Does foreign language choice in HS matter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. But if one had to rank.. Latin would be at the top

Mandarin Chinese is not only more difficult for a native English speaker to master, but pragmatically it’s not even a fair fight. Latin will come in handy when you’re planning to storm the Vatican or if you ever gain access to a time machine … for literally everything else, bet on Mandarin Chinese.

Anytime we need Mandarin, we are going to use a native speaker who speaks English, not some white American who stumbled through four years of high school Mandarin.

It’s about pursuit of a rigorous program, and frankly, a student choosing Spanish or French (assuming Chinese is also available) could be viewed as taking the easiest way out for those four years of FL coursework.

If I was looking at otherwise identical students and one completed four years of Mandarin Chinese as their FL and the other completed four years of Spanish - I mean, if you understand the fact that the former is far more complex to master, you would have to tip the scale to that side, if think.

And then as to your last point, I guess it depends on how far a student pursues native fluency. I know of students who completed a Mandarin Chinese immersion program in the K-5 period, then returned for HS (with, as another poster pointed out, a class full of classmates surrounding them who use the language daily at home, as their primary family language) and some of them are very, very, very capable of reaching effective native fluency at 17 years old, with no indication in accent or otherwise.

Your speculation is incorrect. Colleges do not rank languages on a scale of rigorous and non-rigorous. It doesn’t matter what language you take. DCUM-land is bat sh*t crazy sometimes.

On what expertise do you base the statement that they don't? Are you an AO?

They rank rigor in every domain area, they value AP coursework. These things are usually one of the Top 3 - 4 areas focused on for admissions. But they don't care if one kid was on auto-pilot for four years with only ¿Dónde está el baño? to show for it, while another kid has spent those four years learning to read, write, and speak in the most commonly used primary language in the world, which happens to be far more complex and uses a different alphabet and complex tones? That doesn't seem logical, or sensible, for that matter. Why wouldn't they consider that, even if as part of the puzzle?

To start with because most schools don’t offer Mandarin. So, they don’t penalize kids for not taking a language that isn’t available. You have to choose off the list your school offers. And in most schools, you are looking at 2-3 Romance languages. Also, I had a kid take Mandrin as a second foreign language, get As, and have trouble counting to 100. Not all Mandrin programs are created equal. And unless you have an OPI score or get an AP score junior year, it’s hard to judge class rigor. Plus, at least in this area, most Chinese classes are filled with native speakers. And that is clearly not rigorous.

But I hope you super special Mandrin speaking snowflake gets lots of Ivy love.

Oh my goodness, what a defensive weirdo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. But if one had to rank.. Latin would be at the top

Mandarin Chinese is not only more difficult for a native English speaker to master, but pragmatically it’s not even a fair fight. Latin will come in handy when you’re planning to storm the Vatican or if you ever gain access to a time machine … for literally everything else, bet on Mandarin Chinese.

Anytime we need Mandarin, we are going to use a native speaker who speaks English, not some white American who stumbled through four years of high school Mandarin.

It’s about pursuit of a rigorous program, and frankly, a student choosing Spanish or French (assuming Chinese is also available) could be viewed as taking the easiest way out for those four years of FL coursework.

If I was looking at otherwise identical students and one completed four years of Mandarin Chinese as their FL and the other completed four years of Spanish - I mean, if you understand the fact that the former is far more complex to master, you would have to tip the scale to that side, if think.

And then as to your last point, I guess it depends on how far a student pursues native fluency. I know of students who completed a Mandarin Chinese immersion program in the K-5 period, then returned for HS (with, as another poster pointed out, a class full of classmates surrounding them who use the language daily at home, as their primary family language) and some of them are very, very, very capable of reaching effective native fluency at 17 years old, with no indication in accent or otherwise.

Whether any of these languages is relevant at all depends on the intended major. I'm really doubtful that unless you actually intend to major in foreign languages, that a college will care a lot which language you took. The committee is going to regard four years of any language as "rigorous" for the purpose of assessing your curriculum's rigor.

