|
In France, there is an interesting system (which also has its flaws) to get into high-ranked "colleges" (they're not actually colleges, they're called "Grandes Ecoles" which you would, I guess, translate as "Great Schools".
Contrary to the american way, they are not much research-focused, they really are schools. Of course they have evolved and some of them offer good research opportunities, but that's more the exception than the general rule.
You can get into some of them right after high school, by sending an application, very similar to your system.
However, the top-ranked ones require you to spend the equivalent of your two undergrad years in prep school - well that would be quite a dumb translation as it's very different from prep school in the US (see wiki) so I'll use the term CPGE to avoid any confusion.
Basically you do a first selection right after high school, but primarily based on academical performance during high school (very few, if any, bypass for sob stories and/or athletes. For most CPGEs it's an algorithm that takes your grades and ranks you against everyone else to make a selection.
The interesting part comes next : you spend 2 or 3 years in CPGE, with a big national contest at the end of the 2nd year (technically, there are several of them, but they are all in the same timeframe). If you do well on the written contest, you're selected for oral tests, and you get a final rank, which gives you schools where you are allowed to apply. If you're not satisfied with what you got, you can try again, once (that's why you can spend 3 years in CPGE sometimes).
The interesting point about all of this is that, for the most part, your admissions are deterministic and centralized : if you get good grades, you're in, if you don't, try again (at most once). The bad point is that if you fuck up on contest day, you're done.
|
(This is directed at the OP)
Affirmative action is complete trash, I agree with you.
It is literally harmful to everyone involved.
In case OP ( or anyone else) wants to learn more about it / have material to beat down people who support it, I wrote a speech on it (obv not anything MLK level, but it's a nice compilation of evidence at the least). I can pastebin it if anyone wants it, just PM.
That being said, the people in my school who got into the Ivies and stuff, I can see why they got in. All of us had > 4.5 GPA and > 2350 SAT, but the guys who were at the top of our class were really amazing. I can't really say they got into the places they did (MIT, princeton, harvard, stanford, yale, etc) because of unfairness in the process.
|
-there are a lot of reasons to admit athletes, competitive drive, commitment to self improvement, etc. but my favorite is that athletes are better looking. no one wants an ugly student body.
-SAT tests, AP classes/tests, the ACT, etc. are all way easier than actual college classes, even at non-Ivies.
-other countries have much harder admissions tests, so they can actually use those as a basis for who should attend top colleges.
-the hypothetical white upper-middle class suburban kid from public school who gets into harvard ahead of the exeter kid and studies econ will not change the world, but will make a lot of money and send his kid to exeter.
|
Harvard is pretty garb for undergrad anyway.
|
Make a philosophical argument and say that you weren't lucky enough to be born to parents who went to Harvard, thus giving you no chance at legacy admission, and say that justice has to prevail! Go check out Michael Sandel's Harvard lecture on affirmative action on YouTube.
Life is just unfair I guess, and we have to make do with what we've got in the end. The admission system in the US sounds very harsh to me, and I'd probably have the same objections as you if I were put in your place. Here in South Africa admission still depends on your race and gender, but it isn't all that hard to get admitted into a decent university (granted, we only have a select few true universities, which are all up to standard). The university I'm currently studying at is the Univeristy of KwaZulu-Natal, and all they asked of me were my grades at the end of my final year at high school. That's it. I received my letter of acceptance around early January and off I went.
|
Think of it this way: What do YOU have to offer to an university?
See, thats the difference.
In my country Universities have only two purposes.
First is to teach science to students and the second is to perform science with their staff mostly.
I dont have to offer anything except willingness to learn.
|
On October 15 2013 15:05 opsayo wrote:
the lesson you should be learning is two-fold
you're not a special snowflake
and life's not fair
Sorry OP, but this is the truth.
Play the hand you're dealt as best as you can. You'll be a lot happier not worrying about the injustices in the world.
|
Yeah, it honestly seemed pretty bad to me too over there, sorry for you man.
Thank god it's not like this in France.
You're better, you're in, and it's free (I even got paid for it :D). That's it :D
After your education's done, it's not all that bright though :/
there are a lot of reasons to admit athletes, competitive drive, commitment to self improvement, etc. but my favorite is that athletes are better looking. no one wants an ugly student body
Gotta admit this makes me smile. This all seems so foreign.
