<p>Alright, I have to make a final decision by this week. For next year (12th grade), I have room for one EC class (yes, my school forces me to take one). I have been considering Yearbook and Debate. I really need help deciding which one is better, even though they both are commonplace. Here are the pros and cons to each...</p>
<p>Debate-Pros; Honors course, ensured a position on debate team, I am more interested in Debate...Cons;No experience, i can't think of any others.</p>
<p>Yearbook-Pros; Accepted position as editor of Academics section, fewer people are in this class...Cons:No experience, no honors credit, occasionaly I may be required to stay after school to complete yearbook related activities but I will have to go through some trouble because I don't have a car, I don't think I am that great with handling people because my social skills are not that sharp, more work (I think!).</p>
<p>Please advise me which would be better to take and which Columbia would probably prefer from your understanding. Thanks.</p>
<p><strong><em>Yes, I know this is the second post I have made about EC's. However, I felt that this was the best forum to post it in.</em></strong></p>
<p>Didn't we tell you the first time to do the one you're more interested in? That and the gigantic list of cons for Yearbook, and you're still asking which one is a better choice? Really, it doesn't matter which one Columbia prefers, and it's doubtful they would have a preference at all. Even if they did, there's no way anyone could make a reasonable guess as to which EC will stand out more in next year's applicant pool.</p>
<p>I hate to be harsh, but if that's a decision you still can't figure out, perhaps you should be considering some less competitive universities.</p>
<p>Okay, I understand what both of you said. However, consider this question again without thinking of the pros and cons and tell me which one is more impressive. I thought being the Yearbook editor showed more leadership than being a part of the Debate team. What do you think?
By the way, I am also thinking about less competitive univerisites besides Columbia like NYU, Rensselaer, and Emory. Anyways, I agree that it is important to do EC's that I like. However, is there not a time that we all have to do things that we don't like in order to make ourselves more appealing to highly competitive schools? Honestly, I am more interested in slacking off, dropping out of IB, and taking fewer AP courses. But I choose not to because Columbia University and other highly selective schools will not like that.
Anyways, just to make sure we stay on topic...just tell me which one on paper looks more impressive...Debate team member or Yearbook editor?</p>
<p>It's fine to make sacrifices in the name of ambition. That's understandable. The point we are trying to make is that neither activity looks better on paper. Your genuine interest in debate might help an application because genuine interest tends to communicate better in interviews, essays, etc. Yearbook 'editor' is just a title; there's nothing substantive in it that improves your application.</p>
<p>That said, you're probably right in that some schools might shallowly view that title in a better light. I suppose that's what leads to your asking this question in the first place shallow schools accept shallow people who do things like choose to play a different instrument because it will give them better admissions prospects (as I remember one poster saying he'd done). There are some very highly ranked schools that will accept some very unimpressive people because they see "leadership" in their activities.</p>
<p>To me, "interested and involved debate team member" looks better than "reluctant yearbook editor." I'm biased towards Columbia in thinking they'd probably say the same thing.</p>
<p>I think that's what I'll do. Before I give up my position on the yearbook staff, I'll do a little more research about debate. Then, I'll probably change back to debate. Thanks for helping me.</p>
<p>How is it a "position" to give up if you have no past experience?</p>
<p>Debate will do more for you. It'll teach you more useful skills.</p>
<p>It will not impress Columbia if you're only doing this because it's a required class at your school. What ECs have you done in the past? Do you have no lasting interests?</p>
<p>There is no way either one will "stand out."</p>
<p>That doesn't necessarily mean you won't stand out. However, if you want to stand out, it seems ECs aren't going to do it for you. You'll really have to show some personality in your essay. Please don't do things to get into college, because that technique actually specializes in getting kids waitlisted and rejected.</p>
<p>When I said "position", i meant that as of now, I will have the position of editor next year for the yearbook. I was interviewed and accepted to this position a few weeks ago. </p>
<p>Debate and Yearbook are optional. My school does not require either of them. However, because there will be eight periods next year, my school has placed a maximum limit of 7 AP/IB classes. As a result, everyone must select some sort of non-AP/IB class. I liked Yearbook and Debate because they both had EC work associated with them. </p>
<p>My past EC record is as follows: member of IB Honor Society, FBLA, Math Club, tennis team, volunteer work at a rural underserved clinic, National Honor Society...I can't think of anything else yet. 12th grade-proposed EC's; treasurer of Republican Party Club, plan to start a peer counselling club, intern with the National Hurricane Center (if I am allowed), and coach a handicap sports team, maybe I'll also try to join the golf team as well. So far, I have just attained the minimal status of "member" for all the clubs. I hope that more volunteer work and the EC's for next year will make my EC record stronger.</p>
<p>My interests are meteorology, hypnosis, basketball, baseball, and religious work. From this list of interests, can you think of any EC's that I could do?</p>
<p>I know that I must make up for the lack of EC's. I hope it is not too late and I sincerley hope that I do not have to provide Columbia the amount of time spent with each EC organization.</p>
<p>Columbia does ask for the time involved in each EC. For me, that was a good thing. For you, I guess that might be a crappy thing to ask for.</p>
<p>Your ECs are patchy. I can't see real commitment in them.</p>
<p>If you're interested in baseball and basketball, why were you on the tennis team and thinking about golf? (will you have to drop tennis to do golf? is golf fall or spring? around where I live it's spring)</p>
<p>Do debate. Or do something else. You don't need debate unless you're interested in it. Is there an art class you're interested in? A religious class? Or something?</p>
<p>Hi Jono. I thought about golf and tennis because they were easier to get into, were less time consuming, and because I did not want to risk getting injured in basketball and baseball. Besides, I am out of shape and quite skinny. However, I am a pretty good tennis player.</p>
<p>Right now I'm leaning towards debate. I hope my lack of unique EC's and the time committed towards them does not significantly lower my chances of getting into Columbia. I tried to get into Research Science Institute (one of the most prestigious summer programs located at MIT) but got rejected. Anyways, I guess I can make up for the slack by taking more EC's next year, by doing some extraordinary volunteer work this summer, and by writing outstandingly interesting application essays.</p>