<p>For those who don't know me- I am a US applicant for 2012 and I have already finished my schooling this year. To be honest I didn't like school, anyone for that matter. I hated how everyone would get frenzied up by scores and talk about "education" in terms of numbers- marks, class ranks, percentiles, GPAs and even prospective salaries! I didn't understand all this as all I was bothered about was learning new things. Anything that moved would interest me, I was really interested in some of the classes not because "seekhle yaar, number zyaada milenge", it was because I really wanted to know those things in order to understand the world in a better way. So school did disappoint me in this manner. Also in exams I wouldn't be given marks for correct answers just because they were my own. In fact one of my Chem teachers cut marks for correct answers just because certain "keywords" were absent!</p>
<p>To give an example of how ridiculous quantifying education is to me- One of my schoolmates was a girl in Commerce stream. She was like the most dumbest and stupid persons I have come across. She didn't understand half the things at school including the laws of supply and demand which any layman wouldn't need even a minute to understand. Yet she was the topper of her class...</p>
<p>Why are you freaking out about what others do and think? </p>
<p>You seem to imply that true learning and doing well in exams are mutually exclusive. Not true, even here in India. What you described happens everywhere. What can you do about it?</p>
<p>Do you think all those who make it to the finals of Intel science fair understand what “they” have done? I personally know a girl who did a project on number system and cryptology and made it to the finals of Intel ISEF. She got a few awards for “her” work including the one from the Davidson Institute. She entered Stanford with much fanfare as the next Ramanujam in the making. She flunked out of math dept at the end of first year and had to settle for something which someone here would characterize as underwater basket weaving. She now works as a PR person for a high tech firm. </p>
<p>Don’t worry about others. Focus on your goals and try not to take short cuts when it comes to learning. I know it is hard but you’ll do well in the end. Good guys/gals always win. :D</p>
<p>Haha. I am not worrying. And I know it isn’t mutually exclusive to India, such things happen world over. I am just venting because in some ways I am fed up with studying in such a system. As I said its impossible to quantify education. For me it remains a classic metaphor for numeracy in mathematics- students are led to believe that maths is nothing but numbers which is complete nonsense! </p>
<p>lol! Hopefully Stanford realized their mistake and started looking for more than EC’s and marks!! And yes why wouldn’t she succeed at PR- she made Stanford believe she had something while she nothing!</p>
<p>Ditto at my school and it’s one of the “best” in the country!
We had amazing ECs and great opportunities but the academics were rotten and dull. I hated it too !</p>
<p>Ditto at my school and it’s one of the “best” in the country!
We had amazing ECs and great opportunities but the academics were rotten and dull. I hated it too !</p>
<p>While the execution may not be the most ideal there is good reason why they expect you to write your answers in a certain way. Its about being meticulous and having a disciplined education. You cant just go and write some story that makes some sense and expect the teacher to give you full marks for it because it contains the gist of the right answer. You need to be disciplined in academics. Yes its important to understand everything and enjoy yourself but this is serious stuff. In life if you cannot articulate nor express yourself succinctly in a manner dictated by your situation then you wont go very far. </p>
<p>Yes of course its important to learn and think for yourself. You’re just stating the obvious. But in the system you find yourself in, its better not to complain and deal with it. Many people dont understand the merits of having a meticulous education. That is the very reason that Indians do well on standardized tests involving math or science. And aside from tests how do you propose we gauge someone’s ability and dedication? If someone is really smart but refuses to do well in the school system and doesnt show ability in other forms of academic testing then all they are is lazy. What do you expect in a country with so many people vying for few places at elite institutions? Of course marks matter. Deal with it.</p>
<p>And you’re not exactly being very kind to the girl you describe. You have no right to describe her as intellectually deficient. She was the topper of the class because she was smart in developing skills that will be recognized and for being a very diligent worker. Period.</p>
<p>And as for not understanding things even laypeople would need less than a minute to, I refer you to your own question on the thread. Why indeed do people pursue crazy marks in India.</p>
<p>@mysticgohan- Nope that’s not what I meant. I am questioning the whole concept of quantifying education even at the college level. Even at MIT or Harvard for that matter. Its not about making the best opportunities where I am. Its about the philosophy of education and how one goes about it. Education isn’t something that can be shown through some marks or something. Sadly the whole world is busy quantifying education through numbers. Education is something that is subjective in nature. And quite honestly I don’t care about what marks I get or even where I manage to land up at finally. All I know is that I love learning about things around me and that is not going to change if I get high or low marks. In economics there is a theory called utility theory that basically talks about people’s satisfaction. It was developed by this great economist called Alfred Marshall. Though it was a great concept, there are many criticisms and one of the major flaws was that it tried to quantify “satisfaction”, something which is subjective and can’t be expressed in numbers. Ultimately there were other theories that replaced the marginal utility theory. It is the same case with education. You just can’t express someone’s intelligence in numbers; that’s why the whole concept of IQ is limited by its flaws…</p>
<p>And trust me when I speak about that girl. Just by spending two minutes with her you’ll realize my point.</p>