|
Someone should put the discussion thread up early this year 
|
On October 15 2013 14:40 Loser777 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2013 13:28 Chocolate wrote:On October 15 2013 13:09 Loser777 wrote:Haha, if only college admissions were that predictable. Come spring, you'll find that while the things you mentioned correlate well with admissions prospects, none of them matter past a certain point. I had friends with a higher GPA, higher SAT get into place I didn't. I had friends with a lower GPA, lower SAT get into places I didn't. I got into places that someone with a higher GPA, higher SAT didn't. Or mix and match any one of the parameters you mentioned. College admissions predictions are filled with people overfitting a small sample size. But of course, I pay tribute to the obligatory dick waving contest: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=204700¤tpage=4#75(also was a National Merit Finalist) damn dude it's scary that you didn't even get into UCB. I'm not applying to the UCs since they are really pricey for non residents, but still. Tbh tho I don't think NMF is such a big deal since 15k get it every year. But it's still really shocking to me that an STS semifinalist was denied from some UCs. Did you end up going to UCLA? On October 15 2013 13:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 15 2013 12:21 Chocolate wrote:On October 15 2013 12:05 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:to show that you also know what the fuck a parametric equation is Made me smile Yes, school admissions is annoying, and perhaps unfair if it favors some groups of people. But most of the other stuff you ranted about (which is typical for a junior/ senior in high school, don't get me wrong), stems from the competition that other students and families create, not just because the schools have stupid rules or are too strict. Every school wants the best and brightest; every school wants diversity and variety. Because why would they want to settle if they don't have to? The only advice I can give you is to focus on what a school can offer you, and attend a university that will help you take that next step towards becoming an adult. You can party at any university, but not every Top 50 university has the best material for you. You may not even want to go to Harvard. I think no school on this planet would have to settle to admit me, which is actually really scary when put in the context that I am less likely than not to be admitted to any of the "best" universities in the US. And I understand what you're saying when it comes it what is basically fit, but since I tedn to be sort of dismissive of a lot of people, definitely a personal fault of mine, I'd like to go somewhere where I'd have less of a reason to be dismissive of the average person, if that makes sense. But it certainly would not be the end of the world to go to my state school. I actually do think that MIT has probably the best material for me but I will never know for sure since I will not be a student at every university in the United States. Out of curiosity: 1. What do you want to study/ what's your ideal future profession? 2. What are your grades/ scores/ stats like (as far as your college applications go)? 3. What makes you good/ unique enough to attend any top tier school (besides great grades, scores, and stats, assuming you have them)? 1 I can't decide between CS, EE, or chemistry. If I study EE or CS I'd probably get a masters and then start working in the private sector, maybe once I figure things out try to start my own thing in CS since that's the hot thing to do. If I study chem I might try to get a phd. I've read the post and thread about PhDs and I can honestly say that, from what I know so far about it, chemistry interests me enough that I do get of kind of an itch for it. I suppose I don't NEED a super selective school for any of this but I might not want an MS in CS and I'd also like to be around smart people and smart girls  2 pretty good. I'll spoiler them, shhhh + Show Spoiler +4.0 unweighted GPA w 12 Ap classes (some my senior year), 36 ACT, 800Math2, 800 USHist, 780 Chem I'm not really weak in ECs or awards but at the same time I am not unique enough to really standout in my estimation 3 If I write too much here it'll give me away probably. But I do stuff outside of school that is cool and I'm pretty internally motivated. My parents actually want me to go to the local catholic university. I wish I could say I was doing Intel STS but my project fell through so I can write about research but I won't have an award per se. Intel STS is hyped up way more than what it is. Here's the thing. STS results come out in January, past the application deadline for pretty much every school. For schools where something like that could have made a difference for me (UCs), it did jack shit because UCs don't consider anything after November 30th. To make it matter for privates, there better be some awesome follow-up in your mid-year report about how amazing your project was in addition to you getting the prize for it to be more than a drop in the bucket. Your stats put you in the running everywhere--and that's what's important. Stressing over the details is useless. Focus on writing great essays. What I really regret is perhaps not aiming higher. I applied to so many safety schools that I probably would never attend (it's easy to transfer in California from a CC) that I didn't really explore all my potential options. In the end, wherever you end up, you'll probably find that you're surrounded by under-qualified people. And yeah, I'm at UCLA. Hoping to go somewhere else for grad school though.
Nothing wrong with UCLA bro.
BTW, on a positive note, there have been studies shown that given the same level of talent, attending an "elite" school vs an "average" school makes no statistically measurable difference in lifetime earnings.
To the OP, I get it. Affirmative action works against you. You feel the need to outdo your friends and realize the expectation of your parents. At the end of the day if you really want to make a difference in the world, it's irrelevant where you go for undergrad.
|
On October 15 2013 16:09 chairmobile wrote:
(This is directed at the OP)
Affirmative action is complete trash, I agree with you.
It is literally harmful to everyone involved.
In case OP ( or anyone else) wants to learn more about it / have material to beat down people who support it, I wrote a speech on it (obv not anything MLK level, but it's a nice compilation of evidence at the least). I can pastebin it if anyone wants it, just PM.
That being said, the people in my school who got into the Ivies and stuff, I can see why they got in. All of us had > 4.5 GPA and > 2350 SAT, but the guys who were at the top of our class were really amazing. I can't really say they got into the places they did (MIT, princeton, harvard, stanford, yale, etc) because of unfairness in the process.