You may very well be right for many schools, but I can tell you from very recent firsthand knowledge (as a parent accompanying an athletic recruit minor through the pre-read process) that at least one T20 school (and really, a T3 school) completely 180'd on the previously active recruitment process b/c the highest level of STEM courses available through his school (Calculus B/C and III, Linear Algebra, Physics C) were not on his transcript at the end of 11th grade. It didn't matter that 1/2 of those courses are on his plate for his senior year, or most importantly ... that he has a very specific non-STEM academic plan that's evident in his ECs and that obviously doesn't involve CS, engineering, or math). It didn't matter. Rigor, rigor, rigor.

This might be an anomaly, but it was literally our experience three months ago.

Your assumption that this transfers to language choice is wrong. Sorry, they don’t care if you took Spanish or French or Chinese or whatever.

Again, what do you base that statement on?

Otherwise, as reader, I'm only left to conclude that you are a panicky parent trying to convince yourself it doesn't matter.

Panicky? No. Let me guess, your kid took Chinese.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. But if one had to rank.. Latin would be at the top

Mandarin Chinese is not only more difficult for a native English speaker to master, but pragmatically it’s not even a fair fight. Latin will come in handy when you’re planning to storm the Vatican or if you ever gain access to a time machine … for literally everything else, bet on Mandarin Chinese.

Anytime we need Mandarin, we are going to use a native speaker who speaks English, not some white American who stumbled through four years of high school Mandarin.

It’s about pursuit of a rigorous program, and frankly, a student choosing Spanish or French (assuming Chinese is also available) could be viewed as taking the easiest way out for those four years of FL coursework.

If I was looking at otherwise identical students and one completed four years of Mandarin Chinese as their FL and the other completed four years of Spanish - I mean, if you understand the fact that the former is far more complex to master, you would have to tip the scale to that side, if think.

And then as to your last point, I guess it depends on how far a student pursues native fluency. I know of students who completed a Mandarin Chinese immersion program in the K-5 period, then returned for HS (with, as another poster pointed out, a class full of classmates surrounding them who use the language daily at home, as their primary family language) and some of them are very, very, very capable of reaching effective native fluency at 17 years old, with no indication in accent or otherwise.

Whether any of these languages is relevant at all depends on the intended major. I'm really doubtful that unless you actually intend to major in foreign languages, that a college will care a lot which language you took. The committee is going to regard four years of any language as "rigorous" for the purpose of assessing your curriculum's rigor.

You may very well be right for many schools, but I can tell you from very recent firsthand knowledge (as a parent accompanying an athletic recruit minor through the pre-read process) that at least one T20 school (and really, a T3 school) completely 180'd on the previously active recruitment process b/c the highest level of STEM courses available through his school (Calculus B/C and III, Linear Algebra, Physics C) were not on his transcript at the end of 11th grade. It didn't matter that 1/2 of those courses are on his plate for his senior year, or most importantly ... that he has a very specific non-STEM academic plan that's evident in his ECs and that obviously doesn't involve CS, engineering, or math). It didn't matter. Rigor, rigor, rigor.

This might be an anomaly, but it was literally our experience three months ago.

Your assumption that this transfers to language choice is wrong. Sorry, they don’t care if you took Spanish or French or Chinese or whatever.

Again, what do you base that statement on?

Otherwise, as reader, I'm only left to conclude that you are a panicky parent trying to convince yourself it doesn't matter.

Panicky? No. Let me guess, your kid took Chinese.

Typically, when someone asks you a question about something you've asserted on multiple occasions, and you fail to respond to any of those questions (and then, resort to posing a question of your own), the conclusion is that you're expressing an opinion and running away from being called out on that opinion.

And no, none of my kids took Chinese - in high school, anyway.

[Anonymous]

Such a typical DCUM thread.

And here my kid took Japanese because he was interested in the culture and language, not because of some goal to impress colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. But if one had to rank.. Latin would be at the top

Mandarin Chinese is not only more difficult for a native English speaker to master, but pragmatically it’s not even a fair fight. Latin will come in handy when you’re planning to storm the Vatican or if you ever gain access to a time machine … for literally everything else, bet on Mandarin Chinese.

