Would you prefer European-style admissions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don’t most European countries have a highly centralized, national high school curriculum so the differences in grading and courses is largely eliminated? It seems a necessary predicate to that kind of admissions system

US has APs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No.
I think we need a limit on apps or to abolish the common app or something. The process now is broken compared to when most of us applied.

But the Asian approach of high stakes testing sounds miserable for kids and I want no part of that. I think we would end up closer to that version then the European model if we went to tests only.

European model is also high stakes testing. The difference is that in Europe and the US, the cultural perception is that you don't need to go to an elite school to succeed, whereas in India and China and South Korea it's much more important, hence the greater amounts of pressure.

But the US adopting the European system or even the Asian system of college admissions would not mean adopting the Asian culture of best or bust.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:European way, at least in the UK, is also somewhat holistic. Academic proficiency matters more there, though, and I think they consider the right mix of holistic and academic qualifications.

Not sure their system would work in the US unless we also switched to making kids lock in their majors when they enter college. For example, great math and physics test scores are going to matter if you want to major in physics, but not so much history.

+1 Europeans lock in much earlier to their course of study as teens. And most European colleges are much more focused on that course of study too---definitely not as many electives that are not related to their primary focus (i.e. major). More practical I guess, but I prefer the American way which allows a bit more freedom for a teenager to change their mind about what to do.

Except that nowadays they need to be locked into a “narrative” from the age of 14 to get into one of these elite colleges. If you think teens should have the freedom to explore their interests you should hate everything about the current American admissions process.

Some kids, yes, who are groomed for T10 schools, sure. But other teenagers just remain, clueless teenagers, who might study business, or computer science, or English depending on the day with no need to lockin.

I'm pretty sure this thread is about the elite schools where you do need to lock in from the age of 14.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who would prefer the European system: were you born and lived your life in the US?

No they weren’t. If they were they would understand that the European system wouldn’t work because the uneven k-12 system makes common measurement impossible. They might also know that top schools would all need to look like U Toronto in size to have similar admissions and finally they would understand that top schools in the US are PRIVATE and can do as they please.

If you want that system fell free to push for it in public schools.

How would the uneven k-12 system make common measurement impossible? What do you think AP and SAT scores do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t most European countries have a highly centralized, national high school curriculum so the differences in grading and courses is largely eliminated? It seems a necessary predicate to that kind of admissions system

US has APs.

And common core and NGSS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t most European countries have a highly centralized, national high school curriculum so the differences in grading and courses is largely eliminated? It seems a necessary predicate to that kind of admissions system

US has APs.

Not nearly the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many complain about managing all the factors in US college admissions. Academics, athletics, ECs, and more.

Would you prefer European style admissions where only academics (includes school work/grades and either ACT/SAT, and AP Subject Test results (not the number if AP classes or which AP classes were taken) matter??

Yes, DC's McGill application was so easy. Just some paperwork, grades and SAT. Clear, transparent GPA cut-offs for core subjects related to your major so you only apply to college if you are qualified. And no essays allows them to make a very quick determination.

It's rolling admission so DC applied early, and already has been accepted! No ED, just rolling admission with an early period and a regular period. Easy breezy and no stress.

High school is hard enough. We don't need the college application process to be this convoluted.

U Toronto is quite different…kid had to write three essays, LOR, list ECs…no different than the US, though essays were shorter and no personal statement.

I think the three essays are only if you apply to the smaller residential colleges - Vic, Trin or St. Mikes, right? There are no essays at all for Innes or University college. And the colleges don't really matter anyway, as you can take any major or classes at UofT regardless of where you dorm.

This was for a STEM major, but no specific residential college. Those would have required additional essays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:European way, at least in the UK, is also somewhat holistic. Academic proficiency matters more there, though, and I think they consider the right mix of holistic and academic qualifications.

Not sure their system would work in the US unless we also switched to making kids lock in their majors when they enter college. For example, great math and physics test scores are going to matter if you want to major in physics, but not so much history.