Depends on the type of affirmative action. I agree that the current system's a wash though.
There were a lot of great students at my school who got into great places, then some mediocre students who got into great places, and then some some great students who didn't get into great places. It did seem like kind of a crapshoot to me, results all across the board. No glaring example of affirmative action really affecting much though.
|
College "rankings" are all bullshit anyway. Especially for undergrad, it truly doesn't matter where you go as long as you get the degree you want and talk to people (who will get you in the door and connected with people in your field). Where you go for postgrad depends on your field and interests; if you're looking to do a job you actually like and want to do, its better to go to the college/university where you'll get the training you want and with a supervisor who has an interest in your research area rather than going for a prestigious school but with a supervisor who doesn't give a shit about you or your research.
People will get you opportunities and jobs, the bit of paper is just to show proficiency (and not even a very good way of doing so, at that). And if you're slogging your way through a Masters or doctorate, a good supervisor is worth far more than the name on a bit of paper.
|
Nice statistics there champ
Maybe you don't get in colleges because you make grand statements without backing them up
|
for real you sound like a spoiled white kid who has never had any adversity in their life
if this is the most "unfair" thing that you ever go through in your life
you are a fucking lucky individual
|
On October 15 2013 22:59 cam connor wrote:
for real you sound like a spoiled white kid who has never had any adversity in their life
if this is the most "unfair" thing that you ever go through in your life
you are a fucking lucky individual
Are you talking about OP? Because if I had to guess my money is on him being Asian...
|
Hrmm, I'm just a few years out, but I'll say one of the benefits of a little more age is a chance to reflect on the "system" of admissions when you're not actively involved in trying to get into a good college.
For everything, there is a System. Admissions is no different. The problem is the "How?" of the system, especially for top schools, is really quite hard to understand. It's rarely possible to get good insight into the functionality of it, actually. This is why "legacy admits" would have an advantage in the first place, regardless of a preference to them. (Of course, if you're a half Asian, half Jewish guy, you're probably just screwed anyway for top schools; that's the 3 worst application categories mashed together.)
The other problem, and this is something you're a few years from finding out: the top 50 undergrad schools are pretty indistinguishable. Yes, I know parents (and you) want to make it into a top-flight College, but the situation has changed, especially at most of the Ivies. The Graduate schools are where the names matter now. A top 50 college or university, with a supremely high GPA & awards, will serve you far better than getting a "Degree of Incredibly Questionable GPA" at Harvard. That's what Grade Inflation has done.
The next problem is that most students create a "College Application" with all of their activities. That's mostly a waste. It's just a document that attempts to sum up your current potential, which is why "lesser" students come across "better" than others. It's all in how you Sell the application & categories they fit you into. Which puts you in a place of building an application towards something that, truly, doesn't exist. You aren't building your application to a School but an Ideal. That trips up a lot of people.
Then there's the other issue with Mass Applying: do you know if you even like the school? This is likely to be the 2nd most costly purchase you'll EVER make in life. Do some research & get to know the schools. You might get into an Ivy League school, but what happens when you find out you hate the campus? Of course you're just going to absorb the problems and keep going. And probably kill your Liver in the process of college.
My brother & I both had a much more enjoyable application experience by doing the work over our Freshmen & Sophomore years to narrow down the schools we wanted to attend. He went to a top Engineering school (he makes 6-figure as Engineer for a major company) and I went to a top 20 private college, but we both really wanted to be *at* those schools. That served us both much better than getting into the "best" school we could.
Then there's the problem of "hoop jumping". You're very good at that. Be proud! But realize those hoops are mostly worthless to you after you hit the real world. What "skills" have you built? How well do you interact with people? Can you hold a room? Do you know how to manage your own finances (and budget!) really well? How's your time management? Do you have backup plans in the case that something blows up in life? (I.e. 150k for Law School is rarely a wise idea) You'll get much further, in any career, if you can interact with people better than someone of similar technical ability. (It's still merit, it's just that people then associate your merit positively)
I wish you good luck in your college applications, but realize that once you're "in the door", everything else is different. So just accept it as a hoop to jump through and make the most of the opportunities you have.
(Side-bar: The Olympiad Testing still makes me face palm, especially the Mathematics one. If you're capable of doing well in the testing, you're more than capable to already be taking college-credited classes. I was actually ineligible by the time I was 16, which really surprised me the first time I heard about it. If you can handle the Math, just go take the college classes. It's far more valuable.)
|
Likewise, don't go to hte best school you get into for just that reason. Visit and seriously consider if you want to be there.
