New York Top Schools - Top marks largely go to Asians. Bill de Blasio wants to change the exams

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a mistake for these schools to take kids who need to spend all their time studying to get high enough scores on the test. These schools should be filled with kids who can do well without spending all their out of school time studying, so they can be participating in and learning from non-academic activities such as arts, music, and sports. High school is a time to explore; kids are narrowing their opportunities if they only have time for schoolwork.

I disagree. Well-rounded individuals who get secondarily high academic scores deserve to go to college, but do not deserve to displace the highest achievers. Those who have the drive and will to succeed at any cost, including spending all of their time studying are the types that make scientific breakthroughs, create inventions, and drive intellectual progress forward. I work in a science and engineering based industry and it's the hard workers that are the most needed, not the bright kids who want to do a lot of everything, do everything well, but not truly excel at anything. Great support staff, but not the true bright stars. The best institutions need to have both the brightest and the hardest working.

It's this attitude that well-rounded individual should take the places of the truly academically gifted and diligent that has deteriorated the American dominance in science, engineering and technology. Once we were the unchallenged leader in those areas and now we are just one of the top-10 nations in those areas. We have diluted our intellectual dominance with jacks/jills-of-all-trades.

I am talking about kids who can achieve at the highest level and also have the ability to achieve highly in one or two non-academic pursuits at the same time. They are incredibly hard workers who can learn in two hours what takes another kid four and so have the time to also be a highly skilled athlete or musician. These are the ones to grow up to be the "...types that make scientific breakthroughs, create inventions, and drive intellectual progress forward." Kids who go to school and then need to study and only study after school to be a high achiever miss out on much that is needed to be a leader in science.

Some kids just learn quickly and can be high achievers both in and out of school and more than one area. They will have the variety of experiences that are necessary for the creative thinking that is needed to advance science.

If they are all that, then they should be qualify on the current academic-based standards and don't need any adjustments to the current system. However, it's great that they can do that, but I see absolutely no point in making it a bonus point that they are well-rounded or play instruments or are skilled athletes. The top colleges should be able to place all high achieving academic students. Period. The hard-working academic students are not chasing out high achieving well-rounded individuals. They are chasing out second-string academics who are well-rounded. And that's what I think is wrong. Academics should be the primary criteria for getting into the best institutions and A-/B+ students who are athletes and play instruments pushing out A students who only study is wrong, IMHO.

Parents should be sure that their kids are developing other interests and abilities. If they see that their children are coming home from school and doing nothing but studying, they can encourage them to engage in an activity that develops their abilities in arts, athletics, music, or teamwork. Kids have a lot to learn on the way to being adults, and as parents we need to see that our kids are getting the experiences they need to be good and productive adults.

If I'm reading applications, and one kid has accomplishments in the categories of academics, arts, athletics, and leadership and another candidate has the same level of accomplishment in academics but nothing else, which applicant is the better choice for my school? When applicants have the same academic achievement, the ones who have time to achieve in other areas concurrently have lots more potential for the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a mistake for these schools to take kids who need to spend all their time studying to get high enough scores on the test. These schools should be filled with kids who can do well without spending all their out of school time studying, so they can be participating in and learning from non-academic activities such as arts, music, and sports. High school is a time to explore; kids are narrowing their opportunities if they only have time for schoolwork.

I disagree. Well-rounded individuals who get secondarily high academic scores deserve to go to college, but do not deserve to displace the highest achievers. Those who have the drive and will to succeed at any cost, including spending all of their time studying are the types that make scientific breakthroughs, create inventions, and drive intellectual progress forward. I work in a science and engineering based industry and it's the hard workers that are the most needed, not the bright kids who want to do a lot of everything, do everything well, but not truly excel at anything. Great support staff, but not the true bright stars. The best institutions need to have both the brightest and the hardest working.

It's this attitude that well-rounded individual should take the places of the truly academically gifted and diligent that has deteriorated the American dominance in science, engineering and technology. Once we were the unchallenged leader in those areas and now we are just one of the top-10 nations in those areas. We have diluted our intellectual dominance with jacks/jills-of-all-trades.