Anytime we need Mandarin, we are going to use a native speaker who speaks English, not some white American who stumbled through four years of high school Mandarin.

It’s about pursuit of a rigorous program, and frankly, a student choosing Spanish or French (assuming Chinese is also available) could be viewed as taking the easiest way out for those four years of FL coursework.

If I was looking at otherwise identical students and one completed four years of Mandarin Chinese as their FL and the other completed four years of Spanish - I mean, if you understand the fact that the former is far more complex to master, you would have to tip the scale to that side, if think.

And then as to your last point, I guess it depends on how far a student pursues native fluency. I know of students who completed a Mandarin Chinese immersion program in the K-5 period, then returned for HS (with, as another poster pointed out, a class full of classmates surrounding them who use the language daily at home, as their primary family language) and some of them are very, very, very capable of reaching effective native fluency at 17 years old, with no indication in accent or otherwise.

Whether any of these languages is relevant at all depends on the intended major. I'm really doubtful that unless you actually intend to major in foreign languages, that a college will care a lot which language you took. The committee is going to regard four years of any language as "rigorous" for the purpose of assessing your curriculum's rigor.

You may very well be right for many schools, but I can tell you from very recent firsthand knowledge (as a parent accompanying an athletic recruit minor through the pre-read process) that at least one T20 school (and really, a T3 school) completely 180'd on the previously active recruitment process b/c the highest level of STEM courses available through his school (Calculus B/C and III, Linear Algebra, Physics C) were not on his transcript at the end of 11th grade. It didn't matter that 1/2 of those courses are on his plate for his senior year, or most importantly ... that he has a very specific non-STEM academic plan that's evident in his ECs and that obviously doesn't involve CS, engineering, or math). It didn't matter. Rigor, rigor, rigor.

This might be an anomaly, but it was literally our experience three months ago.

"You didn't take the highest level STEM course" is very different from "you took four years of Spanish instead of Chinese". Your kid was not going to get down-checked for having taken the "wrong" language, but having taken less demanding math and science (when they are available) is another thing entirely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. But if one had to rank.. Latin would be at the top

Mandarin Chinese is not only more difficult for a native English speaker to master, but pragmatically it’s not even a fair fight. Latin will come in handy when you’re planning to storm the Vatican or if you ever gain access to a time machine … for literally everything else, bet on Mandarin Chinese.

Anytime we need Mandarin, we are going to use a native speaker who speaks English, not some white American who stumbled through four years of high school Mandarin.

It’s about pursuit of a rigorous program, and frankly, a student choosing Spanish or French (assuming Chinese is also available) could be viewed as taking the easiest way out for those four years of FL coursework.

If I was looking at otherwise identical students and one completed four years of Mandarin Chinese as their FL and the other completed four years of Spanish - I mean, if you understand the fact that the former is far more complex to master, you would have to tip the scale to that side, if think.

And then as to your last point, I guess it depends on how far a student pursues native fluency. I know of students who completed a Mandarin Chinese immersion program in the K-5 period, then returned for HS (with, as another poster pointed out, a class full of classmates surrounding them who use the language daily at home, as their primary family language) and some of them are very, very, very capable of reaching effective native fluency at 17 years old, with no indication in accent or otherwise.

Whether any of these languages is relevant at all depends on the intended major. I'm really doubtful that unless you actually intend to major in foreign languages, that a college will care a lot which language you took. The committee is going to regard four years of any language as "rigorous" for the purpose of assessing your curriculum's rigor.

You may very well be right for many schools, but I can tell you from very recent firsthand knowledge (as a parent accompanying an athletic recruit minor through the pre-read process) that at least one T20 school (and really, a T3 school) completely 180'd on the previously active recruitment process b/c the highest level of STEM courses available through his school (Calculus B/C and III, Linear Algebra, Physics C) were not on his transcript at the end of 11th grade. It didn't matter that 1/2 of those courses are on his plate for his senior year, or most importantly ... that he has a very specific non-STEM academic plan that's evident in his ECs and that obviously doesn't involve CS, engineering, or math). It didn't matter. Rigor, rigor, rigor.

