And that’s one of the philosophical issues underlying things like required community service—if good is done, then does it really, in the bigger picture, matter what the motivation was?
Way back in 1973 I wrote my college application essay about what I learned from my Girl Scout troop project organizing all the the DC troops to do a day long clean up of the C and O Canal. We even got a Supreme Court Justice to come give us publicity. (Harvard seemed to like it.)
Tying in with some issues raised by FallGirl, fireandrain, makenacompton, and mathyone, and concurring at least in part:
I don’t think that the top schools should be running a competition for “best human being,” to decide their admits. I don’t think that being a person of really strong character (in a good way) correlates very much with academic achievement–not that it anti-correlates, just that it’s really independent. I also don’t think that picking the “best human being who passes a certain academic bar” is the best way to fill a class, or picking the “best group of mutually complementary human beings who pass a certain bar and fill the institutional needs–any other admissions staffer got a bassoonist?”
Having an impact on the community is great if it is done of spontaneous volition, or if one is very thoughtful about it, and picks an area suited to one’s talents and the needs of the community. As mathyone points out, that may be easier with certain talents than others. My [limited] experience of teenagers makes me skeptical of the value of compulsory volunteering, though perhaps other posters have had different experiences.
I am no fan of racking up credits in AP Largely Meaningless.
On the other hand, if you ask why the high school student is unlikely to make much of an impact in trying to cure cancer, it is mainly because the student does not know enough. It could be that the optimal route for a high school student who is sincerely motivated to cure cancer is to learn as much cell physiology, genetics, and molecular biology as possible, as fast as possible. This is unlikely to yield items to put on the application, in proportion to the time invested in study. On the other hand, this approach would work well with the British system of university admissions, because the understanding that the applicant had gained by this study would be appreciated by the university faculty in the same subject area, who conduct the interviews for Oxford or Cambridge.
It matters not what any of us thinks H et al should do. We can start our own universities and admit according to whatever criteria we like, whether it’s scores or good looks.
Anyway, they aren’t saying they are finding the “best human beings.” They are saying they are finding those whom they believe add to the character (in the sense of richness, not morality) of their incoming class / institution. Nowhere are they saying or suggesting that their admitted students are “better” human beings than their rejected ones, or for that matter the good folks at East Nowhere State U who are perfectly wonderful human beings.
My S was involved with a political organization and my D with a cultural institution in our city. Neither of these were volunteering in the classic soup- kitchen or read-to-the/blind or dig-a-ditch sense and indeed D’s was a paying job. Again people are getting too literal with the definition of serving the community just like they get too literal with the definition of leadership as president of XYZ club.
I agree though certain talents / skills lend themselves better to this. I was a rock star in French literature in high school with advanced independent studies and various achievements but there would have been little way to have translated that into the community. Would have had to have used some imagination on that one if it were today! Not sure that’s all bad, though.
Community service is an EC, like any other. I am not sure why the top schools are elevating it above other pursuits. And I do think the definition of community service has become problematic. Must the endeavor be completely other-oriented for to count? If so, I don’t think that’s possible. As MotherofDragons points out, students know that performing service can help them achieve a goal that benefits themselves: admission to a top school. So much of the community service being done now is done primarily for this purpose. Otherwise, how do we explain the tremendous growth in volunteerism among high school students in the last 15 years? Once kids figured out that they need to serve to be eligible for local scholarships and for college applications, they started doing more and more to the point that community organizations (esp. libraries and hospitals) are inundated with volunteers, and high schools like mine have had to put a stop to students forming new charities under school auspices.
Secondly, if the student use his particular talents in community service, which seems ideal as far as achieving impact, will some adcoms look at that as a merely a way to achieve personal benefit? After all, service related to their interests and abilities certainly can further career goals and skill development. The student who wants to major in CS who does a computer-related project could be seen as adding to his resume under the guise of community service. Same for the prospective journalism major who helps the senior center with their newsletter. (I am not suggesting the kids are selfish or are employing any deliberate strategy, but merely am pointing out that some people don’t think skilled service is selfless enough.) In fact, those of you who saw my NHS thread might recall that our high school does not allow any community service that resembles an unpaid internship to count for service hours toward NHS. In other words, if the student is gaining any knowledge or experience that could benefit him personally, then it’s not valid. Therefore, handing out water bottles at a 5K, or serving soup to the homeless would count. Playing in a community orchestra would not, and neither would D’s volunteering at the museum because she learned career-relevant information from that experience.
"On the other hand, if you ask why the high school student is unlikely to make much of an impact in trying to cure cancer, it is mainly because the student does not know enough. "
Any institution who “expects” that the high school kid interested in science has made any appreciable impact in curing cancer is delusional and not worth the time of day.
What ever happened to college as the time of exploration?