OMG. I agree with this so much!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a mistake for these schools to take kids who need to spend all their time studying to get high enough scores on the test. These schools should be filled with kids who can do well without spending all their out of school time studying, so they can be participating in and learning from non-academic activities such as arts, music, and sports. High school is a time to explore; kids are narrowing their opportunities if they only have time for schoolwork.

I disagree. Well-rounded individuals who get secondarily high academic scores deserve to go to college, but do not deserve to displace the highest achievers. Those who have the drive and will to succeed at any cost, including spending all of their time studying are the types that make scientific breakthroughs, create inventions, and drive intellectual progress forward. I work in a science and engineering based industry and it's the hard workers that are the most needed, not the bright kids who want to do a lot of everything, do everything well, but not truly excel at anything. Great support staff, but not the true bright stars. The best institutions need to have both the brightest and the hardest working.

It's this attitude that well-rounded individual should take the places of the truly academically gifted and diligent that has deteriorated the American dominance in science, engineering and technology. Once we were the unchallenged leader in those areas and now we are just one of the top-10 nations in those areas. We have diluted our intellectual dominance with jacks/jills-of-all-trades.

I am talking about kids who can achieve at the highest level and also have the ability to achieve highly in one or two non-academic pursuits at the same time. They are incredibly hard workers who can learn in two hours what takes another kid four and so have the time to also be a highly skilled athlete or musician. These are the ones to grow up to be the "...types that make scientific breakthroughs, create inventions, and drive intellectual progress forward." Kids who go to school and then need to study and only study after school to be a high achiever miss out on much that is needed to be a leader in science.

Some kids just learn quickly and can be high achievers both in and out of school and more than one area. They will have the variety of experiences that are necessary for the creative thinking that is needed to advance science.

If they are all that, then they should be qualify on the current academic-based standards and don't need any adjustments to the current system. However, it's great that they can do that, but I see absolutely no point in making it a bonus point that they are well-rounded or play instruments or are skilled athletes. The top colleges should be able to place all high achieving academic students. Period. The hard-working academic students are not chasing out high achieving well-rounded individuals. They are chasing out second-string academics who are well-rounded. And that's what I think is wrong. Academics should be the primary criteria for getting into the best institutions and A-/B+ students who are athletes and play instruments pushing out A students who only study is wrong, IMHO.

This. If someone is truly as gifted in everything as the PP suggested, they will get in on academic merits alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Same can be applied to SATs, yet, most colleges use these scores as part of admissions. And a lot of kids of all ethnicities take SAT prep tests and/or tutor classes. If standardized tests only reflect rote learning or the ability to be good at taking exams, then colleges should stop using SAT/ACTs scores as part of the admissions process. But, I bet your kid has or will probably prep for the SATs when the time comes. When the time comes, I know I will encourage my DCs to prep for the SATs.

I do agree, though, that some people are better at taking exams than others, and it is not necessarily an accurate reflection of how "smart" they are.

Yes, they should. And many colleges actually have stopped.

In addition, no college admits applicants solely on the basis of SAT/ACT scores. Big state universities tend to looks mostly at test scores and GPAs, but the highest ranking schools also require essays and teacher recommendations. The top colleges and universities want students who bring more to the table than just high test scores. They want kids who are academic high achievers who also will participate in and contribute to the community.
I

Read the book Chosen and you will see how elite schools begin to use things other than academics for admission. Not completely innocent.

Yes, I have read that but that happened a long time ago. A lot of things that went on back then don't happen anymore. Could a similar situation happen today? Anything is possible, but it is highly unlikely today.

Lots of people can get good grades and high test scores by studying night and day, no matter what their race or nationality. Earning high GPAs and high test scores while also being highly involved in sports, arts, music, or volunteer work is much more difficult. The second group is smaller than the first and much more interesting to top schools. Top schools don't want students who are there only to take, they want those who also want to give back.

The practice in Chosen is now deployed to maintain the Asian quota in the Ivy League.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

This is a really convincing article. And I am not a conservative by any means.

[Anonymous]

Parents need to keep the big picture in mind. Focussing on any one category to the exclusion of all else is not doing the best we can for our children.

