Sorry to ask anyone to read the NYT, but thought this was very interesting.
-XC
"It's an objective system because I get to decide who gets what ranking and what criteria we are ranking these applicants on". That's what I got out of the system they have set up and how lead readers function. I realize that we're in a globalized and interconnected world, but why is there such an emphasis on "leadership"? It's not even something you can get a good sense of from reading an application. Secondly, not everybody needs to be a leader. It's the same thing with everybody having to be STEM major or being useless to society. Everybody needs a cook or a plumber just as bad as an Engineer. Same goes for a leader.
In theory sure. But an essay by nature gives all kinds of information that they’re likely using as proxies for leadership, and most of them are indicative of race, religion, social class, and political affiliation. They want people who volunteer, but be honest, if one kid volunteers at a Pro-Life organization and a second in a soup kitchen and a third at a Pro-Palestinian group, who gets that one spot even if all three show “leadership?” Does it sound better if the things they were doing happen in America, near their home, or in Kenya? Keep in mind that only people likely to be able to afford to give gifts to the college post graduation are likely to be able to afford sinecures in NGOs doing interesting work in a far away country. There isn’t really a way around this. The nature of an essay is that it cannot help but give out information that has nothing to do with “leadership”.
wow, how the heck did you come across this very old post?? i mean, going back to 2013-ish! my views certainly have developed since then, reading back on it…
I think I read somewhere that one of the most important jobs for our society to run is of that in sanitation, a statement I can mostly agree with. Imagine if no one picked up your trash whilst living in NY? Shit would get hectic yo.
Interesting article. As someone who is currently in the process of college applications, it is disheartening to know that such "objective" systems come down to depending on the reader who your application gets assigned to. Surely there must be some better system?
cliffelam, if you still check here ever, you weren’t far off on it being a dying problem, in some ways…
This is really interesting. Not on the same level, but I applied for a job a few weeks back, a work-from-home sort of deal, contracting to a company who tested software etc for other, larger companies. The job was rating landing pages from a particular search engine in relation to the search, and as much as they explained the criteria (authenticity, scope, accuracy, freshness, etc) it still seemed really subjective. I'd rate a page as "fair" for being potentially relevant but probably not what the user was looking for, and I'd be told that it should probably be "good" because it was a reliable source, etc. Same sort of 'objective' system I'm getting from this essay.
It's interesting that the same tactic, for want of a better word, is used by both. I'm not sure yet, waiting to hear back from the company. Need to go through a round of examinations of the same sort, which is bound to be a whole heap of fun.