<p>Unfortunately, we can't post entire copies because of copyright laws.
You probably can go to The Washington Post's website and buy the article for a couple of bucks.</p>
<p>No need to pay. You can register for the Post for free and get the article here: <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/17/AR2006111701937.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/17/AR2006111701937.html</a></p>
<p>I find a large amount of fault with this argument - despite what all these people say, every single alumni and admissions personnel that I've spoken to has been very clear that well-rounded is not OUT. It's not necessarily in, but being a well-rounded student myself, I can testify that being well-rounded but having clear passion in what you LOVE to do, whether it's in one specific field or not, showing specific motivation and drive - that's much more important than being "academically lopsided." Just because you focus on one field of academics doesn't mean you're passionate.</p>
<p>Passion and leadership are the two qualities beyond academic success that admissions officers value. The article does not negate the possibility of being passionate (and having proof of it) in several areas; it merely emphasizes that diversity of interests isn't enough.</p>
<p>I don't know why this comes as any surprise. These lists of activities, including one to two years in Spanish Club, MADD, Rocket Club, Volleyball, etcetc shows a lot of activities, but not necessarily any commitment to any one of them.</p>
<p>I hope what the article says is at least partially true, because i have one EC- chess- which I am truly interested in and to which I devote most of my spare time. </p>
<p>I guess a lot depends on how you portray the ECs in the application.</p>
<p>A lot also depends on what one has achieved in one's area of passion. For example, is one a national chess master or expert? Is one a nationally ranked tennis player, or one who just spends a lot of time on the sport?</p>
<p>That's true of course. But it can be hard to determine what exactly a person has achieved in an EC. For example, I used to play in national chess tournaments in the past, but switched to playing online a couple of years back. So paradoxically, although I (in my opinion anyway!) am a much better player now than I was then, my chess achivements in the past look more impressive on paper than my current ones. </p>
<p>At least in sports or games like tennis or chess there is a benchmark against which you can compare performance. I can think of many ECs where that is not possible.</p>
<p>My son is like that too...he also played in national chess tournaments until his music commitments started to eat his weekends and summers. He now plays online as well and is an extremely strong player, but how many adcoms know what an ICC rating means? It's all a crap shoot...I have to take the viewpoint that everyone ends up in the place they were meant to for whatever reasons...and if they aren't happy, they can always transfer!</p>