4 ms·
right but if you’re looking for people who will succeed in college (or the corporate world) wouldn’t you be looking for people who can achieve based on specifi
by ffggvv 6y ago
right but if you’re looking for people who will succeed in college (or the corporate world)
wouldn’t you be looking for people who can achieve based on specified rules and fun to within a system, instead of undisciplined people who can’t do that but may naturally be intellectually curious?
the first makes a terrific employee, the second might not put in hard work for stuffthey don’t find interesting or may leave altogether
- _Nat_ 6y agoDepends on the job. If you've got a simple, mechanical job that a trained monkey could do if monkeys were more intelligent, then, definitely, you'd want folks who'll slavishly adhere to whatever task is assigned -- the folks who'll spend all night doing SAT prep problems would be perfect hires. But if you want to train innovators who'll actually advance their fields -- whether we're talking mathematicians, scientists, engineers, doctors, or business leaders -- then you'll want the folks who'll pursue such things on their own initiative along with the talents they've developed due to that intrinsic motivation. Elite non-innovators can have their place. In science/engineering/math, they won't be leaders, but they can still be effective researchers with strong publication records, reliably churning out decent-quality papers. In medicine, they can be great practicing doctors. In business, they'd be reliable middle-management types. Still, it'd be weird for a top institution to only have middle-management types.