5 ms·

Valuing something like breadth of experience and being a well rounded person might be considered one of the things that makes a western style education as good

by Dig1t 5y ago

Valuing something like breadth of experience and being a well rounded person might be considered one of the things that makes a western style education as good as it is. Compared to other types of university systems, for example the one in India which is extremely concerned with test scores and performance metrics, many people would consider the western one to be better (including many people in India who try to come to the US for their education if they can). Not saying it's the only thing that makes western education good, but I think it definitely plays a role.

barry-cotter 5y ago
What's this Western education system of which you speak? Among Western nations the US is unique in how much emphasis it puts on extracurriculars and character. We know why that is too. The system arose as a smoke screen around Jewish quotas. The overwhelming majority of universities admit students on the basis of results of blind marked exams and nothing else. I'm by no means an expert but the usual examples given of exceptions, Oxford, Cambridge and ENA are looking for academic brilliance, not aristocratic polish ("well roundedness"). Western systems vary a lot in their degree of specialisation too. By 16, after the GCSEs the UK is done with being a generalist. Pick 3 or 4 A-Levels of your choice and if you feel like doing Math, Further Math and Physics or three sciences and Maths no one will stop you in the name of "well roundedness".
- allturtles 5y ago
  Many of the colleges people are actually attending in the U.S. are the same, and offer automatic admission if you hit some threshold of GPA, class rank or test scores. A couple examples: https://uh.edu/undergraduate-admissions/apply/freshman/freshman-process/ https://uh.edu/undergraduate-admissions/apply/freshman/fresh... https://www.missouristate.edu/Policy/Op5_01_3_FreshmanAdmissionRequirements.htm#selection-index https://www.missouristate.edu/Policy/Op5_01_3_FreshmanAdmiss... Actually here's a list of a bunch more: https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/10-best-colleges-with-automatic-guaranteed-admissions/ https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/10-best-colleges-wit... These hand-wringing conversations about fair admissions mostly apply only to the elite top X schools. Those places receive tons of applications from academically top-tier students. The are looking for "something else" to make you stand out from the crowd.
  - chrischen 5y ago
    The “elite” schools cherry pick the exceptional to make the rich (legacy admissions) look good.
  - ZeroGravitas 5y ago
    Note the whole system would collapse if they only let in academically gifted people. Because only a small fraction of those gifted people would have the connections and wealth that is the core networking value these institutions provide. Thats why simple systems like a lottery for everyone that's qualified aren't adopted. And the people trying to get in dont want them to be adopted, they dont want the system to be fair or socially useful, they want access for their kids to the exclusive club, with just enough window dressing to make it seem like something else.
    - allturtles 5y ago
      Even if this cynical take is 100% true, so what? The ivies are private institutions, and have no obligation to admit people based on whatever criteria you, or I, or the general public consider fair. Meanwhile, admission to an elite school is neither necessary nor sufficient to a happy, successful life. A couple of the best software engineers I've ever worked with - guys who got 3-4 promotions by age 30 - went to schools I'd never heard of until I met them.
      - ZeroGravitas 5y ago
        Well, once you stop trying to get people into exclusive clubs, you start asking crazy questions like "why don't we just educate everybody to a high level rather than place arbitrary cutoffs based on century old social clubs to maintain an artificially restricted elite?"
        csa 5y ago
        > Well, once you stop trying to get people into exclusive clubs, you start asking crazy questions like "why don't we just educate everybody to a high level rather than place arbitrary cutoffs based on century old social clubs to maintain an artificially restricted elite?" Pro tip... if you want to be educated well through instruction, don't go to an elite school. The instruction in most of the classes really sucks (with some notable exceptions that are often available for free or cheap online). Small liberal arts schools tend to do a much better job of educating through instruction.
- pw201 5y ago
  The Redditors on /r/cambridge routinely tell American applicants that the whole "extra-curriculars" thing is only relevant if whatever you did demonstrates enthusiasm for or ability in your subject, both of which you will need to survive. Ability for the obvious reason, enthusiasm because you will get the shock of it no longer being effortless and meeting peers who are better at it than you. For me, the "HR interview" was "what would you say to convince me of your enthusiasm for physics?" (as in, I was explicitly asked that very question) not "tell me about how your adventures pogo-sticking up the Khyber on your gap yah made you a well-rounded person" (and the "technical interview" asked you do actually do some physics). As someone who couldn't have afforded a gap yah and would probably have been too frail to go on one, I'm pretty happy about that. The thing that I'm told they will do is look at your school and weight things like GCSE results and A level results accordingly (as in, if you are at a bad school, they'll make allowances for that). https://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/jan/10/how-cambridge-admissions-really-work https://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/jan/10/how-cambri... is interesting from that point of view.
fsckboy 5y ago
> Valuing something like breadth of experience and being a well rounded person might be considered one of the things that makes a western style education as good as it is. so imagine how good great test scores and being well rounded is!