+1 Europeans lock in much earlier to their course of study as teens. And most European colleges are much more focused on that course of study too---definitely not as many electives that are not related to their primary focus (i.e. major). More practical I guess, but I prefer the American way which allows a bit more freedom for a teenager to change their mind about what to do.

Except that nowadays they need to be locked into a “narrative” from the age of 14 to get into one of these elite colleges. If you think teens should have the freedom to explore their interests you should hate everything about the current American admissions process.

Some kids, yes, who are groomed for T10 schools, sure. But other teenagers just remain, clueless teenagers, who might study business, or computer science, or English depending on the day with no need to lockin.

+1. The vast, vast, majority of colleges in the US have high admissions rates. The problem isn’t the system. It’s the parents who are obsessed with getting their kids into the T10.

[Anonymous]

All top universities outside the US are public and range from large to very large.

Oxford and Cambridge are each 20,000+, Canadian schools are 50,000+, etc.

Really not sure how you alter the US when you have lots of 4,000-8,000 student top private schools.

There are schools like Michigan State or Iowa State with very high acceptance rates and fairly straightforward admissions.

[Anonymous]

No. Why should we change our ways to better suit immigrants? If it worked best wherever they came from they wouldn't have come here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:European way, at least in the UK, is also somewhat holistic. Academic proficiency matters more there, though, and I think they consider the right mix of holistic and academic qualifications.

Not sure their system would work in the US unless we also switched to making kids lock in their majors when they enter college. For example, great math and physics test scores are going to matter if you want to major in physics, but not so much history.

+1 Europeans lock in much earlier to their course of study as teens. And most European colleges are much more focused on that course of study too---definitely not as many electives that are not related to their primary focus (i.e. major). More practical I guess, but I prefer the American way which allows a bit more freedom for a teenager to change their mind about what to do.

Except that nowadays they need to be locked into a “narrative” from the age of 14 to get into one of these elite colleges. If you think teens should have the freedom to explore their interests you should hate everything about the current American admissions process.

Some kids, yes, who are groomed for T10 schools, sure. But other teenagers just remain, clueless teenagers, who might study business, or computer science, or English depending on the day with no need to lockin.

+1. The vast, vast, majority of colleges in the US have high admissions rates. The problem isn’t the system. It’s the parents who are obsessed with getting their kids into the T10.

Let’s be clear, it’s not individual parents, it’s a culture. If your kid is good at school and/or tests, the only way to opt out is to move away from areas like the DMV. If you simply tell your kid that those aren’t your values, and you won’t pay for those schools, the kid will be judged a weirdo and a failure when they don’t go to a T25, just as much as if they had joined a cult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. Why should we change our ways to better suit immigrants? If it worked best wherever they came from they wouldn't have come here.

We have changed our ways quite a lot to better suit elite private colleges’ craving for ever-lower acceptance rates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don’t most European countries have a highly centralized, national high school curriculum so the differences in grading and courses is largely eliminated? It seems a necessary predicate to that kind of admissions system

First, Everything has exceptions. Europe has many countries. Each is a bit different.

Most do have standardized subject exams (analogous to AP Subject exams). Abitur is this in some countries. A-level exams are like this in the Uk.

However, differences in grading between schools are fairly common as the in-school regular exams usually are not standardized. Also, while there might be a theoretical std curriculum, in practice different teachers and different schools will vary somewhat both in coverage and in emphasis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:European way, at least in the UK, is also somewhat holistic. Academic proficiency matters more there, though, and I think they consider the right mix of holistic and academic qualifications.

Not sure their system would work in the US unless we also switched to making kids lock in their majors when they enter college. For example, great math and physics test scores are going to matter if you want to major in physics, but not so much history.

UK has two sets of national exams.

Using the example above, at age 16 the STEM student still would sit the GCSE exams for multiple subjects (formerly called O-levels - for those of a certain age) so UK students do not specialize until the last 2 years of HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who would prefer the European system: were you born and lived your life in the US?

Yes