This might be an anomaly, but it was literally our experience three months ago.

Your assumption that this transfers to language choice is wrong. Sorry, they don’t care if you took Spanish or French or Chinese or whatever.

Again, what do you base that statement on?

Otherwise, as reader, I'm only left to conclude that you are a panicky parent trying to convince yourself it doesn't matter.

And what do you base your statement that they do care what language they took on?

If you're the PP with the kid who didn't get recruited, that doesn't support your case at all. You didn't even mention foreign language at all in your single kid sample size anecdote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Learn Spanish (at least first) to show you have a desire to be able to communicate more easily with a huge part of our population.

And to show you are an ally to BIPOC/ lower SES folks.

[Anonymous]

Mine took Latin and Arabic (and had already taken Spanish from age 2 through middle school). Did not seem to make a difference compared to classmates who took different/fewer languages. So, no I don't think it matters for admission, but it is still useful in his studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Such a typical DCUM thread.

And here my kid took Japanese because he was interested in the culture and language, not because of some goal to impress colleges.

In the 1980s, Japanese language used to be highly sought after, just like the Chinese is now. But after Japan's economy tanked, learning Japanese is not very popular. This will likely occur with the Chinese language. But if you enjoy the culture, etc. go for it.

We are very fortunate that we speak English, because everyone needs to know it these days. Ironically, it's modern day lingua franca.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. But if one had to rank.. Latin would be at the top

Mandarin Chinese is not only more difficult for a native English speaker to master, but pragmatically it’s not even a fair fight. Latin will come in handy when you’re planning to storm the Vatican or if you ever gain access to a time machine … for literally everything else, bet on Mandarin Chinese.

Anytime we need Mandarin, we are going to use a native speaker who speaks English, not some white American who stumbled through four years of high school Mandarin.

It’s about pursuit of a rigorous program, and frankly, a student choosing Spanish or French (assuming Chinese is also available) could be viewed as taking the easiest way out for those four years of FL coursework.

If I was looking at otherwise identical students and one completed four years of Mandarin Chinese as their FL and the other completed four years of Spanish - I mean, if you understand the fact that the former is far more complex to master, you would have to tip the scale to that side, if think.

And then as to your last point, I guess it depends on how far a student pursues native fluency. I know of students who completed a Mandarin Chinese immersion program in the K-5 period, then returned for HS (with, as another poster pointed out, a class full of classmates surrounding them who use the language daily at home, as their primary family language) and some of them are very, very, very capable of reaching effective native fluency at 17 years old, with no indication in accent or otherwise.

Whether any of these languages is relevant at all depends on the intended major. I'm really doubtful that unless you actually intend to major in foreign languages, that a college will care a lot which language you took. The committee is going to regard four years of any language as "rigorous" for the purpose of assessing your curriculum's rigor.

You may very well be right for many schools, but I can tell you from very recent firsthand knowledge (as a parent accompanying an athletic recruit minor through the pre-read process) that at least one T20 school (and really, a T3 school) completely 180'd on the previously active recruitment process b/c the highest level of STEM courses available through his school (Calculus B/C and III, Linear Algebra, Physics C) were not on his transcript at the end of 11th grade. It didn't matter that 1/2 of those courses are on his plate for his senior year, or most importantly ... that he has a very specific non-STEM academic plan that's evident in his ECs and that obviously doesn't involve CS, engineering, or math). It didn't matter. Rigor, rigor, rigor.

This might be an anomaly, but it was literally our experience three months ago.

Your assumption that this transfers to language choice is wrong. Sorry, they don’t care if you took Spanish or French or Chinese or whatever.

Again, what do you base that statement on?

Otherwise, as reader, I'm only left to conclude that you are a panicky parent trying to convince yourself it doesn't matter.

And what do you base your statement that they do care what language they took on?