That was not what I was suggesting, PG #443–not that the student would have an impact in curing cancer by studying cell physiology, genetics, and molecular biology, but rather that a fairly deep level of knowledge of those fields is needed to make a serious attempt to cure any kind of cancer. (Or else total serendipity.) I think there might be some merit in a student’s starting to acquire the needed background in high school, if the student hopes to discover something significant.
“In fact, those of you who saw my NHS thread might recall that our high school does not allow any community service that resembles an unpaid internship to count for service hours toward NHS. In other words, if the student is gaining any knowledge or experience that could benefit him personally, then it’s not valid. Therefore, handing out water bottles at a 5K, or serving soup to the homeless would count. Playing in a community orchestra would not, and neither would D’s volunteering at the museum because she learned career-relevant information from that experience.”
This seems either like the dumbest policy ever or an over interpretation of a paid vs. non-paid criteria for service. What career would the museum work possibly prepare her for ? How can a community orchestra not count … you are performing for your community for free and the 0.1% who will pursue a career in music are still serving their community. And it is elitist to insist that somehow people of lesser financial means, and it would be a rare high SES district that does not have any low SES people, look at free lunch for example which has very low criteria … can’t serve their community by working at the BK.
On the other hand, if we are talking say 50 hours a week, almost anyone should be able to find time to say rake leaves of a senior citizen or to serve at the soup kitchen … and yes, that is important. If we are talking 200 hours aka $1600 of paid work at minimum wage, that could be an issue, as could not counting child care for siblings or sick grandparents for a kid with those responsibilities since they may take up all their non-school time.
And, I would argue that all experiences result in knowledge or experience that benefit you personally, nothing is excluded if you are a life-long learner making the most of your life.
I see this situation as somewhat analogous to developing classical musicianship on a stringed instrument. With the rise of Suzuki programs, I think there is no doubt that the level of performance of school orchestras in many of the regions with Suzuki has risen considerably. I imagine that there were regions of the country where the level of the school orchestras was always very high, and there is no very great difference. But in a lot of suburban regions that “got” Suzuki 25 or 30 years ago, it is different from before.
For the students who participate in Suzuki programs, there is the benefit of developing musical skills and stage presence, plus the opportunity to fit in the “10,000 hours” of practice that are supposed to bring proficiency, before other demands on time pile up.
On the other hand, the early music programs have an adverse impact on the non-participants who want to take up an instrument later. The school superintendent l in New Jersey was trying to address this with the “right to squeak” policy. In parallel with that, we were advised that for QMP to begin a stringed instrument in fourth grade was “almost too late.” While it’s always been very hard to get into Julliard or another strong conservatory program, I think it is probably harder than ever for a violinist who started at age 10 or 11.
I don’t pretend to know what is the right practice in this case.
Speaking to the issue that dfbdfb raised, namely what does the motivation matter, if useful service is performed? In the short term, probably not much. In the longer term, I don’t know what the future impact of being obligated to perform community service as a teenager is. I can say that as a teenager, my spouse had to do yard work on a fairly large lot more or less every weekend from early spring to late fall (mowing, pruning, planting, raking . . . ). We hire a lawn service now. I think my spouse feels that as a teenager he did all the yard work that anyone needs to do in a lifetime. 
This is a report issued by a committee, endorsed by many people involved in the process (high school counselors, headmasters, researchers, etc.) It is not a binding plan for the institutions which sent representatives to the conference.
The theme of the meeting was “how to improve the role of the college admissions process in promoting and assessing ethical and intellectual engagement.” It was not, “how to reduce stress in the admissions process.”
Re #444–time ran out for me to edit, and then I was involved in other things, but I wanted to go back to that point. I was suggesting that the best use of a significant block of time by a high school student who wanted to be able to cure some type of cancer in the long term might involve reading a lot of scientific background material during the high school years. Not that the student would then “cure cancer” while still in high school!
The drawback under the current admissions system is that this could leave the student with nothing to show for it, in resume terms. But it might be the best “intellectual engagement” that the student could have.
I think that the emphasis in college admissions on “doing something” that leads to EC entries on the application may actually run counter to “intellectual engagement.” (At least, I see this emphasis.) PG’s high-school experience as an advanced student of French literature led to listable achievements, I think, but for others that sort of experience might not have led to anything that could logically go on a resume. Yet it is certainly intellectual engagement at a high level.
I realize that the Suzuki analogy is imperfect, in that the acquisition of the physical skill of playing an instrument is of a different type than acquiring background knowledge as a high school student, but there are still some parallels. If a student is ready for the reading, I think they are no more likely to be harmed by it than a student who is enrolled in an early Suzuki program is harmed by their enrollment in that program.
There is always the possibility of a high school student stumbling on some discovery or having say a dad or neighbor who allows him to assist on a large research project.
But for 99% of future cancer curers, along with all the other folks who will need to contribute to really improve cancer treatment and outcomes, the answer is just good old fashioned academic work. This would imply, for a high school student, starting some vigorous AP level science classes in high school and maybe supplementing it with on-line classes.
