<p>"We need to be aware of the kind of human being we are cultivating through the college admissions process."</p>
<p>Bingo. </p>
<p>Ive read this thread, and others like it (regarding the Marilee Jones changes -- & for that matter, similar comments emanating from other institutions): an effort to tone down the race for one-up-manship in achievement. Long reflection combined with recent experience interviewing college students have led me to the conclusion that the Jones type of approach is way too subtle. I mean, either MIT is somewhat cautious or ambivalent about encouraging students with different profiles to apply (& high-achieving students to broaden their interests), or they are perhaps not sure of what they are looking <em>for</em>, only what they want to see less of. </p>
<p>The message I receive (I think) from Jones is, Keep doing what youre doing; just be more Type B about it, less Type A. That could produce just pseudo-type Bs or more creative resumes. I think a college has to get a lot more blunt and a lot braver than that. How about, Beyond achievement, wed also like to see when you have sacrificed your drive for personal, individual success in order to improve, assist the rest of the world. Wed like to see how your involvement in community service (if any) has focused on the needs of people other than your own ethnic group. Wed like to see how you have spent your non-study time other than an additional 3 hrs/day perfecting your music, so that you could win the same concerto competition that you already won last year.</p>
<p>I think just encouraging applicants to be more well-rounded, & stating that a college is looking for more creativity, welcomes quirkiness, etc., will not result in a substantial softening of the Take No Prisoners student profile. This is really not meant as a criticism of Jones; Ithink shes doing her best, but I think she & administrators of many other colleges are putting their toes in the water rather than jumping in. Im talking about reducing the merit-frenzy overall. Unless you state, and put in place a policy that limits the admissions value of traditional merit, the negatives about the stress of competition will remain. </p>
<p>Nothing wrong with choosing a meritocractic model if thats what your institution decides. But I think you first have to be honest within that institution, about your priorities. And then you have to communicate that clearly & uniformly, including to your reps who visit regionally at info sessions. Do you want less achievement-frenzy? Or do you want the same level of achievement, just broader categories of achievement? Do you want to admit students who are mostly Looking Out for Number One? (Because that is what you will tend to get with the Take No Prisoners academic warrior.) Or do you want students who, while achieving, have also a vision and practical idealism that has already been concretely demonstrated one that shows that they are citizens of the world, not just citizens for self and ego a narrowly defined civilization? </p>
<p>If a college wants character in its students, its admissions policies must model & reflect that. And they have to decide, at least internally, how to recognize character. Personal discipline is definitely, in my book, an aspect of character, but only one factor. It depends on the goal of that discipline, & who benefits, & the narrowness or breadth of that discipline. </p>
<p>And linking my comments back to symphonymom's quote, I value less the Arrived adult who decides to become generous as a middle-aged millionaire or billionaire, than I value the person of any age who regularly sacrifices & shares the time commodity that is universally available (as opposed to money that is not). Again, maybe a particular college would prefer the former model of "success" than the latter model of character, but I think there is still much inconsistency, if not cowardice, by colleges in making such decisions. Please, don't say you want character, genuine (& clearly defined) leadership, well-roundedness, humanity, creativity -- but then implement an admissions policy that says something else entirely.</p>