How to get into Harvard link... anyone seen this? Great reading!

[mirabillis]

http://blog.prepscholar.com/how-to-get-into-harvard-and-the-ivy-league-by-a-harvard-alum

 

Great reading I came across.

 

Then there's this supplement, where he posts his actual college app in its entirely.

http://blog.prepscholar.com/successful-harvard-application-common-application-harvard-supplement

 

 

I feel like it's good pointers. We're nowhere near Harvard caliber, but I think there's valid advice, namely:

 

• pitfalls of trying to be well-rounded (jack of all trades, master of none)
• find your spike/your focus (!!) (does my son's xbox obsession count?! HAHAHAH! :D)
• keep in mind early on who can pen 2-3 letters of recommendation (begin thinking early)
• and what do you want your personal narrative to show?

[regentrude]

Started reading, but I have a hard time staying focused reading this article because he repeats himself so, so much, and many of the things he says are actually common knowledge and not earth shattering news.

[Corraleno]

Oh man, IMHO that article just sums up everything that's wrong with the college admissions race. He says not to waste your time on volunteer work or community service. Don't bother with sports or music unless you're team captain or concert master. Just pick one thing you're really good at and become world class! Target the entire 4 years of your high school existence to the sole goal of getting into Harvard, and maybe you'll win the lottery!

 

Nope, not going to sacrifice 4 years of my kid's life on the off chance he can go to a school filled with guys just like the one who wrote that article. (And, for the record, this kid actually is "world class" at something; he made top 20 at the last World Cup. He also has multiple gold medals and perfect papers on the National Greek & Latin exams and has self-taught several other languages. Because he's allowed to find and pursue his interests, not because it's part of some master plan to get into an Ivy. )

 

The only thing I agree with that writer about is that, for very selective schools, it's good to be "spiky." They do want your application to "tell a story" and show that you are passionate about something. It's better to be great at one thing than just good at two or three things, if you are looking at very selective schools where you really need a hook to stand out enough to make it into the 5-10-20% of applicants who are admitted.

 

But those colleges represent a TINY percentage of all the colleges in this country. Most colleges are looking for kids who work hard, have good grades, have interests and activities outside of school, and contribute to their communities. Do those things and you will find a college that's a good fit and will provide a good education. Focusing a student's entire life in high school (and often middle school) on winning the Ivy lottery would (IMHO) be a huge disservice to the vast majority of students. 

ETA: I think even for kids who are potential Ivy admits, focusing everything on Ivy admissions can leave kids who just miss the mark feeling like failures. Remember the girl a few years ago who applied to Ivies, was devastated when she didn't get in, and wrote a sarcastic editorial about it? She ended up "settling" for either Ohio State or Penn State (both of which are excellent schools, with ~50% admissions, and I'm sure she was offered hefty scholarships), but she felt like she'd "done everything right" and then didn't get the prize she thought she'd earned.

 

Edited September 22, 2016 by Corraleno

[mirabillis]

I felt there was valid advice. I do think as we think of college admissions, we think of looking well-rounded, athletics, clubs, community service. I know I as a high schooler, excelled academically, and felt pressured to be a part of community  service, clubs, etc - when those were maybe not my natural passion nor inclination. I felt like I had to do it. And did I excel at any of these? Mostly not, I was more a jack of all trades, master of none. Now where this leaves the 'normal' academically gifted student for admissions into such Ivies, probably nowhere. But it makes sense in today's competitive world that for these types of admissions, you need a hook, something to stand out. And while we're not looking into this type of college whatsoever, I feel the article did provide some useful advice about how to proceed in high school planning for any type of college admissions.... Do I need to enroll my kid in all the activities imaginable to look well-rounded? No. Probably better to pick a few and do them continuously and do them well. I think that's really valid advice. Pick a focus or 2 or 3 - and stick with those for through all 4 years. That's valid to know.

