<p>Kluge - I have a hard time imagining a student going through 4 years of high school and not connecting with any interested teacher. Or, maybe I should say I have a hard time imagining a SERIOUS student never connecting with a teacher, quiet, outgoing, or in-between. Maybe that's the difference.</p>
<p>Kluge:</p>
<p>You still seem to believe that INDIVIDUAL teachers are objective in their grading practices, or that schools in the same district with more or less the same student population (e.g. ours) will follow similar grading practices, will indeed produce the same results. There's no way for UCSD to ascertain that. I KNOW that my S was held to a higher standard than his classmates because his teachers knew he was capable of more. In fact his teachers and we discussed that in a parent-teacher conference. We agreed that it did not matter what the criteria for grading might be, our S should be judged against what he was capable of doing. Our k-8 high school, one of 15 produced more than half of the NMSF last year.<br>
Criteria such as UCSD can be helpful in a general way, but not to evaluate the transcript of an individual student. But UCSD is not looking necessarily to admit single individuals at a time, unlike LACs and highly selective private universities. It is a public university that has as its mission to admit as many qualified students as it has space for. Making fine distinctions among them is not a goal. </p>
<p>Since I did not raise the issue of plagiarism, I do not feel compelled to address it except that it would take a really stupid student to ask a teacher for a rec when s/he has committed plagiarism in that teacher's class.</p>
<p>...and if the student didn't commit plagiarism, and had no idea that their teacher thought they had?<br>
[quote]
A teacher that suspects, but cannot prove, frequent plagiarism or at least lack of orginality, can make veiled references to that.
[/quote]
--It's Epiphany's comment, it's directly on point of the downside of LOR's (to me, anyway)</p>
<p>...and if the student didn't commit plagiarism, and had no idea that their teacher thought they had? </p>
<p>That's why students should always ask the teacher if they feel comfortable writing them a letter of recommendation. The recs are just that; a letter of "recommendation." If the teacher can't recommend a given student, they shouldn't be writing the rec.
In my experience, kids know which teachers like them and which ones don't, and ask accordingly. Actually, I think more often than not, they underestimate how much a teacher likes them.
I think makes sense that the UCs and other state schools with the mission to educate everyone don't require recommendations. But for pirvate schools that are looking to balance their classes and may only be able to admit 200-300 students, it surely helps them with their mission to do so.</p>
<p>There are so many variables with teachers & kids "connecting." I agree that quieter students (especially in huge classes) can easily be overlooked by overworked teachers. In smaller classes (my kids' HS has about 20 or fewer students in all classes except music, PE & drama), teachers have a much better opportunity to get to know the kids better, even the more reticent ones. This especially holds true if the child can be coaxed (by parents or whomever or thru personal drive) to participate & share their ideas & passion in class. My son tends to be shy, but has gotten to know his teachers well in this setting. At open house, it's clear that all the teachers know all the students in each of their classes.</p>
<p>In most cases, teachers who suspect that a student has committed plagiarism will not have the time and energy to devote to proving it and making the accusation stick in the face of parents threatening hellfire, brimstone and slander. So they have to live with their suspicions. But it would be a very strange teacher who made veiled references to the possibility of plagiarism without more to go on than just an unfounded suspicion. </p>
<p>I personally would not have interpreted the comment about the student growing more confident in presenting his or her own ideas as a veiled reference to plagiarism but as a fairly straightforward comment about the student's lack of originality and creativity. That is not the same as accusing a student of plagiarism. But it would probably sink the student just the same at selective colleges.</p>
<p>The MIT rec form specifically asks teachers to comment on what factors account for a student's grades:consistent hard work; grade consciousness; virtue of memory; brilliance of mind.
