Eng.1010
23 October 2018
The Real Answer
Introduction
Intelligence, its meaning, components, and determiners, has been a widely debated subject since times immemorial. It is, however, widely agreed that it entails more than a person's ability to acquire, understand, and apply knowledge and skills. In addition, its components are broader than mathematical and reading skills. Emotional, existential, interpersonal, and musical intelligence are equally indispensable when measuring a candidate’s suitability and capabilities. Putting one type of intelligence on a pedestal, while ignoring others does not also seem considerate. It is, therefore, questionable to believe that GAP grades and performance in SAT tests are effective parameters of determining a college or university applicant's full range of abilities, attitude, aptitude, and potential. Day-to-day life involves much more than what is learned in the classroom and tested through written and oral tests. This fact means that there are gifts and talents that are overlooked when the society focuses on a student’s categorization, as an achiever or a C student.
Summary
In “Throw Out the College Application System” by Adam Grant, the author introduces the problem with the current college system. He claims that the college system used today is favoring the intelligent students but neglects the brilliance potential students because the system only focuses on SAT scores and grades. Grant explains how assessment centers can replace the college system being used today. Grant also provides history of assessment centers and how useful they can be for colleges. The author examines how everyday businesses, psychologists, and agencies has been using assessment centers for about seventy years. The way they use assessment centers is to analyze who has the key behaviors they’re looking for and who has the ability to excel. Furthermore, Grant provides the benefits of using assessment centers such as giving students a chance to display strengths, creativity, and ingenuity. Another benefit would be that students no longer would need a resume or recommendation letter to get into their choice school. They will also be able to perform developmental assessments on moral dilemmas other than having to take SATs or other standardized tests to get in. The author analyzes the drawbacks of assessment centers, stating that finances can be a problem. The main reason why finances can be a problem is because the more time they use, the more money being used. Grant argues that professional schools such as business, law, and medical schools should use assessment centers because they are cost efficient. For these reasons is why Grant explains assessments centers should be used by colleges
Thesis
The current college application system is unfair and ineffective, if indeed it is constructed to determine whether or not a student is suitable for a particular course at university level. Many talents and gifts that contribute to the development of the country in other ways are constantly overlooked, and those who possess them are not thought to be intelligent, just because they may not be able to read or write well. Apart from this stereotype, there are many inconsistencies in the system that shed a bad light on its credibility and reliability, hence, improvements in the education system need to be made.
Body
Grant claims that the whole college application system should be abolished. However, in my opinion, there are credits the system can be given since it has been in use for a long time. For centuries, the society has depended on tests to tell who is intelligent, and the results are evident in the good number of doctors, engineers, and artists that are available. This assertion is in line with the fact that the relative importance of personality and IQ measures varies with individuals’ performance (Borghans, Golsteyn, Heckman, & Humphries, 2016).
It is also easier for a critically ill patient to entrust his/her life into the hands of a doctor if they know the doctor acquired rigorous training through an academic system.
On the other hand, I agree that other abilities, such as problem-solving, exceptional leadership qualities and critical thinking, which do not reflect in grades, are being overlooked. The author points out to popular people, such as Richard Branson and Steve Jobs, as examples of individuals who despite not having had a college education because they could not perform well in school, have gone on to become successful in creative ways. This fact can be supported by the theory of successful intelligence, which advocates for capitalizing compensation and strengths to correct weaknesses (Sternberg, 2015). In this case, I agree with the author since the whole throng of young people cannot depend on employment as a source of income, and as such, other soft skills and informal jobs are important.
As a solution to the problem, Grant suggests the incorporating an Assessment Centre into the education system, as part of the whole evaluation process that will enable tutors gather comprehensive and credible information about a candidate. An assessment center involves spending a whole day completing a series of individual tasks, interviews, and group activities, as their performance in each is either objectively scored or observed by trained evaluators. The canter has been in operation since 1942 when they were used to screen candidates for business and military positions. Over time, assessment centers have been introduced in fields, such General Electric and AT&T.
In my opinion, the centers will be a worthy investment even though their implementation will not happen without finances since application fees may be raised, which may lock other applicants out. I believe that even though the system is riddled with outdated traditions, there are other ways of improving it other than introducing assessment centers. Instead of adding a new to the old, the narrowly conceived and unimaginative traditions should be done away with and, possibly, new ones added.
Admission into college should be more about whether one’s interests are met, how an individual will learn, and if the selected institution will meet those needs. There should also be increased transparency on the logistics involved in the selection process without violating anyone’s right to confidentiality of personal information. In addition, parents and family members of applying students should be educated on how to support the scholars, and then asked to state whether or not they think their children are ready. Wai and Rindermann (2015) say “although Fortune 500 CEOs were highly selected on education and cognitive ability, when placed in the context of a broader array of occupations in the extreme right tail of achievement.” This fact means that another change that could help mitigate the situation is requiring all students thinking of joining college to apply to five different institutions, based on their various interests, so that if they miss on one opportunity, they can still get a chance elsewhere.
Conclusion
I agree with Adam Grant that there are idiosyncrasies going on with the application system that is currently in use. However, doing away with the whole of it may eventually present more unexpected problems for both the education system and the applying candidates, financially and otherwise. Introducing assessment centers will definitely help, but there are other methods that are equally pertinent, which can be adopted in the quest for a fairer, more inclusive, and effective system. Therefore, the concerned stakeholders should come up with an amicable solution that caters for all the parties involved in the issue.
References
Borghans, L., Golsteyn, B. H., Heckman, J. J., & Humphries, J. E. (2016). What grades and achievement tests measure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(47), 13354-13359.
Sternberg, R.
J. (2015). Successful intelligence: A model for testing intelligence beyond IQ tests. European Journal of Education and Psychology, 8(2), 76-84.
Wai, J., & Rindermann, H. (2015). The path and performance of a company leader: A historical examination of the education and cognitive ability of Fortune 500 CEOs. Intelligence, 53, 102-107.