[wapiti]

Mirabillis, you might be interested in the following articles:

MIT admissions blog Applying Sideways

Yale's new application questions

[quark]

While I think there were a few valid points, I can see how when someone hangs out on these boards that this article comes off as repetitive and just commonsense and overkill. When I read these articles I now know how to look at them from several angles...concerned parent, savvier (than when I first started researching) counselor, determined-to-honor-my-child's best interests facilitator etc. I try to think about where the writer is coming from, how his background might have shaped his views and if any biases are strongly evident. I try to see if this person is selling something (he started the website where the article is featured). I also try to remember that most of these articles are not written from a homeschooling PoV or towards homeschoolers as the main audience.

 

And if I think there's value, I now send my son the link too. I love seeing how he reacts. Whether he will sit back and take note or do that teen thing we all so love (roll his eyes, I mean) or start pointing out where it's illogical or brilliant or "no, definitely not me, mom".

 

So I take what helps and leave out the rest.

 

I really like that he was willing to show his actual application. That's something I haven't seen anywhere else (yet). It's educational (for me).

 

What I really don't like is how these articles can play on parental fears and even influence some of us into forgetting why we homeschool in the first place.

 

Applying Sideways really speaks to me. I love that link. (ETA: also commonsense by the way, but a nice-to-be-reminded-of kind of commonsense).

Edited September 22, 2016 by quark

[Corraleno]

 I know I as a high schooler, excelled academically, and felt pressured to be a part of community  service, clubs, etc - when those were maybe not my natural passion nor inclination. I felt like I had to do it. And did I excel at any of these? Mostly not, I was more a jack of all trades, master of none.  <snip>  Probably better to pick a few and do them continuously and do them well. I think that's really valid advice. Pick a focus or 2 or 3 - and stick with those for through all 4 years. That's valid to know.

 

Telling a student who genuinely enjoys participating in lots of ECs to quit anything they won't be top of the class at (as Allen Cheng suggests), is just as misguided as pressuring a student to participate in a bunch of ECs just for the sake of college applications — in both cases the student is being told to go against their natural instincts and interests for the sake of looking a certain way on applications. If a kid really likes being in jazz band and French club and chess club and running cross country and working on the student newspaper, without being a star in any of those areas, that's really okay. There are plenty of colleges who would love to have that kid. Telling a kid to quit working at the soup kitchen or volunteering for Habit for Humanity, because those hours would be better spent improving their tennis game or drilling for science olympiads may infinitesimal increase their chances of getting into an Ivy, but at what cost to their sense of empathy and humanity? And there are plenty of colleges that do want to see community service, even if the student didn't single-handedly start a nonprofit or raise a million dollars for charity, so that's bad advice for the kids applying to those colleges.

 

High school represents four years of a child's life they can never get back. It's the perfect time for kids to explore different things and figure out who they are and want they want. And even for kids who have already found their passions, who already excel at one or two things, they should still be allowed — even encouraged — to "waste" some of their time on activities that give them pleasure but don't add to their resume. Don't bother playing an instrument if you can't be first chair? Quit a sport you enjoy unless you're a national medalist or at least team captain? I think that's terrible advice for anyone, even Ivy wannabes. IMO the last thing the world needs these days are more Harvard grads who think community service is just a waste of time. 

[Corraleno]

While I think there were a few valid points, I can see how when someone hangs out on these boards that this article comes off as repetitive and just commonsense and overkill. When I read these articles I now know how to look at them from several angles...concerned parent, savvier (than when I first started researching) counselor, determined-to-honor-my-child's best interests facilitator etc. I try to think about where the writer is coming from, how his background might have shaped his views and if any biases are strongly evident. I try to see if this person is selling something (he started the website where the article is featured). I also try to remember that most of these articles are not written from a homeschooling PoV or towards homeschoolers as the main audience.

 

Yeah, it makes me wonder why a guy who published original medical research while still in high school decided to forgo a career in medicine (his stated goal in his Harvard application) and instead leverage his Harvard pedigree to sell test prep services and college counseling online. It's like the Harvard name on his degree was itself the prize, not the education he got there.

[quark]

Yeah, it makes me wonder why a guy who published original medical research while still in high school decided to forgo a career in medicine (his stated goal in his Harvard application) and instead leverage his Harvard pedigree to sell test prep services and college counseling online. It's like the Harvard name on his degree was itself the prize, not the education he got there.

 

I think he didn't forego the career though Jackie. Looks like he took a detour of some sort (some bio-related field IIRC) and ALSO started this service.