If our hopes for success for our children are to come true, we need to provide the opportunities for them to develop all of their talents and interests, in addition to encouraging good health and fitness. The academically successful child who engages in a variety of activities is developing the skills needed to be a successful and productive adult.

[Anonymous]

Many of our kids will work for Asian bosses, treated by Asian doctors, and taught by Asian professors... Maybe we should thank them rather than trying to beat them down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Parents need to keep the big picture in mind. Focussing on any one category to the exclusion of all else is not doing the best we can for our children.

If our hopes for success for our children are to come true, we need to provide the opportunities for them to develop all of their talents and interests, in addition to encouraging good health and fitness. The academically successful child who engages in a variety of activities is developing the skills needed to be a successful and productive adult.

This is you and I's big picture. I try my best to encourage my child to try a variety of things as well.

But the picture for the society is absolutely what the PP said. The scientific breakthroughs are absolutely carried out by the studious hyper-focused individuals. They need a place to flourish. The Stuvys of world is as appropriate a place as any other place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many of our kids will work for Asian bosses, treated by Asian doctors, and taught by Asian professors... Maybe we should thank them rather than trying to beat them down.

?

Many of "us" actually are Asian-American.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of our kids will work for Asian bosses, treated by Asian doctors, and taught by Asian professors... Maybe we should thank them rather than trying to beat them down.

?

Many of "us" actually are Asian-American.

Points well taken. Fair point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of our kids will work for Asian bosses, treated by Asian doctors, and taught by Asian professors... Maybe we should thank them rather than trying to beat them down.

?

Many of "us" actually are Asian-American.

And we, too, will be working for Asian-Americans. I'm Asian. My direct manager is Asian. I'm in high tech.

[Anonymous]

The new gen Asian kids - US born, late 80 kids - are starting to hit the work force with pretty impressive resume. It's the beginning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a mistake for these schools to take kids who need to spend all their time studying to get high enough scores on the test. These schools should be filled with kids who can do well without spending all their out of school time studying, so they can be participating in and learning from non-academic activities such as arts, music, and sports. High school is a time to explore; kids are narrowing their opportunities if they only have time for schoolwork.

I disagree. Well-rounded individuals who get secondarily high academic scores deserve to go to college, but do not deserve to displace the highest achievers. Those who have the drive and will to succeed at any cost, including spending all of their time studying are the types that make scientific breakthroughs, create inventions, and drive intellectual progress forward. I work in a science and engineering based industry and it's the hard workers that are the most needed, not the bright kids who want to do a lot of everything, do everything well, but not truly excel at anything. Great support staff, but not the true bright stars. The best institutions need to have both the brightest and the hardest working.

It's this attitude that well-rounded individual should take the places of the truly academically gifted and diligent that has deteriorated the American dominance in science, engineering and technology. Once we were the unchallenged leader in those areas and now we are just one of the top-10 nations in those areas. We have diluted our intellectual dominance with jacks/jills-of-all-trades.

Um, you neglect to state the fact that many countries at the time in which we were the so called technological leader were slightly occupied with wars, revolutions and stuff like that. Also, our historians often fail to give credit to the Europeans for the technolgical breakthroughs they made in inventing the car, the computer, and the airplane. Oh, and don't even get me started on the Inca, the Maya, and the Ancient Chinese!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a mistake for these schools to take kids who need to spend all their time studying to get high enough scores on the test. These schools should be filled with kids who can do well without spending all their out of school time studying, so they can be participating in and learning from non-academic activities such as arts, music, and sports. High school is a time to explore; kids are narrowing their opportunities if they only have time for schoolwork.

I disagree. Well-rounded individuals who get secondarily high academic scores deserve to go to college, but do not deserve to displace the highest achievers. Those who have the drive and will to succeed at any cost, including spending all of their time studying are the types that make scientific breakthroughs, create inventions, and drive intellectual progress forward. I work in a science and engineering based industry and it's the hard workers that are the most needed, not the bright kids who want to do a lot of everything, do everything well, but not truly excel at anything. Great support staff, but not the true bright stars. The best institutions need to have both the brightest and the hardest working.