Similarly, and I making this up a bit, if someone really is interested in a career in say public policy, I would think taking the full list of social studies and history AP classes would be better than doing just anything that fits well into the well-rounded wish list that is being advertised (and that is likely not really at all how those Harvard slots are being doled out).
So academic drudgery is the equivalent of the Suzuki 10,000 hours or Little League 10,000 hours.
Volunteerism seems like a goal within itself these days, including probably counteracting the isolation and disengagement of all the suburban people who don’t know their neighbors. If you volunteer in the soup kitchen in high school, maybe you will continue to do so as an adult, and therefore be engaged in your community, both through service and socially through connections with other volunteers, politicians, businessmen, etc.
If you believe this
The purpose of the meeting was to consider how to improve the role of the college admissions process in promoting and assessing ethical and intellectual engagement.
then you would believe that they are trying to improve the authenticity and usefulness of high school pre-Harvard or pre-anywhere college preparations by stressing engagement. Ethics implies something else entirely, and even community service does not directly show ethics …
So then would the community service need to be of a problem-solving nature to qualify for a thumbs-up from admissions counselors? The student notices a social problem, applies his intellect to solve it, and then sets up some organizational structure that will implement the solution? I think these schools have already been looking for the kid who can initiate and lead an endeavor or an improvement on an endeavor rather than just participate in something already organized, so this would not be anything new either.
I think the Suzuki analogy is instructive. Doing Suzuki violin from a young age is a way to develop a certain level of proficiency on the violin. But it’s not how you get into Juilliard on violin. You do that by being a “Doe” of the violin–in other words, a person who is abnormally talented at playing the violin. If you’re not one of those abnormally talented people, you’re not getting into Juilliard even if you practice for 100,000 hours. It may be that it’s getting harder even for abnormally talented people to get in if they don’t also start young–but I’ll bet some still do. People who aren’t that talented but who work really hard don’t get in.
Somehow it’s more palatable to say this about Juilliard, than it is to say that Harvard is looking for abnormally smart and accomplished applicants, preferably highly accomplished in multiple areas.
See the following old thread for a possibly relevant discussion: http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-life/753128-michael-jordan-vs-my-roommate.html
I don’t think this is intended to be a “how to get into selective colleges” guide for applicants. It’s supposed to be a “how to improve the process” for universities and high schools.
For example, our local high school requires a certain number of community service hours. There doesn’t seem to be much guidance in what to do. The wealthier parents are able to arrange all sorts of neat things. The students whose parents work during the day are at a disadvantage. Reminding everyone that babysitting younger siblings or working a part-time job at the mall also counts, is a good thing.
I gather from talking with parents that many volunteer opportunities restrict students’ ability to meet the people they’re helping, out of a fear of liability. So they may fold napkins or make soup for a meals program, under employee supervision. In comparison, playing the flute for a senior home would be a good thing.
I’ve missed a large number of posts in this thread, so I may be missing something. Where did top schools say or act like community service is elevated above other pursuits? Almost without exception, “elite” schools do not mark community service (volunteer work) as important in their CDS, and I’m not aware of treating community service as more important than numerous other types of out of classroom activities. Character and personal qualities can be quite important, but this isn’t synonymous with community service. MIT has a good description of what types of character and personal qualities they are looking for at http://mitadmissions.org/apply/process/match . They mention things like trying to make the world a better place with examples including lobbying a senator or tutoring, collaborative and cooperative spirit, initiative and risk taking, etc.
[/Quote]
I think the Suzuki analogy is instructive. Doing Suzuki violin from a young age is a way to develop a certain level of proficiency on the violin. But it’s not how you get into Juilliard on violin. You do that by being a “Doe” of the violin–in other words, a person who is abnormally talented at playing the violin. If you’re not one of those abnormally talented people, you’re not getting into Juilliard even if you practice for 100,000 hours. It may be that it’s getting harder even for abnormally talented people to get in if they don’t also start young–but I’ll bet some still do. People who aren’t that talented but who work really hard don’t get in.
[/Quote]
Talent is Overrated. There was even a book about it.
http://www.amazon.com/Talent-Overrated-Separates-World-Class-Performers/dp/1591842948
Hypothetical Question:
If everybody quit their day job and studied/practiced for the SAT 8 hours each day, how many years would it take someone of average intelligence to begin consistently getting 2400s? 10 years? 20 years? What about people of below-average intelligence?
Way back in the 1970s my high school instituted a volunteer/service learning program. But as a private boarding school they set it up so that they set aside time during the school week for it. It’s evolved over the years so that freshman use it for more team building activities, sophomore have community service projects, juniors work on Capitol Hill and seniors do something vocational. Last year they went to a weird modular schedule so they now do this in big chunks instead of once a week. The main thing I learned from the volunteer work I did, was that the volunteer gets at least as much out of the experience as the person you are supposedly helping.
More palatable but incomplete, because you’re right about H (and P and Y, etc.).