<p>
</p>
<p>I think it’s the increased pressure and recent lawsuits from students with perfect test scores being turned down by elite colleges. I was listening to a report on NPR on Friday in which a student is suing schools for that reason - implying a quota. </p>
<p>I just completed more interviews than usual and saw a trend that’s been building for years perfect kids with perfect resumes and an amazing ability to regurgitate but not synthesize information. One student even admitted he pursued an activity to get it on his college resume. Even more suggested they’d done all the “right” activities and were perfect candidates. I tried to politely say - your resume looks like most of the other 13,000 in the pile - kids who’ve done those exact same school activities and have the same grades - what else to you have going for you?</p>
<p>These days perfect kids with perfect stats are becoming a dime a dozen and in some cases there seems to be an “entitlement” issue. One student even leaned across the table and asked me to “sell him” on MIT. (I declined). Another seemed surprised that he needed to do more than just show up for an interview to be selected. When I press for insight into past failure, struggle, or obstacles, I get few well thought out answers. The most common answer involves wanting something and not getting it (but rarely reveals a redoubled effort to achieve it, or even having learned from it.) </p>
<p>So I wonder if the spate of articles has to do with students and parents concentrating on the wrong benchmarks and then suing when the outcome is not what they expected. We’ve tried to say that, even here on the boards, that the best candidates are broad, well rounded, and have imperfect resumes because they took risks, fell down, picked themselves up and started again. Some won, some lost, but all were interesting and none were cut from the same cookie sheet. </p>
<p>But there will always be a component of the applicant pool that wants to steer any admissions decisions in the direction of scores because, in the end, quantitative data is concrete even if it’s not (by itself) really a true indicator of the measure of the man or woman behind it.</p>
<p>So I applaud the article for bringing up what should be obvious - some of our greatest growth comes from how we approach failure.</p>