Holistic Admissions at Berkeley

Parents Social Lounge
181

<p>@californiaaa</p>

<p>First, a lot of great USA kids have better options that slaving away at a grad job. They get thier degrees and go work in high paying careers. We have options in the USA that’s not available in the rest of the world. That’s why folks come here.</p>

<p>I mean, really, compare the pay for a grad student to a working STEM major…it’s sad. If anything, the Universities are taking advantage of grad students…but thats another issue.</p>

<p>I really don’t think US faculty hate US students ;)</p>

182

<p>Of course, I am just one STEM person in one lab. Certainly, I can’t speak for the whole system.</p>

<p>However, you may notice that the MAJORITY of STEM grad students in all leading universities are … immigrants. Lots of newly-hired faculty in the leading universities are … immigrants (because you need Ph.D. to get a position in academia. If you don’t have enough American Ph.D. students, you won’t get many American-born Profs.). American kids are pushed out of a very interesting career path. </p>

<p>Is it good? No. Especially, since I see lots of really great American HS kids that are excited to do science. Unfortunately, the pipeline dries by the time kids reach grad school.</p>

183

<p>"First, a lot of great USA kids have better options that slaving away at a grad job. " </p>

<p>Certainly, true. Why can’t colleges hire MORE STEM students to begin with? Some of them would like to go towards Ph.D. </p>

<p>Yes, it takes time and effort to get through Ph.D. But it’s still better job than many Americans are getting. Not everyone in USA is a millionaire. Not everyone ends up working on Wall Street.</p>

184

<p>Do something with your complaints. Every time I suggest a complainer go speak with, say, admissions, or offer to be involved, it’s dismissed. “I don’t have time” or whatever. </p>

<p>I wonder if you are too closely blending your concerns for your daughter and her friends with your experiences with politically active athletes-? Drawing conclusions before the details are in. Not very “scientific.” Oddly, I’ve encountered a few scientist folks on CC who jump to conclusions (and stand behind them, insisting they are right) in a way inconsistent with scientific procedures.</p>

185

<p>"I really don’t think US faculty hate US students "</p>

<p>I never said it. I am saying that faculty is disengaged from undergrad education. They don’ts see undergrads as “their students”, “their kids”. </p>

<p>Why can’t AO give faculty flexibility to select the students that will work in the labs? That are interested in Ph.D. path? (to begin with)</p>

186

<p>Faculty, at least at UC, have FAR less authority and control over UG admissions than some here seem to think is within their power. UC is beholden to the people of CA, not to its faculty. They do an excellent job of putting each kid under the sorting hat and finding the best place for that kid to receive his education. They pluck the most promising from the cesspool that is K-12 education in many districts and catapult them to the top to give them a chance. Some of them thrive, and for some it’s too much to handle. It’s worth the risk for the one’s who make it, in one generation, from manual laborer to professionally employed. </p>

<p>I don’t think the faculty at the top UC’s have any complaints about their UG students, but once you get to the less selective campuses you’ll hear a lot of whining from the faculty about the shortcomings of the undergraduates. It’s not a problem with the system, it shows the system is working.</p>

187

<ol>
<li><p>Why should I start revolution? Why me? I care about my lab, not about every single injustice in the world. </p></li>
<li><p>Yes, I feel sad. When I talk to HS kids, I see lots of knowledge, enthusiasm, energy to learn. I feel like we fail these kids.</p></li>
</ol>

188

<p>Ah, yes. My quote: Do something with your complaints. Every time I suggest a complainer go speak with, say, admissions, or offer to be involved, it’s dismissed. “I don’t have time” or whatever. </p>

<p>Your answer: Why me? I care about my lab, not about every single injustice in the world.</p>

<p>And, so I say, “Why us?” Why distract this thread?</p>

<p>I’ve made my point, won’t be further answering this poster.</p>

189

<p>to momsquad ,</p>

<ol>
<li><p>“I don’t think the faculty at the top UC’s have any complaints about their UG students,” … faculty doesn’t whine. They just don’t interact with UG. Most faculty just don’t care about UG, simply speaking. It’s not “their kids”.</p></li>
<li><p>The percentage of immigrant STEM grad students at top univ is higher than the percentage of American born. Much higher. UG is not a pipeline to grad school, opposite. </p></li>
<li><p>Every year, the percentage of newly hired top faculty at top colleges are more “international” and less American. How do you say that “the system is working”? Working for whom?</p></li>
<li><p>“Faculty, at least at UC, have FAR less authority and control over UG admissions than some here seem to think is within their power.” - agreed.</p></li>
</ol>

190

<p>to lookingforward , </p>

<p>You suggest me to “do something”, but you don’t want to do anything yourself. IF fact, it looks like you are appalled (you quote" And, so I say, “Why us?” )</p>

<p>Fine, no problem. I still feel sorry for the HS kids.</p>

191

<p>

</p>

<p>Because that’s what leaders DO. They lead because it’s the right thing to do, they effect change around things they don’t like because it’s the right thing to do. It’s pathetic to draw the paycheck and then pretend you’re just too busy to invest in changing things you don’t like. It’s easier to complain.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Maybe all the little geeks-in-labs are that way. My kids’ professors (one at a top LAC, the other at a top research univ) all seem to be plenty engaged and reasonably enjoy teaching.</p>

192

<p>to Pizzagirl ,</p>

<p>"If the faculty at these places don’t care about undergrads, then why should I care about wanting to send my kid there? "</p>

