Blinking and Tipping
I haven't read any of Malcolm Gladwell's books. But I know I really ought to. For one thing, people who have read them keep telling me I should (including my Uncle Larry, just this past weekend). For another, every time I read something Gladwell has written, I'm impressed.
Like this New Yorker essay on the anatomy and social ramifications of the Ivy League admissions process.
Everyone who knows me also knows that I am kind of a school snob (kind of? I'm sure you're all saying) and that I am maybe over-proud of my own alma mater. So naturally, I read the article, assuming that the W&M admissions process is at least roughly similar to that of the Ivies (except, of course, that W&M has that pesky in-state requirement). After reading the article in its entirety, I think I'm right to think so.
Very interesting article, especially since I can't get enough of the subject. Unfortunately, my thoughts on it have jumped all over the place - they're not even close to coherent. So here they are, in no particular order.
1. Love it when social science and brand management intersect. More people outside of traditional marketing departments should think about what they're doing in terms of marketing. Wrote about it on the other (KPC) blog...here.
2. Reading this article on the heels of the one I just read (the review of Capote, which I posted about below) was especially interesting. I'd just noted that Capote and Harper Lee were friends, and wondered about the relationship between success and accident of who you know.
If Ivy admissions are all about admitting students who will become superstars after college, they must think about the fact that their superstars will help one another rise to the top just by the virtue of being friends - even if that help is intangible. This is undoubtedly true for Harvard - everyone knows that Tommy Lee Jones and Al Gore were roommates there. Along the same lines, my cousin John was Chris Moore's roommate there freshman year, and ended up investing in Good Will Hunting as a result. That type of thing happens all the time.
Gladwell gives this phenomenon short shrift, however. He posits that families encouraging their kids to attend Ivies are misguided in the belief that going to an Ivy (over another school) will result in those kids becoming superstars after college. (And he has some fairly convincing statistical evidence backing up his claim). The reason for this misguidance is in admissions: the philosophy of the Ivies (admitting those who are already poised to become stars) is in direct contrast to that of, say, the Marines (trusting that the environment will shape stars - or good Marines).
In all this discussion, though, he doesn't even mention the value of social networking at an Ivy. And I know that's got to fit in somewhere.
3. Definitely interesting to read about Harvard's alleged "happy bottom quarter" approach. Within my first few days at W&M, the president made a scary yet obvious speech to the incoming freshman, explaining that though 85 or 90% of the new freshman class had been in the top 20% of their class in high school, that type of relative success simply wasn't possible anymore. Never forgot that speech. It totally shaped the academic fear and misery that W&M loves to foster.
4. My parents were right that team sports are really important to include on college applications.
5. Finally, at the risk of sounding cocky (and it's not even a risk - it's a certainty), after reading this article, I started thinking that maybe I should've applied to Princeton. Part of the reason I didn't was because I knew who else was applying from my high school, and I knew they had (slightly) better grades and scores. However, I'm nearly certain I was more well-rounded...less dorky (and believe me, I was a dork. Just less so than some of the others.)
Then again, why go to Princeton? I had a great college experience, both socially and academically. And I'm not sure what would be different about my life right now if I'd gone to an Ivy. It's possible that I'd be in the exact same place: sitting in Baltimore, blogging instead of working, increasingly content without superstardom.
I guess I'll just always have to wonder...
Like this New Yorker essay on the anatomy and social ramifications of the Ivy League admissions process.
Everyone who knows me also knows that I am kind of a school snob (kind of? I'm sure you're all saying) and that I am maybe over-proud of my own alma mater. So naturally, I read the article, assuming that the W&M admissions process is at least roughly similar to that of the Ivies (except, of course, that W&M has that pesky in-state requirement). After reading the article in its entirety, I think I'm right to think so.
Very interesting article, especially since I can't get enough of the subject. Unfortunately, my thoughts on it have jumped all over the place - they're not even close to coherent. So here they are, in no particular order.
1. Love it when social science and brand management intersect. More people outside of traditional marketing departments should think about what they're doing in terms of marketing. Wrote about it on the other (KPC) blog...here.
2. Reading this article on the heels of the one I just read (the review of Capote, which I posted about below) was especially interesting. I'd just noted that Capote and Harper Lee were friends, and wondered about the relationship between success and accident of who you know.
If Ivy admissions are all about admitting students who will become superstars after college, they must think about the fact that their superstars will help one another rise to the top just by the virtue of being friends - even if that help is intangible. This is undoubtedly true for Harvard - everyone knows that Tommy Lee Jones and Al Gore were roommates there. Along the same lines, my cousin John was Chris Moore's roommate there freshman year, and ended up investing in Good Will Hunting as a result. That type of thing happens all the time.
Gladwell gives this phenomenon short shrift, however. He posits that families encouraging their kids to attend Ivies are misguided in the belief that going to an Ivy (over another school) will result in those kids becoming superstars after college. (And he has some fairly convincing statistical evidence backing up his claim). The reason for this misguidance is in admissions: the philosophy of the Ivies (admitting those who are already poised to become stars) is in direct contrast to that of, say, the Marines (trusting that the environment will shape stars - or good Marines).
In all this discussion, though, he doesn't even mention the value of social networking at an Ivy. And I know that's got to fit in somewhere.
3. Definitely interesting to read about Harvard's alleged "happy bottom quarter" approach. Within my first few days at W&M, the president made a scary yet obvious speech to the incoming freshman, explaining that though 85 or 90% of the new freshman class had been in the top 20% of their class in high school, that type of relative success simply wasn't possible anymore. Never forgot that speech. It totally shaped the academic fear and misery that W&M loves to foster.
4. My parents were right that team sports are really important to include on college applications.
5. Finally, at the risk of sounding cocky (and it's not even a risk - it's a certainty), after reading this article, I started thinking that maybe I should've applied to Princeton. Part of the reason I didn't was because I knew who else was applying from my high school, and I knew they had (slightly) better grades and scores. However, I'm nearly certain I was more well-rounded...less dorky (and believe me, I was a dork. Just less so than some of the others.)
Then again, why go to Princeton? I had a great college experience, both socially and academically. And I'm not sure what would be different about my life right now if I'd gone to an Ivy. It's possible that I'd be in the exact same place: sitting in Baltimore, blogging instead of working, increasingly content without superstardom.
I guess I'll just always have to wonder...
posted by Kit Pollard at
5:43 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home