So poetic and perfect!

our ‘education’

This past week, I heard the most ridiculous thing regarding school and the nature of education. It was the thought of learning “deeply and conceptually” and “for the sake of learning.” Ha!

None of us learn because we’re interested in what we’re doing. And even if we were interested in specific subject area, say physics, for example, the way the curriculum is structured stifles and annihilates that interest. Instead of using a student-centered curriculum, that focuses on finding and developing students’ interests, we have a one-size-fits-all, dull, and fast-paced curriculum. It’s no wonder we have a whole population of kids who are turned off by the thought of school and getting an education. 

A lot of today’s discussion about education reform is focused on rewarding teachers better. Yes, that’s important. But so is reforming exactly what our teachers are doing. A fantastic teacher can breathe life into a boring curriculum, but ultimately what students will enjoy in that model is the teacher, not the subject area. 

Now I’m not suggesting that we triple our employment of teachers to allow each student to receive a personal education. That’s impractical.

A good place to start, though, is to reduce the number of AP courses available to students. At most, the collegeboard should only have five. That entails taking out every language AP and only keeping perhaps two science, one history, and one math AP. This will allow students to demonstrate their ability on a standardized curriculum while not having that demonstration consume their entire high school lives.  

This extra space in high school study can be filled with classes like philosophy, philosophy, and more philosophy. Isn’t it funny how philosophy is completely left out of the curriculum at elite schools like Bronx Science? What kind of an educational foundation is an educational foundation without philosophy? 

UMM dessert at Per Se! View high resolution

UMM dessert at Per Se!

“
The difference suggests that, where considering race is allowed, elite universities may be handicapping Asian-American applicants. “They just all sort of magically end up with under 20 percent Asian students,” Hsu says. One Princeton lecturer has asked if that number represents the “Asian ceiling.
http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2011/04/17/high_achieving_asian_americans_are_being_shut_out_of_top_schools/?page=1
“
S is for Stanford
you know the name well
too bad that it looks
like a huge Taco Bell
J. D. Rothman, The Neurotic Parent’s Guide to College Admissions.

the graduates

This article is so good!

Start watching from 25:10. The whole “dear __th grade me” thing is really nice. 

Few favorites:

“Dear 10th grade me: That B you got in AP Bio? Doesn’t matter anymore!” - one can only hope…

“Dear 11th grade me: Don’t let those AP’s freak you out.” - I’m actually doing quite well at this one.

“Dear 11th grade me: Even if it’s three or four AM in the morning and you have four pages of your paper left, keep working hard.” - That’ll be me this Friday, 5/4/12, at 3:00 AM. Wish me luck!

“Classlessness” is the funniest word ever. lol

uchicagoadmissions:

Visceral UChicago

Here are a few sights, sounds, and smells that we associate with the Life of the Mind:

Sinking into a comfy reading chair in Harper Library’s sunlit Grand Reading Room, propping your feet onto the matching ottoman, and pulling out a book (for effect) as you drift off for a late-afternoon nap.

Catching a glimpse of the spring ducklings in Botany Pond, heart bulging with familial pride and protectiveness.

Hearing the bagpipes wail louder as the Convocation procession makes its way toward the Main Quad.

Scanning the Medici bakery shelves in the morning, when they’re stocked full of fresh, warm, flaky, buttery pastries.

Go to the University of Chicago Magazine to read more, and leave your own recollections. 

I love UChicago’s libraries! 

(Reblogged from uchicagoadmissions)

how i analyze people

This can be considered a continuation of a previous post. But I think the way I analyze people is different from the way most people do. I might be wrong though!

Step one: Observe what the person looks like, who the person is with, and how the person acts by default to both friends and strangers.

Step two: Articulate your first impression of this person (to yourself, of course).

Step three: Take the exact opposite of that impression.

Step four: Treat the person according to the information you obtained from step three.

Step five: Give the person ample opportunity to show him/herself. Adjust your opinions accordingly, noting whether the person behaves honestly or superficially.

Step six: Decide whether you like or hate the person.

Okay I feel creepy. But try this, and tell me how well it works for you! I think it works well, but I may be terribly mistaken. It’s difficult to judge how you judge people.