by Dig1t 5y ago

barry-cotter 5y ago

What's this Western education system of which you speak? Among Western nations the US is unique in how much emphasis it puts on extracurriculars and character. We know why that is too. The system arose as a smoke screen around Jewish quotas. The overwhelming majority of universities admit students on the basis of results of blind marked exams and nothing else. I'm by no means an expert but the usual examples given of exceptions, Oxford, Cambridge and ENA are looking for academic brilliance, not aristocratic polish ("well roundedness"). Western systems vary a lot in their degree of specialisation too. By 16, after the GCSEs the UK is done with being a generalist. Pick 3 or 4 A-Levels of your choice and if you feel like doing Math, Further Math and Physics or three sciences and Maths no one will stop you in the name of "well roundedness".

allturtles 5y ago
Many of the colleges people are actually attending in the U.S. are the same, and offer automatic admission if you hit some threshold of GPA, class rank or test scores. A couple examples: https://uh.edu/undergraduate-admissions/apply/freshman/freshman-process/ https://uh.edu/undergraduate-admissions/apply/freshman/fresh... https://www.missouristate.edu/Policy/Op5_01_3_FreshmanAdmissionRequirements.htm#selection-index https://www.missouristate.edu/Policy/Op5_01_3_FreshmanAdmiss... Actually here's a list of a bunch more: https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/10-best-colleges-with-automatic-guaranteed-admissions/ https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/10-best-colleges-wit... These hand-wringing conversations about fair admissions mostly apply only to the elite top X schools. Those places receive tons of applications from academically top-tier students. The are looking for "something else" to make you stand out from the crowd.
- chrischen 5y ago
  The “elite” schools cherry pick the exceptional to make the rich (legacy admissions) look good.
- ZeroGravitas 5y ago
  Note the whole system would collapse if they only let in academically gifted people. Because only a small fraction of those gifted people would have the connections and wealth that is the core networking value these institutions provide. Thats why simple systems like a lottery for everyone that's qualified aren't adopted. And the people trying to get in dont want them to be adopted, they dont want the system to be fair or socially useful, they want access for their kids to the exclusive club, with just enough window dressing to make it seem like something else.
  - allturtles 5y ago
    Even if this cynical take is 100% true, so what? The ivies are private institutions, and have no obligation to admit people based on whatever criteria you, or I, or the general public consider fair. Meanwhile, admission to an elite school is neither necessary nor sufficient to a happy, successful life. A couple of the best software engineers I've ever worked with - guys who got 3-4 promotions by age 30 - went to schools I'd never heard of until I met them.
    - ZeroGravitas 5y ago
      Well, once you stop trying to get people into exclusive clubs, you start asking crazy questions like "why don't we just educate everybody to a high level rather than place arbitrary cutoffs based on century old social clubs to maintain an artificially restricted elite?"
      - csa 5y ago
        > Well, once you stop trying to get people into exclusive clubs, you start asking crazy questions like "why don't we just educate everybody to a high level rather than place arbitrary cutoffs based on century old social clubs to maintain an artificially restricted elite?" Pro tip... if you want to be educated well through instruction, don't go to an elite school. The instruction in most of the classes really sucks (with some notable exceptions that are often available for free or cheap online). Small liberal arts schools tend to do a much better job of educating through instruction.
pw201 5y ago
The Redditors on /r/cambridge routinely tell American applicants that the whole "extra-curriculars" thing is only relevant if whatever you did demonstrates enthusiasm for or ability in your subject, both of which you will need to survive. Ability for the obvious reason, enthusiasm because you will get the shock of it no longer being effortless and meeting peers who are better at it than you. For me, the "HR interview" was "what would you say to convince me of your enthusiasm for physics?" (as in, I was explicitly asked that very question) not "tell me about how your adventures pogo-sticking up the Khyber on your gap yah made you a well-rounded person" (and the "technical interview" asked you do actually do some physics). As someone who couldn't have afforded a gap yah and would probably have been too frail to go on one, I'm pretty happy about that. The thing that I'm told they will do is look at your school and weight things like GCSE results and A level results accordingly (as in, if you are at a bad school, they'll make allowances for that). https://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/jan/10/how-cambridge-admissions-really-work https://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/jan/10/how-cambri... is interesting from that point of view.

fsckboy 5y ago

> Valuing something like breadth of experience and being a well rounded person might be considered one of the things that makes a western style education as good as it is. so imagine how good great test scores and being well rounded is!