<a href="http://web.mit.edu/admissions/pdf/MITevalA.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://web.mit.edu/admissions/pdf/MITevalA.pdf</a>
The MIT adcom clearly recognize that students can get As through different path, and they also quite obviously would rather admit the brilliant student than the diligent one or the grade grubber or the parrot. And this distinction, you won't get from a transcript or board scores.</p>
<p>The downside of recs is not that they will be nasty; it's that they will be bland. I have actually seen recs in which the author did not seem to know the gender of the person that was being written about. But I also know that some recs were absolutely crucial to some candidates getting the job/fellowship/ admission into the program to which they had applied.</p>
<p>As a teacher, I find that teachers find it very difficult to say they won't write a letter of recommendation for a student. We don't want to hurt the child's feelings. How I handle the situation is, you know I don't teach a core class - don't the colleges want a core teacher? I am very honored that you chose me, but really your app will look better if a core teacher writes it. Recently, I was asked to write an optional rec for Princeton and was thrilled! 5 re-writes later, I finally sent if off and believe me, the adcom will be able to tell that I really mean it. Many of these are pro forma letters. And tell me the adcoms can't read through those! But there are the students we really want to write a letter for, and you can tell the difference. So I think the letters do mean a lot, because the tone comes through and at those schools where there are 10 applicants for each spot, that could turn the tide. As for the teachers in contract negotiations I think it's criminal to make the kids suffer - that's why we are doing what we do - to help them. But I bet that some teachers will still write letters for those "special" students. So far, I have a perfect record - every kid for whom I wrote a letter has been accepted at that school. Whether my letter helped or not, I don't know. I just know that I did my best for my kids, and somehow it paid off.</p>
<p>Let me clarify. I perhaps spoke too specifically, when I meant plagiarism in the broader context of "help" (parental, hired, or textual). </p>
<p>(1) Yes, as a.s.a.p. states, most students approach only those teachers whose respect they assume they have. In my D's school, this is known as approaching the teacher with the question, "Do you feel/would you feel comfortable writing a rec for me?" A teacher then has an exit, & should use the exit door if writing a rec. will present a moral or practical conflict for the teacher.</p>
<p>(2) Private colleges regularly use SAT II and SAT I writing scores as a check against the personal essay -- knowing full well that these are sometimes written by counselors, parents, even other students. Those test results, + class grades in English & other writing courses, + the personal essay(s) provide a profile, which, if not coherent, raises red flags in the Admissions Office. One could say that this cross-verification is a test of the genuine authorship of the personal essay. (Read: test for "plagiarism," although this is not the strict definition of plagiarism; it's the concept of honest authorship that is obviously sought.)</p>
<p>That is what I meant.<br>
A teacher could have no proof of student "borrowing," but could see clear discrepancies between the level & polish of in-class writing, and what is produced after hours. The phrase "needs greater confidence in own original ideas" can mean an over-reliance on (legitimate) sourcework, an over-reliance on the fruits of earlier class discussion, etc., a reluctance to draw independent conclusions. These are not necessarily indications of dishonesty but can be fair game for rec comments if delivered without insinuation. And if there <em>is</em> insinuation, or the temptation to that, the teacher--yes-- should not agree to recommend. But colleges are not just weeding out overt dishonesty; they are actively seeking originality in a freshman class, or an indication of a certain amount of academic courage.</p>
<p>Like you, A.S.A.P., I question the level of initiative in a student who in 4 yrs has never approached a teacher in an effort to establish a deeper academic relationship with him or her. Similarly, I question the professional commitment of a teacher who does not regularly invite his or her class to engage in those meaningful relationships, & make himself/herself available for that.</p>
<p>And as to the so-called objectivity of U.C. and other non-LOR schools, one is kidding only oneself if one believes that the personal essay that UC requires is not read as subjectively as similar essays are read by private school adcoms. The UC essay is not read by a computer, a calculator, an adding machine. There are positives to the greater predictability of UC admissions versus many private schools, but the UC admissions system has its own flaws. Pure objectivity is definitely not there. I'm actually glad for that.</p>
<p>I also feel that teachers who feel that recommendations are "useless" should not waste time writing them, as possibly that cynicism, and/or a formulaic response, will sabotage a student. That is not much better than agreeing to write a rec for a student you feel lukewarm or worse about.</p>
<p>So glad that none of my D's teachers viewed their recs about her as "useless." Her admissions results might have been different in that case.</p>
<p>UF admissions agrees with the OP. Teacher recommendations are not required. Our GC was told that the recs all sound the same anyway & aren't even read unless the student is borderline for admissions.</p>
<p>Kriket:</p>
<p>As I have said large state universities handle admissions differently than LACs or highly selective schools.</p>