If you're the PP with the kid who didn't get recruited, that doesn't support your case at all. You didn't even mention foreign language at all in your single kid sample size anecdote.

You refuse to answer the question of how you know they DON'T take FL choice into consideration, but instead ask me to defend a statement I never made?

Nobody in this thread, including me, has made a statement that the AOs or admissions process DO take the FL selection into consideration. The furthest I've gone is in asserting that they should, based on the unifying theme of academic rigor.

Now that we're past those pleasantries, how about you share with everyone how you know they DON'T (since you HAVE asserted that they don't care)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It absolutely should matter. Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and Korean, are substantially more challenging to native English speakers than languages like Spanish, French, etc.

That said, it probably isn’t taken into consideration much, if at all.

Most of the kids in Chinese and Japanese at our school speak this at home so for a non-native it's extra challenging.

I agree about the Chinese, but not Japanese. In our school district, there are tons of first gen Chinese families, and it is spoken at home. But hardly have any Japanese families. Their numbers are miniscule. There are more non-Japanese kids studying the language; typically white kids and other Japanophiles who like the culture, anime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. But if one had to rank.. Latin would be at the top

Mandarin Chinese is not only more difficult for a native English speaker to master, but pragmatically it’s not even a fair fight. Latin will come in handy when you’re planning to storm the Vatican or if you ever gain access to a time machine … for literally everything else, bet on Mandarin Chinese.

Anytime we need Mandarin, we are going to use a native speaker who speaks English, not some white American who stumbled through four years of high school Mandarin.

It’s about pursuit of a rigorous program, and frankly, a student choosing Spanish or French (assuming Chinese is also available) could be viewed as taking the easiest way out for those four years of FL coursework.

If I was looking at otherwise identical students and one completed four years of Mandarin Chinese as their FL and the other completed four years of Spanish - I mean, if you understand the fact that the former is far more complex to master, you would have to tip the scale to that side, if think.

And then as to your last point, I guess it depends on how far a student pursues native fluency. I know of students who completed a Mandarin Chinese immersion program in the K-5 period, then returned for HS (with, as another poster pointed out, a class full of classmates surrounding them who use the language daily at home, as their primary family language) and some of them are very, very, very capable of reaching effective native fluency at 17 years old, with no indication in accent or otherwise.

Your speculation is incorrect. Colleges do not rank languages on a scale of rigorous and non-rigorous. It doesn’t matter what language you take. DCUM-land is bat sh*t crazy sometimes.

On what expertise do you base the statement that they don't? Are you an AO?

They rank rigor in every domain area, they value AP coursework. These things are usually one of the Top 3 - 4 areas focused on for admissions. But they don't care if one kid was on auto-pilot for four years with only ¿Dónde está el baño? to show for it, while another kid has spent those four years learning to read, write, and speak in the most commonly used primary language in the world, which happens to be far more complex and uses a different alphabet and complex tones? That doesn't seem logical, or sensible, for that matter. Why wouldn't they consider that, even if as part of the puzzle?

To start with because most schools don’t offer Mandarin. So, they don’t penalize kids for not taking a language that isn’t available. You have to choose off the list your school offers. And in most schools, you are looking at 2-3 Romance languages. Also, I had a kid take Mandrin as a second foreign language, get As, and have trouble counting to 100. Not all Mandrin programs are created equal. And unless you have an OPI score or get an AP score junior year, it’s hard to judge class rigor. Plus, at least in this area, most Chinese classes are filled with native speakers. And that is clearly not rigorous.

But I hope you super special Mandrin speaking snowflake gets lots of Ivy love.

How would native speakers in any FL class make it less rigorous?

I would think the instructor would expect more of everyone, that any curve in the class would be blown out of the water by the native speakers, that the pace of the class would move much more rapidly, that minor pronunciation or written mistakes would be dinged more frequently by virtue of their infrequency, etc.

How is that less rigorous?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. But if one had to rank.. Latin would be at the top

Mandarin Chinese is not only more difficult for a native English speaker to master, but pragmatically it’s not even a fair fight. Latin will come in handy when you’re planning to storm the Vatican or if you ever gain access to a time machine … for literally everything else, bet on Mandarin Chinese.

