<p>Thank you, holycow0515. Thank you very much.</p>
<p>My boss, who has a nine-figure net worth, got his bachelor's degree at... wait for it... Johnson and Wales University.</p>
<p>I've intentionally rejected the rat race and am most likely headed for the University of Alaska. Yeah, I know, fourth-tier... so what?</p>
<p>econner, the past is not the future. America has had great creativity and entrepreneurial spirit. In the past. There has been a fundamental change in the nature of global business, global science and industry. Yes, in the future, brains will equal financial success. It didn't in the past, both in Europe and America class and privilege dominated success (as in Asia) but the tremendous changes sweeping the world have fundamentally altered the landscape. </p>
<p>Also, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. In other words, if someone with 2400 does no EC or leadership activity that does not mean he/she has no talent for it. In study after study, IQ trumped all other factors in predicting leadership.</p>
<p>Sorry, America is a doomed nation.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Sorry, America is a doomed nation.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What nation do you expect to thrive in the next few decades? Why?</p>
<p>\India still suffers from the caste system and Leninism in China will probably explode (it always has before) and in the same way the U.S. will decline. Nations on top are a victim of their own success.</p>
<p>But I don't think universities should aim to produce economic leaders a dime a dozen either. So in that way you are correct; they've "lost" the vision. </p>
<p>But we'll be okay for awhile.. at least until I'm dead. :-).</p>
<p>Where did your son end up?</p>
<p>My S ended up at Columbia.</p>
<p>I was making 2 points. First, the academy exists for disinterested exploration of knowledge, as a counterpoise to society which will always be prey to current fads. This was true of Plato's Academy which is perhaps the second longest running university, 410 BC to 569. This is true of the university in Morocco which can claim to be the longest running one and of the second, Oxford. Alexander's Hellenistic world was made possible by the Greek thought which preceded him. The Renaissance was made possible by Boccacio and Alberti and all those who invented double entry bookkeeping and perspective painting. Niels Bohr's Institute in Copenhagen, which attracted Heisenberg, Fermi, Dirac, Pauli, Einstein, Feynman, Godel, von Neumann etc etc did not select its members based on gender , race, athletic talent and community service. The university ought not to select future leaders of society. No wonder the modern academy has its members with deep ties to pharma, the military, foreign policy ,etc etc.</p>
<p>Second point, until the 17 the cent China's economy was the largest in the world, in the 18th it was India, 19th England, and for the last 60 years the US. So, let's not be beguiled by the merely contemporary, America's ascendancy has been very recent and for a very short period of time.</p>
<p>The next 50 years will belong to the US and then China. India's caste system is fast crumbling, that's not the problem but India does not have China's manufacturing base or infrastructure.</p>
<p>"Basically all this "admission into college is getting increasingly more difficult" just makes me want to cry.</p>
<p>It's so frustrating knowing that I am a good student, passionate, involved, and working my butt of to go to some of these schools, and yet I probably will not get in. It's very discouraging." </p>
<p>Don't be discouraged - many colleges would love to have you and your special qualities, and would probably find substantial $$$ for you to attend. All this article means is that the top tier colleges will be lots more competitive, and the lower colleges will be able to fill their classrooms more easily. This is good for those colleges, and if you don't decide that you will be a failure if you don't get into Harvard, or Yale, you will be fine. </p>
<p>I think CC makes people crazy - I know it makes me crazy to read stuff here. Everyone here is so focused on about 50 schools, when there are so many great schools out there. For my son, all this article means is that he has to make sure he is applying to a couple of REAL safeties, not his first choice, but schools he would love nevertheless.</p>
<p>ramaswami: I can understand why the rest of the world is finding China threatening. I've read "The World is Flat" several times. It's definitely a good book, and I love Friedman's columns; yet I truly believe he didn't get it right. However, this is not the point of the thread. What I'm trying to say is that, having spent most of my life in Asia (including China), I'm well aware of our own potential. It's true we're productive in certain areas. But don't worry, I would say that not only the next 50 years, but the next 100 years will still belong to the United States of America.</p>
<p>Kids going to college in record numbers is a good thing. I know that possibly not getting into a top tier or Ivy League may be disappointing, but to get top scholarship money and get into honors programs at very good colleges and uninversities is a great way to go. One of my kids, a 2007 high school graduate, chose a great school with a large scholarship and the honors program over a top liberal arts school. His tuition is covered by scholarship, he is responsible for room and board. Next year he will be an RA and go to school for free. If he had chosen the big name school, his bill would be well over $40,000 per year. This way he can save his money for medical school.</p>
<p>Right on Momstl4. I went to a state school and have staff from the elites working for me! It isn't always the school, but what you put into it. Was your S accepted at the Ivies? Where did he end up?</p>
<p>friedokra nice stats (btw fried okra is delicious)
Case Western waived their online app fee, which explains that school</p>
<p>I wonder when this population bulge is expected to peak. I have a child in the class of '10 and this is definitely worrisome.</p>
<p>I read recently that the peak is expected to wane slightly beginning with the class of '12.</p>
<p>I guess it was in other threads where I pointed out that America's number of graduating high school students is not the only number that influences college admission competitiveness. Other issues to look at are </p>
<p>1) how many high school graduates decide to go to college rather than straight into the workforce (the long-term trend is for this percentage to increase year on year), </p>
<p>2) how many international students apply to United States colleges (the long term trend is for this number to go up year by year, especially as formerly Third World countries become prosperous and formerly dictatorial countries become more free) </p>
<p>and </p>
<p>3) how many of the students, from whatever place, apply to the very top echelon of colleges (the long term trend is a "flight to quality," with more and more applicants for the very best colleges). </p>
<p>All the long term trends suggest to me that even when the number of United States high school graduates begins to decline, which is no more than a few years from now, it won't necessarily be easier for a high school student to get into Harvard, MIT, or similar colleges. My oldest son is in high school class of 2010. My youngest child is in high school class of 2021. I don't expect the youngest child to have an easier time getting into a top college than the oldest.</p>