement bears repeating. </p>
<p>It's not that there was some secret code in the recs.. its that the applicant didn't manage to do whatever he had to do to make his application come alive for the ad coms at the right time and the right place. (I mean, the difference between a an admission or a waitlist for some students might come down to whether their app was the first one discussed on a Monday morning or the last one at the end of a very long Friday). </p>
<p>We don't know what was in his app. I do know that the newspaper article about his test scores didn't do much to project any information about his personality. What makes that kid special? I don't know from the article... perhaps that was also a weakness with his apps.</p>
<p>or maybe they just read his application on a rainy day...
How</a> sunny weather lowers the college admissions bar, and more - The Boston Globe</p>
<p>
[quote]
A student who has had to devote every waking moment to studying to get top grades, while admirable, isn't the type of student that the very top colleges are looking for because they want students who are able to get top grades while also having a life: The type of people who'll eventually be successes in their field while still having time and energy to devote to helping their community or profession in general.
[/quote]
I agreeeeeee...but that's not always how it works.</p>
<p>
[quote]
why was he obsessed with Harvard??
[/quote]
Cuz it's hahvahd...and we are all prestigewhores</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why all this negative stuff about the young man? He had the proper response, was humble and very likeable, and when he applied, he did nothing more or less than thousands of students in this country - went for the most known, elite schools just because they are the ones that many people think are the "best" or the only ones that matter. Of course we know that isn't so, but to many who have NO knowledge of the college scene, this is the propaganda that is out there, and they believe this. I applaud this young man.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I must missed most of "all this negative stuff about this young man." What I read here is the result of many speculating why a student with **very **rare and stratospherically high statistics was NOT accepted at the most prestigious schools heapplied to. I also believe most posters believe that he had plenty of great choices, include two of the very best schools in what appears to be his preferred field.</p>
<p>And, yes, I believe it to be acceptable to speculate about what HE or HIS entourage might have done to undernine a set of scores that usually spell shoo-in for most everyone. A perfect SAT score is rare ... a perfect SAT and a perfect ACT is extremely rare. And what it made even more acceptable is the evident willingness for the family to share minute details of the rejections in a widely read newspaper and in public forums. Simply stated, they made it public and they must have a very good reason to do so. This is the same dog that ended up biting the Princeton reject who was featured by USA Today and many others who can't refuse some publicity. And, as far as doing what is best for the children, one has the right to question --and criticize-- the decision by parents to be involved in the manner Father Ghosh did, and especially his decision to subject his son to the scrutiny of an entire nation, for probably nothing else than a bit of vindication. </p>
<p>And, for what is worth, the benefits of broadcasting this story will be lost on most everyone who could --possibly-- benefit from it. Do you believe that any of the parents who are more or less emulating Father Ghosh's ultra-helicoptering methods will let it go because of this story? I'll bet some good money they simply do more and raise the expectations for their kids even higher. And, of course, the scramble for the "best" EC will be put on the front-burner. For all I know, they may even start looking at those lowly team sports if the individual sports and EC stop delivering as they used to be! </p>
<p>It's hard to make the dead and blind hear and see, especially when that 7th grade Duke SAT is sooooooooooooo ... promising.</p>
<p>
[quote]
This is the same dog that ended up biting the Princeton reject who was featured by USA Today and many others who can't refuse some publicity.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Since you brought this up, one thing that crossed my mind about this Asian 4.0/2400 boy, is that perhaps his stats are too high. After what happened with Princeton and Jian Li, I've wondered whether elite schools might look for more less-than-perfect-scoring Asian kids, so that the stats don't look like they have a tougher time getting in. Just a thought.</p>
<p>"Also, NSM, your notion that there are a bunch of brilliant but unmotivated students sitting around high school bored-but-ready-to-bloom is out of date, if it ever was true. When I was in a crummy high school, there were limited options for some students, but now, even the middle of the road publics my kids attend offer a lot of course options and a lot of opportunities to participate in a variety of activities to keep themselves stimulated. Any genius who just sits around feeling superior is lazy and is no catch for HYP or any other school."</p>
<p>1 There are bored but ready to bloom kids at many high schools including some top ones. I've met them, and also gave birth to one.</p>
<ol>
<li>I never suggested such kid is what HPYS and similar schools are looking for. What I was trying to say is that HPYS would pick a kid who didn't have to work hard to get high grades over a kid who had to devote every waking moment to getting high grades. Of course, HPYS isn't likely to want a kid who didn't have to study to get high grades, but didn't do anything in their free time either except vegetate. Even if the kid's school didn't have interesting ECs, if the kid was HPYS material, the kid would have found something interesting to do even if it was spending lots of time studying the bugs in their own back yard.</li>
</ol>