5 ms·

Drop the cutoff system completely or partially. The top scoring students aren't necessarily all the students you want.Quite often the gems are hidden throughout

by fezz 11y ago

Drop the cutoff system completely or partially. The top scoring students aren't necessarily all the students you want.Quite often the gems are hidden throughout the spectrum. Selective breeding for people good at grades and tests isn't going to get you the people with the most potential for the future.

foolinaround 11y ago
Agreed, but I think your suggested course of action is beyond the author's pay grade. And, where's the fun in it? :)
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
yummyfajitas 11y ago
How do you reliably and objectively identify the gems? Note that an American-style "holistic" system is unnecessary since India explicitly allows racism into the process (so no need for convoluted schemes to hide it). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reservation_in_India#Government_funding_allowing_reservations_in_colleges.2Funiversities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reservation_in_India#Governmen...
- MichaelCrawford 11y ago
  I studied astronomybat caltech. The valedictorian of the other high school didnt get an interview. The valedictorian of my high school didnt apply. I totally blew off high school to do my own thing. However I was crushed that I was not accepted to MIT. I didnt apply to stanford. I expect I would have gotten in but didnt think we could afford it. In reality stanford is so expensive so people like me can get great financial aid. Caltech was quite cheap for a private school no doubt because it is small but with a hufe endowment.
  - TheLoneWolfling 11y ago
    astronomybat == astronomy at?
- piyush_soni 11y ago
  As much as I hate the Reservation system in Indian colleges, I wouldn't call that 'racism'. They are two different things. They are trying to _mitigate_ the effects of a possible racism by doing this. Just that they don't understand they have to give that reservation advantage to them really early in life - not while admitting students for Doctor and Engineer degrees.
  - yummyfajitas 11y ago
    The fact that one might allude to cancelling one bit of racism with another doesn't make it not racism. (I'm defining "racism" as "discrimination based on race", not "any cause for a statistical disparity" as some other people do.) I must say that I do prefer the Indian system to the US system, however. It's at least explicit and can be debated on merits. The purveyors of the US system are secretive so as to prevent opponents from gathering facts to argue against it.
    - ejstronge 11y ago
      I think you (and others) have espoused this viewpoint in other threads. I'll just say that having an outsider (perhaps a politician) re-appropriate words that have a clear, technical definition (say surveillance or security) must be frustrating for experts who understand those words. Redefining a well-understood technical word is a good rhetorical technique but side steps whatever logic underlies the word's original defintion.
- colechristensen 11y ago
  Give everyone between 16 and 20 basic income, access to MOOCs (supported by advisers, TA's, etc.), dorm-like housing and let anybody try to do anything. Select those who've made something of themselves for 2 years of university undergraduate finishing.
  - yummyfajitas 11y ago
    You've cooked up a scheme that's vastly more expensive than the current one (let me remind you that India is poor) and you still haven't even explicitly defined "made something of themselves". Let me also remind you that unlike the US, India is a country with real problems - with the money you spend on this crazy vague subjective university admission scheme, you could instead do something useful like building more toilets.
    - sumitviii 11y ago
      This argument is just like the one used against Mars program. In competitions, asymmetrical developments are often better than symmetrical ones. We can build more toilets (aren't we already?) or we can educate next generation to aspire to do something great.
      - yummyfajitas 11y ago
        We are already educating the next generation. The question is whether we should adopt some incredibly expensive scheme to implement a vague and subjective university enrollment method when we already have a very effective one, or whether we should spend the money on toilets for the bottom half instead. Every ~2500rs spent on colechristensen's basic income is one less toilet. That's the core calculation. And yes, I do think the money spent on the Mars orbiter was just an exercise in national pride and would have been better spent on toilets, protecting women's dignity, literacy/arithmetic/english and similar low hanging fruit.
        sumitviii 11y ago
        >money spent on the Mars orbiter was just an exercise in national pride When start-ups compete against big corporations, do they try to follow corporate crap and other slow things? The advantage of being second is that you can learn from those ahead of you. Although I agree that at least basic sanitation is more important than this, but this is not the case in general. In general, we need to invest in next generation technologies and advancements. Only then can we create income sources which dwarf all coming from the advancements of rest of the world.