 

[Corraleno]

Some interesting responses to Cheng's article here on College Confidential.

 

Several people posted that the successful Ivy applicants they knew were precisely the sort of "well-rounded" kids that Cheng disparages:

 

 

The kid I know currently at H had no spike or hook. Only 3 APs and one big fat "B" sitting in the transcript. A well rounded kid who did sports as well as theater and music. Most importantly, the kind of kid who made every classroom better and often put others first despite considerable intelligence and talents; I'm sure the LORs screamed this, and that the personal statement was a delight to read.

 

 

A boy at my D's school just got accepted ED to Harvard. Good student, some APs, but not spectacular. Pres. of student body two years in a row, very involved in all kinds of things. And we live an hour north of NYC, where lots of kids like him apply to Ivy schools. My guess is that he got in because he is very likable, works hard, and goes above and beyond to get things done. I don't think he has any particular hook, except being well-rounded. I imagine he got good refs from his teachers. ... I heard an interview once with the Dean of admissions at Harvard, he said the "bread and butter" of Harvard is the well-rounded student.

[quark]

I think he didn't forego the career though Jackie. Looks like he took a detour of some sort (some bio-related field IIRC) and ALSO started this service.

 

 

Oh wait, I think I was wrong, Jackie. He says in this article:

 

In the long run, both predictions turned out to be wrong. After college, I did go to Harvard Medical School for the MD/PhD program for 4 years, but I left to pursue entrepreneurship and co-founded PrepScholar. Moreover, in the time I did actually do research, I switched interests from neuroscience to bioengineering/biotech.

 

[Corraleno]

Well his own trajectory is a pretty good argument against the idea that you need to choose your "spike" in 9th grade and focus single-mindedly on pursuing that, so you can get into a top college, which in turn will get you into a top grad program, where you can... eventually decide that you're more interested in something completely different and drop out, lol.

[Arcadia]

[*]find your spike/your focus (!!) (does my son's xbox obsession count?! HAHAHAH! :D)

I read that article long ago because I keep running out of reading materials. Anyway thought your son might be interested in what I quoted below. When I think of Harvard, I think of Harvard Business School only (the association is that strong).

 

"At Robert Morris, video game scholarships can be worth up to half of tuition and housing, or $19,000. What’s more, since the NCAA doesn’t regulate e-sports, they’re not bound by the rules of amateurism. A couple of Robert Morris players, for example, recently played in a semi-pro tournament and each earned around $1,000. Want to get paid as a college athlete? Stay on the Xbox." http://time.com/3756140/video-games-varsity/

[quark]

The secret to getting into Harvard: Be nicer

More commonsense! :D

[Lori D.]

...

Edited September 22, 2016 by Lori D.

[regentrude]

...

 

Now I am really curious what you had written, Lori; I really appreciate your wisdom and insights - would you consider putting it back?

[Nan in Mass]

I like Cal Newport,s approach in his book How to Be a High School Superstar. You might be interested in looking at that.

 

Nan

Edited September 22, 2016 by Nan in Mass

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Telling a student who genuinely enjoys participating in lots of ECs to quit anything they won't be top of the class at (as Allen Cheng suggests), is just as misguided as pressuring a student to participate in a bunch of ECs just for the sake of college applications — in both cases the student is being told to go against their natural instincts and interests for the sake of looking a certain way on applications. If a kid really likes being in jazz band and French club and chess club and running cross country and working on the student newspaper, without being a star in any of those areas, that's really okay. There are plenty of colleges who would love to have that kid. Telling a kid to quit working at the soup kitchen or volunteering for Habit for Humanity, because those hours would be better spent improving their tennis game or drilling for science olympiads may infinitesimal increase their chances of getting into an Ivy, but at what cost to their sense of empathy and humanity? And there are plenty of colleges that do want to see community service, even if the student didn't single-handedly start a nonprofit or raise a million dollars for charity, so that's bad advice for the kids applying to those colleges.

