Anonymous wrote:Another way to look at it is that colleges want students who are independent critical thinkers. If your child is heavily involved in an activity but you can’t find any way to spin that into an example of leadership, then they’re probably doing little more than simply showing up and doing what they’re told. It’s your child is truly engaged/invested in an activity, surely at some point they’ve thought to themselves that X might be a better way to do something, or Y could be a great addition to what they’re already doing. If your child isn’t even doing that, what are they going to contribute to the college community other than filling a seat?
The problem with this argument is that it doesn't align with what we know about how
People make scientific and intellectual progress. There are
Reasons why someone could be a math prodigy at
Age 10 but not a great legal scholar. In some disciplines people
Do their best work in their 50s so there is no reason to expect
Everyone to speak at age 17 or 18 or 19. It would be like the
Army looking at 17 year old recruits and saying who is
Likely to become a general. You would get some of it right
But a lot of it wrong.