Anytime we need Mandarin, we are going to use a native speaker who speaks English, not some white American who stumbled through four years of high school Mandarin.

It’s about pursuit of a rigorous program, and frankly, a student choosing Spanish or French (assuming Chinese is also available) could be viewed as taking the easiest way out for those four years of FL coursework.

If I was looking at otherwise identical students and one completed four years of Mandarin Chinese as their FL and the other completed four years of Spanish - I mean, if you understand the fact that the former is far more complex to master, you would have to tip the scale to that side, if think.

And then as to your last point, I guess it depends on how far a student pursues native fluency. I know of students who completed a Mandarin Chinese immersion program in the K-5 period, then returned for HS (with, as another poster pointed out, a class full of classmates surrounding them who use the language daily at home, as their primary family language) and some of them are very, very, very capable of reaching effective native fluency at 17 years old, with no indication in accent or otherwise.

Whether any of these languages is relevant at all depends on the intended major. I'm really doubtful that unless you actually intend to major in foreign languages, that a college will care a lot which language you took. The committee is going to regard four years of any language as "rigorous" for the purpose of assessing your curriculum's rigor.

You may very well be right for many schools, but I can tell you from very recent firsthand knowledge (as a parent accompanying an athletic recruit minor through the pre-read process) that at least one T20 school (and really, a T3 school) completely 180'd on the previously active recruitment process b/c the highest level of STEM courses available through his school (Calculus B/C and III, Linear Algebra, Physics C) were not on his transcript at the end of 11th grade. It didn't matter that 1/2 of those courses are on his plate for his senior year, or most importantly ... that he has a very specific non-STEM academic plan that's evident in his ECs and that obviously doesn't involve CS, engineering, or math). It didn't matter. Rigor, rigor, rigor.

This might be an anomaly, but it was literally our experience three months ago.

Your assumption that this transfers to language choice is wrong. Sorry, they don’t care if you took Spanish or French or Chinese or whatever.

Again, what do you base that statement on?

Otherwise, as reader, I'm only left to conclude that you are a panicky parent trying to convince yourself it doesn't matter.

And what do you base your statement that they do care what language they took on?

If you're the PP with the kid who didn't get recruited, that doesn't support your case at all. You didn't even mention foreign language at all in your single kid sample size anecdote.

You refuse to answer the question of how you know they DON'T take FL choice into consideration, but instead ask me to defend a statement I never made?

Nobody in this thread, including me, has made a statement that the AOs or admissions process DO take the FL selection into consideration. The furthest I've gone is in asserting that they should, based on the unifying theme of academic rigor.

Now that we're past those pleasantries, how about you share with everyone how you know they DON'T (since you HAVE asserted that they don't care)?
[/quo

"You refuse to answer the question of how you know they DON'T take FL choice into consideration" - you're asking me to prove a negative? So you're a r3t@rd.

"Nobody in this thread, including me, has made a statement that the AOs or admissions process DO take the FL selection into consideration." - Were you the one who was yammering about "rigor rigor rigor" and a kid getting rejected for insufficiently rigorous STEM courses? That comment was in response to a post that colleges don't regard some languages as more rigorous than others. Either you intended that response to indicate that top school AOs do take "language selection rigor" into consideration, and now you're trying to walk it back, or you deliberately posted irrelevant nonsense and you're still trying to confuse the issue. Basically you should just go away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. But if one had to rank.. Latin would be at the top

Mandarin Chinese is not only more difficult for a native English speaker to master, but pragmatically it’s not even a fair fight. Latin will come in handy when you’re planning to storm the Vatican or if you ever gain access to a time machine … for literally everything else, bet on Mandarin Chinese.

Anytime we need Mandarin, we are going to use a native speaker who speaks English, not some white American who stumbled through four years of high school Mandarin.

It’s about pursuit of a rigorous program, and frankly, a student choosing Spanish or French (assuming Chinese is also available) could be viewed as taking the easiest way out for those four years of FL coursework.