 

High school represents four years of a child's life they can never get back. It's the perfect time for kids to explore different things and figure out who they are and want they want. And even for kids who have already found their passions, who already excel at one or two things, they should still be allowed — even encouraged — to "waste" some of their time on activities that give them pleasure but don't add to their resume. Don't bother playing an instrument if you can't be first chair? Quit a sport you enjoy unless you're a national medalist or at least team captain? I think that's terrible advice for anyone, even Ivy wannabes. IMO the last thing the world needs these days are more Harvard grads who think community service is just a waste of time. 

 

I do not have national level athletes living at my house.  

 

The most competitive athlete I had swam in an area with incredibly talented and hard working swimmers (as in Katie Ledecky was at one of the distance meets and Michael Phelps had set many of the pool records where our meets were held).  He jokingly asked on the way to his first USA Swimming meet if I thought there would be a ribbon for 93rd place.  He was quite realistic about his relative ability, but was always willing to get up at zero dark thirty for an early practice.  The skills he learned from swimming built a foundation of toughness and resilience that he drew upon in other areas.  I am convinced that the fact that his success in many areas unrelated to swimming are directly related to sticking with the hard practices, even though he wasn't winning his events.

 

His brothers also do sports, not because they dream of fame, but because love their sport.  They like the feeling of sailing or paddling.  They like feeling like they have worked out hard and are stronger than the last time.

 

It may well be that this will make them not good candidates for a highly selective school.  OK.  The highly selective schools do in fact have their pick of thousands of highly qualified candidates.  But the argument that you should mold your high school years based on what will get you into an Ivy sounds a lot like families who dream of the NFL and frame activities, success and failures in light of that goal.  

[Lori D.]

Now I am really curious what you had written, Lori; I really appreciate your wisdom and insights - would you consider putting it back?

 

lol... Nothing terribly insightful, and I removed it because I thought it might sound like I was disagreeing with previous posters (definitely not!), or being negative about applying to Ivy Leagues, when really I'm not -- just wanted to express being realistic about the odds and not putting all your hopes on being accepted to just the Ivy League of your dreams, but also being sure to apply to safety schools to make sure you DO get admitted to college. ;)

 

I quoted admission stats from Harvard -- over 37,000 apply every year, and a little over 2,000 are accepted [37,307 / 2,080 from College Board's Big Future profile]. My thought was that the vast majority of that 37,000+ applicants all look very similar academically (top-of-the-top -- high GPA, top class ranking, high AP scores), and extracurricular-y, with all of them are excelling at their personal interests and activities.

 

Statistically, 5-6 out of every 100 applicants are admitted, that means 94-95 (almost identical) applicants are NOT admitted. That leads me to believe that Harvard has to make choices at that point based on who "fits their slots" for reasons that don't have as much to do with academics and excelling in extracurriculars. Things that are more "luck of the draw, like:

 

- demographics -- Harvard wants a certain balance as far as gender/race/ethnicity; financials; in-state/out-of-state/international; etc.

- degree program/dept. openings -- only so many slots open in each dept. or degree program

- college culture -- every school wants to cultivate a certain type of "culture" and campus life through the students' collective interests and experiences

 

Anyways, that's what I deleted. :) Again, it wasn't meant to discourage people from applying to Ivy League and competitive/selective schools! :)

Edited September 22, 2016 by Lori D.

[regentrude]

Thanks for posting it again, Lorie. I do not think this is to discourage an otherwise qualified applicant for whom such a school would be a good fit from applying to a top tier school. Any student (and parent) embarking on such an endeavor should be well aware of the slender odds and be realistic about the chances. And some people do get in. My DD attends a school with an admissions rate of 8% - i.e. one that rejects 92 out of every 100 applicants. It worked out and the school is a good fit, not perfect, and she gets a stellar education - but had this not happened, she would have been fine elsewhere, too.

Going into this with all facts and realistic expectations is most important.

[MysteryJen]

Echoing Corraleno, I think it is a crime to spend your entire high school doing things you don't want to do in service of some goal you don't really care about. Whether that is joining every club to be "well-rounded," pursuing AP when you just want do be doing art, or continuing to train in a sport you no longer love to get a scholarship and make it "worth it," it makes me sad to see young people put all their self-worth into a basket marked "Ivies."