<p>Harvard, Stanford , Berkeley … any STEM powerhouse. Trust me, most top-level Profs. don’t care about UG education and have very limited interaction with UG students. Seminars, lectures, grading is often done to TAs (in other words, by foreign-born grad students).</p>

193

<p>californiaa - I think what you’re missing is that outside of your own little narrow world, no one really cares all that much about STEM PhD’s. Sorry. I know you think that the world does and should revolve around them, but they just really aren’t any more important to anything than anyone else.</p>

194

<p>

</p>

<p>So then why you are so upset that your daughter (supposedly) won’t get into Harvard? It’s a little inconsistent to whine that H won’t accept her, but no one at H will care about her anyway.</p>

195

<p>to Pizzagirl,</p>

<p>“Because that’s what leaders DO. They lead because it’s the right thing to do, they effect change around things they don’t like because it’s the right thing to do.”</p>

<p>People with such attitude go to politics and public service. However, someone has to discover next cancer drug, while leaders are fighting for democracy. In the end, Galileo was not a public leader. </p>

<p>"Maybe all the little geeks-in-labs are that way. " </p>

<p>Exactly. Leave us alone. We need geeks in the labs. Someone has to work … it’s already far too many leaders around. </p>

<p>All I am asking - let me select my geeks. I need them in the lab. I don’t need leaders … I am not going to hire future Obama anyway (Obama-type person won’t get into a Ph.D. program anyway, either) . There are enough smart geeks in US … unfortunately, AO selects against them …</p>

196

<p>Because my D. may be a perfect fir for a Harvard lab :slight_smile: Unfortunately, she has little chance of getting in.</p>

<p>Again, my D won’t be accepted to Harvard. She is a geek, not a leader. She will miss Harvard … Harvard will miss her (and hire some Chinese geek instead). </p>

<p>I was TA at Harvard. Teaching UG. Yet, my D. can’t be an undergrad. Although, she is smarter than I am. Kid is smarter than teacher …</p>

197

<p>Pizzagirl, </p>

<p>“outside of your own little narrow world, no one really cares all that much about STEM PhD’s.”</p>

<p>Exactly. BTW, why Stanford became famous? Could anyone, please, remind me … why Stanford-Harvard-Yale became desired universities?</p>

<p>Seriously. I though that a university becomes popular if it has great science. Without famous scientists, Nobel prices, grants, startups, etc. a university becomes “liberal art college”. </p>

<p>Correct me, if I am wrong. I thought, that without solid a Ph.D. program, any famous university would collapse.</p>

198

<p>

</p>

<p>Oh!! Well, you’re mistaken. Perhaps in your culture science has some special place of honor, but here in the US, it doesn’t. You’re making the classic mistake of believing that your particular field is more important than other fields. In the US, we also believe in the importance of humanities. Learn something new every day! </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>ROFL! It’s almost as though you don’t understand that “prestige” isn’t just a function of scientific achievement. Could you be more one-sided or one-dimensional if you tried? In the US, the great universities get that way because of accomplishment in many fields – politics, history, the arts, literature, etc. – not just because of science. Why would you think science is more important? (scratching head)</p>

199

<p>

</p>

<p>If I were an adcom, and a student conveyed these sentiments to me in an interview or in an essay, I’d be sure not to admit him or her. Leadership is about LEADERSHIP. About seeing things you don’t like around you, and figuring out ways to influence them differently. Not your throw-up-your-hands-there’s-nothing-you-can-do attitude. Not your all-that-counts-is-the-geek-in-the-lab attitude. You can be a leader in many ways and not have a thing to do with politics or public service. Honestly, this is self-evident.</p>

200

<p>Californiaa, you’re making a lot of unsupported assertions. </p>

<p>What Harvard, and most of these other schools are looking for, as far as I can tell, is a range of students with diverse background and, yes, diverse talents. Sometimes, that means the student leader with very good, but not outstanding stats. But sometimes, it means the lab (or any other type of) geek as well, even if the geek doesn’t have a record in local politics or as chair of various organizations.</p>

<p>I went to an elite undergrad, go to an elite grad program, and teach undergrads at that school. I don’t believe all of my classmates or students are/have been leaders. Some of them are just really committed to and passionate about a field in which they’ve demonstrated extraordinary talent. </p>

<p>The problem, I think, is how you define extraordinary talent. I’ll use sports as a comparison. If you look at a bunch of top high school basketball players, an experienced scout can probably distinguish between the kids who were great high school players but won’t make it at the college level, the kids who are great college players but would never make the NBA, and serious NBA prospects. If you’re a Harvard adcom looking at students who seem to be leaning toward STEM, probably almost all of those kids would do very well at the college level. But only a percentage of those are going to have the potential to do genuinely groundbreaking research.</p>

<p>If Harvard sees something in a kid’s record that suggests he or she is in the latter category, I’m pretty sure that kid is getting in. Some people in the former category - some of which may be 2400 scoring vals - will get in too. But that kid may not be as desirable as a 2200 in the top 5 % of his or her class who seems to be moving toward a serious political career. </p>

<p>Of course, not everyone who has that outstanding academic potential is going to demonstrate it by the end of high school. But so what? If the super high achieving kid with only modest ECs doesn’t get into Harvard, there’s a good chance he’ll find a home at Brown, or Duke, or Hopkins, or (tragedy of tragedies) the honors program of a flagship state university. Those schools will all provide him with ample opportunities to distinguish himself before grad school.</p>

<p>Bottom line: if your D is really exceptional in her chosen field and can find a way to show that, not being a “leader” won’t keep her from the Ivies. If she’s somewhat below that tippy top category, she’ll still have lots of great options. Nothing nefarious about it.</p>