by fezz 11y ago

foolinaround 11y ago

Agreed, but I think your suggested course of action is beyond the author's pay grade. And, where's the fun in it? :)

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

yummyfajitas 11y ago

How do you reliably and objectively identify the gems? Note that an American-style "holistic" system is unnecessary since India explicitly allows racism into the process (so no need for convoluted schemes to hide it). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reservation_in_India#Government_funding_allowing_reservations_in_colleges.2Funiversities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reservation_in_India#Governmen...

MichaelCrawford 11y ago
I studied astronomybat caltech. The valedictorian of the other high school didnt get an interview. The valedictorian of my high school didnt apply. I totally blew off high school to do my own thing. However I was crushed that I was not accepted to MIT. I didnt apply to stanford. I expect I would have gotten in but didnt think we could afford it. In reality stanford is so expensive so people like me can get great financial aid. Caltech was quite cheap for a private school no doubt because it is small but with a hufe endowment.
- TheLoneWolfling 11y ago
  astronomybat == astronomy at?
piyush_soni 11y ago
As much as I hate the Reservation system in Indian colleges, I wouldn't call that 'racism'. They are two different things. They are trying to _mitigate_ the effects of a possible racism by doing this. Just that they don't understand they have to give that reservation advantage to them really early in life - not while admitting students for Doctor and Engineer degrees.
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  The fact that one might allude to cancelling one bit of racism with another doesn't make it not racism. (I'm defining "racism" as "discrimination based on race", not "any cause for a statistical disparity" as some other people do.) I must say that I do prefer the Indian system to the US system, however. It's at least explicit and can be debated on merits. The purveyors of the US system are secretive so as to prevent opponents from gathering facts to argue against it.
  - ejstronge 11y ago
    I think you (and others) have espoused this viewpoint in other threads. I'll just say that having an outsider (perhaps a politician) re-appropriate words that have a clear, technical definition (say surveillance or security) must be frustrating for experts who understand those words. Redefining a well-understood technical word is a good rhetorical technique but side steps whatever logic underlies the word's original defintion.
colechristensen 11y ago
Give everyone between 16 and 20 basic income, access to MOOCs (supported by advisers, TA's, etc.), dorm-like housing and let anybody try to do anything. Select those who've made something of themselves for 2 years of university undergraduate finishing.
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  You've cooked up a scheme that's vastly more expensive than the current one (let me remind you that India is poor) and you still haven't even explicitly defined "made something of themselves". Let me also remind you that unlike the US, India is a country with real problems - with the money you spend on this crazy vague subjective university admission scheme, you could instead do something useful like building more toilets.
  - sumitviii 11y ago
    This argument is just like the one used against Mars program. In competitions, asymmetrical developments are often better than symmetrical ones. We can build more toilets (aren't we already?) or we can educate next generation to aspire to do something great.
    - yummyfajitas 11y ago
      We are already educating the next generation. The question is whether we should adopt some incredibly expensive scheme to implement a vague and subjective university enrollment method when we already have a very effective one, or whether we should spend the money on toilets for the bottom half instead. Every ~2500rs spent on colechristensen's basic income is one less toilet. That's the core calculation. And yes, I do think the money spent on the Mars orbiter was just an exercise in national pride and would have been better spent on toilets, protecting women's dignity, literacy/arithmetic/english and similar low hanging fruit.
      - sumitviii 11y ago
        >money spent on the Mars orbiter was just an exercise in national pride When start-ups compete against big corporations, do they try to follow corporate crap and other slow things? The advantage of being second is that you can learn from those ahead of you. Although I agree that at least basic sanitation is more important than this, but this is not the case in general. In general, we need to invest in next generation technologies and advancements. Only then can we create income sources which dwarf all coming from the advancements of rest of the world.