 

The kids I know who got into the great schools did so by being themselves and applying to lots of places. Picking an Ivy because it is the best fit for you is very different than an "Ivy or bust" mentality.

 

FWIW, I had a swimmer with national cuts. She turned down the Yale coach, because the school and team were not a good fit. The years and years of practice, meets, travel etc were because she loved her sport. She picked her school because she will get to swim, not just ride the bench, and she couldn't go wrong with VT academically, and we could afford the final bill. 

 

A realistic assessment of yourself, talent, scores, grades AND what you can afford is the most important part of getting in to the right college for you.

 

[regentrude]

And I completely agree with pp who emphasized that high school years are precious life time and should not be wasted making a child do activities just to "look good" on a college application. This is too valuable a time. The young people should freely explore activities and do what makes them feel happy and fulfilled.

 

DS is single minded about martial arts, competing at national level, pouring all his energy into it - because that is his "thing". Defiitely "spiky", but he does not care enough about academics to be interested in a top tier school.

 

DD OTOH is an all rounder and did many different things: rode horses (no high profile competitions), sang in choir (no high profile performances), was in the English honors society (local uni), tutored physics, and did each of those things because it made her happy. She got into an extremely selective school despite of this and is still staying well rounded, pursuing a double major in literature and physics (yes, crazy, no overlap) while also singing in choir, leading an organization that offers ACT tutoring for local high schoolers, being the president of  the Women in Physics society. She still has no single "spike", but makes a great contribution in her multi-facetted way.

 

So even the advice about the "spike" is to be taken with a grain of salt. And I would never encourage a student to tailor what he does in his free time in high school towards looking good n the application - life is too short.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Thanks for posting it again, Lorie. I do not think this is to discourage an otherwise qualified applicant for whom such a school would be a good fit from applying to a top tier school. Any student (and parent) embarking on such an endeavor should be well aware of the slender odds and be realistic about the chances. And some people do get in. My DD attends a school with an admissions rate of 8% - i.e. one that rejects 92 out of every 100 applicants. It worked out and the school is a good fit, not perfect, and she gets a stellar education - but had this not happened, she would have been fine elsewhere, too.

Going into this with all facts and realistic expectations is most important.

 

I think the bolded is important.

 

I have had the opportunity to talk to hundreds of kids applying to college over the last 10+ years, when I do info events for my alma mater.

 

Sometimes I really don't understand what is driving a particular student's college application decisions.

 

-Students who are applying to MIT with test scores that are 620 or lower.  

-Kids who say they have a certain focus as their priority, but who are not applying to quality schools that shine in that area, but that are not top 20 schools for name recognition.

 

I wonder if some families start with a list of a couple dozen schools that have shiney name recognition and don't want to consider moving beyond that list.

[Penelope]

Hmmm. He says several places that he did not excel at violin and was never close to first chair or concertmaster, but then in the application he lists first chair/concertmaster under his orchestra extracurricular.

 

So either he lied in the application, or this isn't the real application and is done after the fact for the purposes of selling his books and getting traffic to his business site.

[Guest2]

Well I guess I have too much time on my hands today, but I read the article and enjoyed it.

 

As for the violin, if I am reading it correctly, he was first chair, but he also said this about his orchestra:

"Second, it is important to do things you enjoy. I still enjoyed playing the violin and being part of an orchestra, and I really enjoyed my school’s academic teams, even though we never went beyond state level. Even if some activities don’t contribute as much to your application, it’s still fine to spend some time on them – just don’t delude yourself into thinking they’re stronger than they really are and overspend time on them."

 

I took that to mean that high school students should do what they enjoy, but know that some things won't make a stronger application, and that is ok.

 

He also said this"In retrospect, one “mistake†I made was spending a lot of time on the violin.Each week I spent 8 hours on practice and a lesson and 4 hours of orchestra rehearsals. This amounted to over 1,500 hours from freshman to junior year.

The result? I was pretty good, but definitely nowhere near world-class. Remember, there are thousands of orchestras and bands in the country, each with their own concertmasters, drum majors, and section 1st chairs."

 

I don't have a dog in this fight as so far none of my kids are even applying to an elite school. I guess I just didn't read the article the same way in regards to both the violin and doing activities because the student enjoys them.