If I was looking at otherwise identical students and one completed four years of Mandarin Chinese as their FL and the other completed four years of Spanish - I mean, if you understand the fact that the former is far more complex to master, you would have to tip the scale to that side, if think.

And then as to your last point, I guess it depends on how far a student pursues native fluency. I know of students who completed a Mandarin Chinese immersion program in the K-5 period, then returned for HS (with, as another poster pointed out, a class full of classmates surrounding them who use the language daily at home, as their primary family language) and some of them are very, very, very capable of reaching effective native fluency at 17 years old, with no indication in accent or otherwise.

Whether any of these languages is relevant at all depends on the intended major. I'm really doubtful that unless you actually intend to major in foreign languages, that a college will care a lot which language you took. The committee is going to regard four years of any language as "rigorous" for the purpose of assessing your curriculum's rigor.

You may very well be right for many schools, but I can tell you from very recent firsthand knowledge (as a parent accompanying an athletic recruit minor through the pre-read process) that at least one T20 school (and really, a T3 school) completely 180'd on the previously active recruitment process b/c the highest level of STEM courses available through his school (Calculus B/C and III, Linear Algebra, Physics C) were not on his transcript at the end of 11th grade. It didn't matter that 1/2 of those courses are on his plate for his senior year, or most importantly ... that he has a very specific non-STEM academic plan that's evident in his ECs and that obviously doesn't involve CS, engineering, or math). It didn't matter. Rigor, rigor, rigor.

This might be an anomaly, but it was literally our experience three months ago.

Your assumption that this transfers to language choice is wrong. Sorry, they don’t care if you took Spanish or French or Chinese or whatever.

Again, what do you base that statement on?

Otherwise, as reader, I'm only left to conclude that you are a panicky parent trying to convince yourself it doesn't matter.

And what do you base your statement that they do care what language they took on?

If you're the PP with the kid who didn't get recruited, that doesn't support your case at all. You didn't even mention foreign language at all in your single kid sample size anecdote.

You refuse to answer the question of how you know they DON'T take FL choice into consideration, but instead ask me to defend a statement I never made?

Nobody in this thread, including me, has made a statement that the AOs or admissions process DO take the FL selection into consideration. The furthest I've gone is in asserting that they should, based on the unifying theme of academic rigor.

Now that we're past those pleasantries, how about you share with everyone how you know they DON'T (since you HAVE asserted that they don't care)?
[/quo

"You refuse to answer the question of how you know they DON'T take FL choice into consideration" - you're asking me to prove a negative? So you're a r3t@rd.

"Nobody in this thread, including me, has made a statement that the AOs or admissions process DO take the FL selection into consideration." - Were you the one who was yammering about "rigor rigor rigor" and a kid getting rejected for insufficiently rigorous STEM courses? That comment was in response to a post that colleges don't regard some languages as more rigorous than others. Either you intended that response to indicate that top school AOs do take "language selection rigor" into consideration, and now you're trying to walk it back, or you deliberately posted irrelevant nonsense and you're still trying to confuse the issue. Basically you should just go away.

You could have proved they DON'T take FL choice into consideration by responding with:

"I'm currently an AO at a major university, and we don't consider the FL selection on a scale - it's just a binary consideration. Met or unmet."

or

"My DC asked the admissions counselor from Dartmouth who visited their school if FL choice matters, and they definitively said that it doesn't matter to them"

or

I saw on the University of Michigan website something that addressed the issue - it stated that they don't care what FL is chosen, as long as it's four years."

or

on and on and on ...

Nobody was asking you to prove a negative. You were asked to back up what you said, or reveal yourself for the crass liar you are.

Mission accomplished. Although, in fairness, the expectation provably wasn't that you would go 2-for-2.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. But if one had to rank.. Latin would be at the top

Mandarin Chinese is not only more difficult for a native English speaker to master, but pragmatically it’s not even a fair fight. Latin will come in handy when you’re planning to storm the Vatican or if you ever gain access to a time machine … for literally everything else, bet on Mandarin Chinese.