<p>Dont lecture me about utility theory in economics. Clearly you dont understand the need to quantify things. The reason we need to quantify things in economics is so that we have firm yardsticks by which we may undertake cost-benefit analysis. You cant just say you’ll be this happy or that happy. You need numbers to help you make rational decisions. Yes there can be mistakes in quantifying but without quantifying there is no decision in the first place. No one argues that education cannot be quantified but what other efficient yardstick but marks and standardized tests are there to determine how diligent or gifted one is? Do you propose that people sit with prospective candidates and have candid leisurely discussions about the intricacies of life and nature? Smell the coffee hon. </p>
<p>And trust me, you still dont have a right to call that girl stupid. She is a topper cause she works hard, you’d do well to learn from that.</p>
<p>@mysticgohan- Forget about the future and for once just start looking at education as something in the present. Stop worrying about you succeeding in getting higher numbers at school so that you can go to a very good college. Look at education as something that is always around you, helps you understand the myriad questions you have about the world. This is my view and definition of education. If you don’t get this, certainly we have very differing views of what education is. </p>
<p>And I am most certainly have no intentions of “lecturing” someone. It was just an example of something through which I was trying to make my point. And FYI in case you don’t know, the utility theory has taken a back seat. Indifference curves are much better ways to depict satisfaction. </p>
<p>Forget about the girl, you weren’t in the class, thus you wouldn’t get what I am talking about…</p>
<p>And also try to be less rude in your musings…</p>
<p>@princetondreams- Hmm… My argument is in some ways philosophical… And what the article depicts, thats not what I mean. I am talking about how we perceive the whole concept of learning and education even in colleges as well…</p>
<p>Just a question-and I honestly don’t intend this to be rude in case it sounds like it-have you ever wondered that you, and not others, might be the problem?</p>
<p>Anyways, that girl’s goal is to get the highest marks possible. Your’s is to value learning for learning’s sake. Since your goals are so different, why do you even care what she does? Or are you envious of her for her being able to do what you cannot? </p>
<p>And if your goal is a top US school, you really shouldn’t see a distinction between the two-learning and attaining top grades. Rhodes Scholars, for instance, are frequently those who graduate with perfect GPAs.</p>
<p>I am extremely repentant for my abhorrent behaviour. Without belittling your intellect as you have your friend’s, may I ask you if you actually know what an indifference curve is? An indifference curve for two goods shows the various combinations of the two goods that are perceived to represent the same <em>utility</em> to a particular consumer. So yes utility is a concept that is inherent to the concept of indifference curves. Like distance in a distance-time curve if you will. </p>
<p>And yes PD’s right, in the end you’re going to college for academics and they will judge you by the yardsticks commonly used to gauge proficiency in the same. No one is arguing about all the ideals of education you were so kind to educate us with. The fact is, the world isnt ideal and people are doing the best they can to make it fair for everyone and we just have to live with it.</p>
<p>@Princetondreams- lol! I meant any school, not anyone. Since I wrote this is in case of very sleepy state, I made a typo!</p>
<p>@mysticgohan- Yes I do. Like you said Indifference curves are nothing but a set of curves which measure the “indifference” i.e responsiveness of the consumer to a particular object. I know that.</p>
<p>And again the girl. Yes I do accept that I am biased against her. But probably that bias is due to how I was treated by my peers, including her. And yes again perhaps my cynicism against this system arises by my experiences at school. I was mocked, made fun of in front of the whole class. Even teachers joined it sometimes. Of course I took it all in a sportive manner, not bothering about what they thought of me. But deep down it did hurt me that I wasn’t accepted how I was. I had a habit of asking whatever came to my mins to the teachers, my peers even didn’t spare picking up on me even on this aspect. I didn’t have a usual school life like almost everyone has. I wasn’t accepted by the people around me. </p>
<p>I do know a lot of people are made fun of and even mocked, but there’s a limit to everything. After all mocking me so regularly that even a 1st grader knows me by that name what my peers would use to mock me, now that is crossing the line. Still I took everything in stride and talked (acted a lot of times) to people, including that “girl” I talked about earlier. Certainly I am not jealous of her topping the class, as I said I don’t believe in marks. After I finished my school I joined a college. At least the mocking isn’t there, but there’s hardly someone whom I can talk to about my interests. Others talk about movies, tv shows, that’s there mutual interests. Although even I like movies, I am nerdy and somewhat obsessively interested in academic subjects. Tell me how many people I have around me that I can talk to?</p>
<p>This is why I want to come to US. You guys are in Columbia and Caltech, that’s the kind of crowd I want to be in. </p>
<p>Sorry for venting but well you guys pestering about the “girl” made me bring all that out…</p>
<p>Boy, I have no idea where you’re taking this discussion Mystic.</p>
<p>As for the thread title, I think it’s pretty obvious. Large population means high competition, and imo we lack the infrastructure, so opportunities are given on the basis of marks, where not much work has to be done in choosing the ‘best’. An ease way out, if you will.</p>
<p>The utility I received from reading through this thread was minimal, since this argument here is defunct. </p>
<p>In most cases people who “top” are, contrary to your belief, rather smart. I know many people who did not appear to be smart at in terms of their speech and actions but relayed their ideas with eloquence on paper.</p>
<p>The OP is clearly the thoughtless result of pent up angst over the Indian education system. It is truth universally acknowledged that quantitative data is the best factor in determining ones academic ability. In order for learning to become subjective you have to first master the objective basics. It is as mysticgohan said, "In life if you cannot articulate nor express yourself succinctly in a manner dictated by your situation then you wont go very far. ".</p>
<p>Save the learning for the sake of learning stuff for some commonapp essay ^^.</p>
She now works as a PR person for a high tech firm. </p>