Edited October 6, 2016 by Silver Brook

[regentrude]

As for the violin, if I am reading it correctly, he was first chair, but he also said this about his orchestra:

"Second, it is important to do things you enjoy. I still enjoyed playing the violin and being part of an orchestra, and I really enjoyed my school’s academic teams, even though we never went beyond state level. Even if some activities don’t contribute as much to your application, it’s still fine to spend some time on them – just don’t delude yourself into thinking they’re stronger than they really are and overspend time on them."

 

I took that to mean that high school students should do what they enjoy, but know that some things won't make a stronger application, and that is ok.

 

He also said this"In retrospect, one “mistake†I made was spending a lot of time on the violin.Each week I spent 8 hours on practice and a lesson and 4 hours of orchestra rehearsals. This amounted to over 1,500 hours from freshman to junior year.

The result? I was pretty good, but definitely nowhere near world-class. Remember, there are thousands of orchestras and bands in the country, each with their own concertmasters, drum majors, and section 1st chairs."

 

I guess my view on life is very different. If a kid enjoys playing the violin and being part of the orchestra, how can it possibly be a mistake spending a lot of time doing that very thing they enjoy? Spending 500 hours per year (which translates to a bit less than 1.5 hours/day) on a beloved activity seems a very good use of time to me.

 

(As an aside: 8 hours of practice per week does not seem to be in line with the amount of time world class musicians need to practice... so i am wondering what his expectations were)

[Jen500]

I don't understand--what makes the author of the blogpost an 'expert' in admissions??? I see he runs an SAT prep business and was accepted at a lot of top colleges, but I didn't really look more at his website to see what makes him qualified to give his expertise as far as specific advice about what to do/not do to get into an Ivy League school.

[Bluegoat]

Also, with the violin, how the heck is that "wasted" because it didn't help him get into university?  He can keep on playing violin his whole life, many amateur ochestras would be thrilled to have someone like that.

 

I sometimes think some people think that life, and non-work activities, end after high school.

[Guest2]

Regentrude and Bluegoat , I absolutely agree with both of you. I am not quite sure if the author does. He did put "mistake" in quotation marks and I formatted my response so poorly, it is difficult to see.

 

He went on to say ,"If I were to optimize purely for college applications, I should have spent that time on pushing my spike even further – working on more Olympiad competitions, or doing even more hardcore research.Looking back I don’t mind this much because I generally enjoyed my musical training and had a mostly fun time in orchestra (and I had a strong Spike anyway). But this problem can be a lot worse for well-rounded students who are stretched too thin."

 

Seems like he had some mixed feelings, and perhaps would not have played the violin if he didn't have a strong resume strength already. I am amazed that anyone would do this. He is an entrepreneur. I am not sure if he wouldn't have the same client base if he had just been admitted to his schools( not attended) and started his business. Heck, he could have used the money he saved by not attending as a pretty sizable startup.

[SarahW]

Yeah, I read through some of his blog posts, and I see his point.

 

I think what he is reacting against is that in high school people (parents / teachers / counselors) were telling him to be "well-rounded." That he needed to be good at the violin to "balance" his chemistry. His recommenders all bring up his orchestra experience, one teacher says over and over how "well-rounded" he is (which is never noted by the adcom reader). If you read through his application it's clear that he was also pushed into competitive violin, he had a very demanding teacher, and was entered in music competitions, some of which conflicted with his chemistry. I think he liked playing the violin okay, but everyone put all this pressure on him about how he had to be great at it to get into a good college. And then, as it turns out, that's not the case at all. Big oooof.

 

As he points out, even elite colleges don't expect 18yos to be world class at everything, so why try? He could have happily played the violin in the orchestra (without fighting for 1st chair), had a less demanding teacher, and kept it up as a hobby without a single music competition, and Harvard would have been just as happy with him. As it was, though, he got an enormous question mark on his application for talking about the violin, highlighting his experience with violin, suggesting that he'd keep it up in college, and then not even sending in a demo tape. His story is similar to another one I heard of a girl applying to selective school who ran varsity cross country because, well, because it was an extracurricular and made her "well-rounded." She talked about cross country in her essays and highlighted it, but never once mentioned interest in joining the college cross country team. That made the adcom officer scratch his head and question whether this girl actually liked running, and whether she knew what she wanted in general.

