I've read a number of weightier articles about college and the admissions process recently, and the ideas they express have stuck with me. The first "Why Are American Colleges Obsessed with Leadership?" got me thinking about those qualities that are hard to measure - things like leadership and concern for others. I've always disliked having to evaluate a student's sense of humor (although I did just read a junior's questionnaire that had me laughing out loud!).
Is a student a leader simply because she's the president of a club? Does she have good leadership skills because she was elected to the student council? Almost every teacher/club sponsor has worked with a student who, although she holds the top spot in an organization, doesn't do a very good job of leading it, and yet on a college application, she appears to be one of those coveted "leaders." The comments that follow this article also offer some food for thought: how do we judge "meaningful" leadership, or do we often evaluate it in a "by the numbers" sort of way? Is leadership being elected to a post or standing up in front of others and just telling them what to do? Perhaps we should give more consideration to the student who can collaborate and work with others to investigate problems, brainstorm solutions, and find solutions.
The second article - Do Rigid College Admissions Leave Room for Creative Thinkers? - is a complement to the first, I believe, because it allows that some very important qualities may be harder to measure in the traditional sense.
No comments:
Post a Comment