Also, it's undergrad, it's not too important. I know a girl who went to a school which is barely top 200 in USA and she's going to LSE for PhD work. Nobody cares she went to Sonoma state now.
|
If I could design a system of deserving, it would center around people who are do well in the best case scenario. An example might be lots of hard tests, only count the highest. The current system looks for dedication and consistency, but intelligence past a certain point gives diminishing returns. I get why it's like that. People who are more consistent will have more integrity and stability as a group. It also seems fair to most people; deserving is based on work. Not to me though. It is true that under my system I would do better than under the current system, I should add. This being my reaction to what you say.
So: Yes, it is unfair, and no that is not to be expected. You do have a genuine grievance here, but you appreciate the system excluding the exceptions and I cannot relate.
Good luck
|
Don't get your hopes up. I went through this exact same shit last year; I applied to 13 schools, including Harvard, Cornell, etc.
I thought I had the "full package," pretty good athlete, very good academics, ECs and whatnot.
I got into 2 schools: Franklin&Marshall, and Dickinson. These were my safety schools (they're pretty good in general, just compared to Harvard...).
Spring break was one of the hardest weeks, receiving 6 rejections in 3 days. I was very down, and not excited for F&M or Dickinson.
Long story short-- I am attending F&M and playing football on the school's team, and i'm LOVING it. I've met a lot of cool people, my classes are fun, etc. (And no, I was not one of those athletes you rightly identify as needing help to get in).
Moral: If you've done your research and genuinly like every school you're applying to, you'll enjoy your undergrad experience no matter where you go. Don't get caught up in "what ifs".
|
On October 15 2013 21:53 c0ldfusion wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2013 15:05 opsayo wrote:
the lesson you should be learning is two-fold
you're not a special snowflake
and life's not fair Sorry OP, but this is the truth. Play the hand you're dealt as best as you can. You'll be a lot happier not worrying about the injustices in the world.
Maybe I'm just too young, but in my opinion a defeated attitude and just a willingness to accept things the way they are is pretty destructive. There is inequality and unfairness in life, but there are also changes we can do to make them go away just a little bit. You can't just say that inequality is always going to exist and there's nothing we can do to address it; if we didn't do that there would be loads of things still wrong with our society.
On October 15 2013 22:55 cam connor wrote:
Nice statistics there champ
Maybe you don't get in colleges because you make grand statements without backing them up
for real you sound like a spoiled white kid who has never had any adversity in their life
if this is the most "unfair" thing that you ever go through in your life
you are a fucking lucky individual
Well if I understand you then you are calling me a liar. I don't really know what to say other than that academics and school are basically the only things that I'm really good at, but you don't have to believe me if you don't want to. And of course this isn't the most unfair thing I will experience in my life but since it's a systematic thing it feels more unjust than discrimination by some thugs or random people.
On October 15 2013 23:12 c0ldfusion wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2013 22:59 cam connor wrote:
for real you sound like a spoiled white kid who has never had any adversity in their life
if this is the most "unfair" thing that you ever go through in your life
you are a fucking lucky individual Are you talking about OP? Because if I had to guess my money is on him being Asian...
Nah I'm white but if you looked at my application without knowing my race you might think I were Asian.
On October 16 2013 03:35 Froadac wrote:
Likewise, don't go to hte best school you get into for just that reason. Visit and seriously consider if you want to be there.
Also, it's undergrad, it's not too important. I know a girl who went to a school which is barely top 200 in USA and she's going to LSE for PhD work. Nobody cares she went to Sonoma state now.
I've visited some of the "best schools" and I actually did really like MIT the best, like I honestly think I would fit in there and be happy, or at least as happy as you could be at MIT . I think I can honestly fit in at a lot of places, since I don't have this romantic concept of some perfect college for me that's out there waiting to be discovered.
On October 16 2013 07:22 darthfoley wrote:
Don't get your hopes up. I went through this exact same shit last year; I applied to 13 schools, including Harvard, Cornell, etc.
I thought I had the "full package," pretty good athlete, very good academics, ECs and whatnot.
I got into 2 schools: Franklin&Marshall, and Dickinson. These were my safety schools (they're pretty good in general, just compared to Harvard...).
Spring break was one of the hardest weeks, receiving 6 rejections in 3 days. I was very down, and not excited for F&M or Dickinson.
Long story short-- I am attending F&M and playing football on the school's team, and i'm LOVING it. I've met a lot of cool people, my classes are fun, etc. (And no, I was not one of those athletes you rightly identify as needing help to get in).
Moral: If you've done your research and genuinly like every school you're applying to, you'll enjoy your undergrad experience no matter where you go. Don't get caught up in "what ifs".
Well I remembered reading your blog and feeling for you, my man. It's good to know that you are happy at your safety, I'm happy for you and hopefully if I find myself in the same situation I'll be able to manage.
Anyway I'm sorry that I sounded like a whiny little bitch but hopefully I'll have reason not to whine so much once March and April roll around.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