 

I read this guy as pushing a KonMari method of high school. Does doing this bring you joy? If not, throw it away and find out what does. The method is a bit harsh, sure, but I think it's a worthwhile point.

 

 

[zaichiki]

I guess my view on life is very different. If a kid enjoys playing the violin and being part of the orchestra, how can it possibly be a mistake spending a lot of time doing that very thing they enjoy? Spending 500 hours per year (which translates to a bit less than 1.5 hours/day) on a beloved activity seems a very good use of time to me.

 

(As an aside: 8 hours of practice per week does not seem to be in line with the amount of time world class musicians need to practice... so i am wondering what his expectations were)

 

This last is a good point, but I think it is a common misunderstanding among high school students  -- not just with music.  Perhaps it's a touch of the big fish, small pond syndrome?  Teachers contribute to this, too, somehow not realizing how many other bigger fish are out there.

[daijobu]

 

I think what he is reacting against is that in high school people (parents / teachers / counselors) were telling him to be "well-rounded." 

 

 

I read this guy as pushing a KonMari method of high school. Does doing this bring you joy? If not, throw it away and find out what does. The method is a bit harsh, sure, but I think it's a worthwhile point.

 

I love the Kon Mari approach to extracurriculars.  I hadn't heard that before.  

 

I agree it's a real problem because top colleges will not only instruct students to be well-rounded, but also to challenge themselves by taking the most difficult courses at their school.  So on another parent list I'm on, I read a post from a mom complaining that her student was taking 6 APs this year because he wanted to attend a name school.  Sadly, I don't even think taking so many APs at once will help.  

[Arcadia]

His story is similar to another one I heard of a girl applying to selective school who ran varsity cross country because, well, because it was an extracurricular and made her "well-rounded."

 

It is not just selective schools though. Many Asian kids in high school are told to round up their profile. For example my friend's daughter is a wonderful writer, won a few awards for her writing and she plays violin but didn't get selected for youth orchestra (ETA: auditioned but didn't make the cut). Her school guidance counselor told her to get onto a school team for a sport just to fill that "sport blank" because her profile is too "nerdy". She is now in the school team for tennis. She is not even aiming for the top state universities at this point and would be happy anywhere. Her parents aren't pushing either. This kid also pick Spanish at the guidance counselor advice because the chance of a 4 or 5 for AP Spanish is very high locally.

 

I am seeing the same pressure in public school kids to reach eagle scouts rank even if they are in scouts because of their parents. Some kids love scouting while some are there to check the box because of parents. (ETA: I was a girl guide and loved it, also knew nerdy geeky boy scouts age peers who loved scouting)

 

My hubby is an academic nerd who went to a university that only look at grades.

 

So on another parent list I'm on, I read a post from a mom complaining that her student was taking 6 APs this year because he wanted to attend a name school.

I know public school kids taking that many not because of wanting to attend a name school but because there isn't many subject choices left. Not all schools have honors coursework due to lack of demand, so it is either biology or AP biology for example. AP microeconomics and AP macroeconomics are usually same year too as they are one semester each. Edited October 7, 2016 by Arcadia

[mirabillis]

http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/applying_sideways

 

This is another article I came across in an earlier WTM posting, from MIT admissions, with a similar thread - that about the spike, the hook... I think it's interesting to think of. Again, we have no delusions that we're MIT or Harvard or anything remotely close, caliber. But it's interesting to see. Like someone said above, schools like these get the best of the best applicants (all top-of-the-top academics, ECs, etc) - so it's that hook that makes you stand out. But on another level for 'normal' colleges, I can see this bearing fruit as well. Find your focus, enjoy it, and run with it. It's the beauty of homeschooling that we can make that happen, that academics are more open to us in what we can/can't take. Now, for us, in 9th grade, I don't know what my ds's focus/hook is... but I do feel the Harvard's alum's advice not to strive so hard to be well-rounded, to be a jack of all trades, and master of none, is valid - and something I'll make sure we don't get bogged down in.