Anytime we need Mandarin, we are going to use a native speaker who speaks English, not some white American who stumbled through four years of high school Mandarin.

It’s about pursuit of a rigorous program, and frankly, a student choosing Spanish or French (assuming Chinese is also available) could be viewed as taking the easiest way out for those four years of FL coursework.

If I was looking at otherwise identical students and one completed four years of Mandarin Chinese as their FL and the other completed four years of Spanish - I mean, if you understand the fact that the former is far more complex to master, you would have to tip the scale to that side, if think.

And then as to your last point, I guess it depends on how far a student pursues native fluency. I know of students who completed a Mandarin Chinese immersion program in the K-5 period, then returned for HS (with, as another poster pointed out, a class full of classmates surrounding them who use the language daily at home, as their primary family language) and some of them are very, very, very capable of reaching effective native fluency at 17 years old, with no indication in accent or otherwise.

Whether any of these languages is relevant at all depends on the intended major. I'm really doubtful that unless you actually intend to major in foreign languages, that a college will care a lot which language you took. The committee is going to regard four years of any language as "rigorous" for the purpose of assessing your curriculum's rigor.

You may very well be right for many schools, but I can tell you from very recent firsthand knowledge (as a parent accompanying an athletic recruit minor through the pre-read process) that at least one T20 school (and really, a T3 school) completely 180'd on the previously active recruitment process b/c the highest level of STEM courses available through his school (Calculus B/C and III, Linear Algebra, Physics C) were not on his transcript at the end of 11th grade. It didn't matter that 1/2 of those courses are on his plate for his senior year, or most importantly ... that he has a very specific non-STEM academic plan that's evident in his ECs and that obviously doesn't involve CS, engineering, or math). It didn't matter. Rigor, rigor, rigor.

This might be an anomaly, but it was literally our experience three months ago.

Your assumption that this transfers to language choice is wrong. Sorry, they don’t care if you took Spanish or French or Chinese or whatever.

Again, what do you base that statement on?

Otherwise, as reader, I'm only left to conclude that you are a panicky parent trying to convince yourself it doesn't matter.

And what do you base your statement that they do care what language they took on?

If you're the PP with the kid who didn't get recruited, that doesn't support your case at all. You didn't even mention foreign language at all in your single kid sample size anecdote.

You refuse to answer the question of how you know they DON'T take FL choice into consideration, but instead ask me to defend a statement I never made?

Nobody in this thread, including me, has made a statement that the AOs or admissions process DO take the FL selection into consideration. The furthest I've gone is in asserting that they should, based on the unifying theme of academic rigor.

Now that we're past those pleasantries, how about you share with everyone how you know they DON'T (since you HAVE asserted that they don't care)?
[/quo

"You refuse to answer the question of how you know they DON'T take FL choice into consideration" - you're asking me to prove a negative? So you're a r3t@rd.

"Nobody in this thread, including me, has made a statement that the AOs or admissions process DO take the FL selection into consideration." - Were you the one who was yammering about "rigor rigor rigor" and a kid getting rejected for insufficiently rigorous STEM courses? That comment was in response to a post that colleges don't regard some languages as more rigorous than others. Either you intended that response to indicate that top school AOs do take "language selection rigor" into consideration, and now you're trying to walk it back, or you deliberately posted irrelevant nonsense and you're still trying to confuse the issue. Basically you should just go away.

For the avoidance of doubt, since you seem to require remedial guidance on this one ...

I KNOW that the UC system does NOT consider test scores now that they have shifted to test blind mode. I KNOW THAT.

ACT & SAT: UC will not consider SAT or ACT test scores when making admissions decisions or awarding scholarships. They may be used as an alternative method of fulfilling minimum requirements for eligibility or for course placement after you enroll. Note: SAT and ACT scores may only be reported in your application post-submission.

Quoted from: https://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/how-to-apply/applying-as-a-freshman/filling-out-the-application.html

and

Supported by the CDS for all UC schools.

---

Did I just prove a negative?