<p>But it is instructive that your GC considers them useful when a student is borderline for admission. How does one know a priori that this is the case and is therefore worth writing a rec?</p>
<p>Yes, and this is the point, of course... and the reason for my own anger at the CP teachers. One element can tip the scales for a student in so many cases of tight admissions situations -- going much beyond the Extreme competitions, shall we say. (We could all refer to recent threads discussing previously "easy" schools that will be competitive this year.) That tipping element can easily be (& often is) something forgotten by the student, something poorly written or left off the app, a report not sent by the GC. It can also be a LOR written ambivalently or without imagination or support.</p>
<p>As marite says, one cannot know ahead of time what single or combination of elements will decide for one candidate over another, or even whether all the elements were superb but the geographic, ethnic & gender factors were out of the student's control. Plenty of "perfect" packages & "perfect" students received thin envelopes last cycle, & will this cycle. Why send a quite imperfect package?</p>
<p>I'm on three minds on this. (I know that sounds weird, but bear with me.)</p>
<p>Mind one: First, in the small school where I sub most often, one English teacher has to write ALL the recs from English teachers (which is usually a requred rec). That's 75 or so recs--and each of them, to do well and carefully, takes more than half an hour. Should she spend time writing recs or should she plan for her current class and evaluate their work? Hard to do both. Should she be paid extra to do them over the summer?</p>
<p>Mind 2: I'm a teacher. I <em>know</em> that reqs make a difference; I know that at least two or three students I wrote optional reqs for got into college because of them. (And yes, one of them commended the student's hard work and reliability; I don't think that's always a negative.)</p>
<p>Mind 3: As a parent of two children who went to a total of 8 different schools, with me teaching at four more, I know that there is ZERO consistency in grading standards between schools. Schools vary in how they count (whether they count) such things as class participation, test scores, lab reports, worksheets, homework, standardized state-level tests (Regents, Golden State, APs, etc.). Teachers vary on these things within schools. Some teachers give full credit for late work, some partial credit, some none--and does a student who turns in his work two days late know less than one who does it on time?</p>
<p>In fact, grading standards vary so widely that we were able to find a high school that didn't grade homework at all and counted tests highly for our son (who hates homework and loves tests) AND a different high school for our daughter that emphasized written work and holistic grading for our daughter (who does pretty well on tests and writes beautifully).</p>
<p>Should reqs and GPAs be eliminated in favor of test scores? I hate to think that we'd go the way of India or Japan, where performance on a single test can make or break a student's career.</p>
<p>In most Asian countries, there is ONE national entrance exam used for college admissions.
As to objectivity, it's as absolute as it can get:
EVERYONE takes exactly the same exam on the same days (usually several days long).
Admission is strictly based on the exam scores.</p>
<p>Is it 100% fair & the perfect system?
If you are sick, you either still take it (performances may suffer)
or wait another year!
Families who can afford tutors & cram schools, send their kids for the best test prep there.
Also, such national testing does not provide much room for individuality/creativity etc.
So it's still not perfect, even though there are no obvious subjective components such as LOR, ECs, or even GPAs (with varying grading standards in different schools).</p>
<p>I think, perhaps, that its just as well that our colleges have a variety of evaluating applicants. A methodology that would suit LAC A might not suit University B at all well, for any number of reasons. The important thing, I think, it to have some awareness of what's going on with the system, which cc is good at providing.</p>
<p>An important point (yours) in this whole discussion, Ohio_mom.</p>
<p>It is likely that most applicants -- certainly to selective colleges, which would include many Publics -- have been admitted over at least one statistical "equal," & in many cases over statistically superior students -- due to the very "subjectivity" that is sometimes reacted to on CC with horrified voices. Both that subjectivity and the variety just alluded to, favor rather than handicap the U.S. college applicant.</p>
<p>Democracy runs deep in our traditions, & that extends to our educational system, including higher education. It is not that everybody gets the identical education, obviously, but the idea is universal access. That access involves a dizzying array of 2-yr + 4-yr. options. Without a "variety of evaluating applicants," as well as a variety of types of institutions, there would be far fewer educated citizens. As a country, we've determined that an educated citizenry promotes the political, economic, & social good. (CP teachers: Are you listening?)</p>
<p>It's been said by those who travel widely, that elementary & secondary education is often better outside of the U.S., but that, in the higher education realm, the U.S. rules. This is due both to varieties of options & varieties of admissions.</p>
<p>I might think about that before I concluded that a "more objective" method produces superior results. (Superior for whom?) I find the Asian models discussed above regressive, not progressive. They smack of classism, elitism, & everything we're supposed to not represent in our nation's values.</p>