It's this attitude that well-rounded individual should take the places of the truly academically gifted and diligent that has deteriorated the American dominance in science, engineering and technology. Once we were the unchallenged leader in those areas and now we are just one of the top-10 nations in those areas. We have diluted our intellectual dominance with jacks/jills-of-all-trades.

Steve Jobs was extremely well rounded and extremely successful. He would never have thought of adding fonts to the Mac if it weren't for a calligraphy class that he took after dropping out of college. You are making a sweeping generalization, PP.

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/what-a-calligrapher-priest-taught-steve-jobs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a mistake for these schools to take kids who need to spend all their time studying to get high enough scores on the test. These schools should be filled with kids who can do well without spending all their out of school time studying, so they can be participating in and learning from non-academic activities such as arts, music, and sports. High school is a time to explore; kids are narrowing their opportunities if they only have time for schoolwork.

I disagree. Well-rounded individuals who get secondarily high academic scores deserve to go to college, but do not deserve to displace the highest achievers. Those who have the drive and will to succeed at any cost, including spending all of their time studying are the types that make scientific breakthroughs, create inventions, and drive intellectual progress forward. I work in a science and engineering based industry and it's the hard workers that are the most needed, not the bright kids who want to do a lot of everything, do everything well, but not truly excel at anything. Great support staff, but not the true bright stars. The best institutions need to have both the brightest and the hardest working.

It's this attitude that well-rounded individual should take the places of the truly academically gifted and diligent that has deteriorated the American dominance in science, engineering and technology. Once we were the unchallenged leader in those areas and now we are just one of the top-10 nations in those areas. We have diluted our intellectual dominance with jacks/jills-of-all-trades.

Steve Jobs was extremely well rounded and extremely successful. He would never have thought of adding fonts to the Mac if it weren't for a calligraphy class that he took after dropping out of college. You are making a sweeping generalization, PP.

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/what-a-calligrapher-priest-taught-steve-jobs

But it was the other Steve who really invented Apple computer. Steve Jobs is a visionary but scientist he is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a mistake for these schools to take kids who need to spend all their time studying to get high enough scores on the test. These schools should be filled with kids who can do well without spending all their out of school time studying, so they can be participating in and learning from non-academic activities such as arts, music, and sports. High school is a time to explore; kids are narrowing their opportunities if they only have time for schoolwork.

I disagree. Well-rounded individuals who get secondarily high academic scores deserve to go to college, but do not deserve to displace the highest achievers. Those who have the drive and will to succeed at any cost, including spending all of their time studying are the types that make scientific breakthroughs, create inventions, and drive intellectual progress forward. I work in a science and engineering based industry and it's the hard workers that are the most needed, not the bright kids who want to do a lot of everything, do everything well, but not truly excel at anything. Great support staff, but not the true bright stars. The best institutions need to have both the brightest and the hardest working.

It's this attitude that well-rounded individual should take the places of the truly academically gifted and diligent that has deteriorated the American dominance in science, engineering and technology. Once we were the unchallenged leader in those areas and now we are just one of the top-10 nations in those areas. We have diluted our intellectual dominance with jacks/jills-of-all-trades.

Steve Jobs was extremely well rounded and extremely successful. He would never have thought of adding fonts to the Mac if it weren't for a calligraphy class that he took after dropping out of college. You are making a sweeping generalization, PP.

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/what-a-calligrapher-priest-taught-steve-jobs

But it was the other Steve who really invented Apple computer. Steve Jobs is a visionary but scientist he is not.

If it weren't for Jobs, Wozniak would've just been a computer club geek with some cool ideas. Jobs had the sense to partner up with Wozniak, who was a shy engineer content at staying at HP. Someone asked him if he could improve Atari's video game and he had the sense to recruit Wozniak. Many visionaries partner up with technical people to make their ideas become a reality. Look at Alexander Graham Bell (another college dropout) and Thomas Watson, for example. I realize that Wozniak was more than a technician and was very much an inventor, but he didn't have the bold vision to do much with his ideas. He needed Jobs to draw it out of him.