So, Malala Yousafzai – Nobel laureate, civil rights leader, world-renowned advocate for uplifting women and girls through education – wants to study at Stanford University.
However, there’s a hitch.
You see, Stanford has “standards.”
In particular, Stanford has the SAT, the meaningless entrance exam that is required of all applicants who fail to be the spawn of wealthy donors. It is a well known fact that schools like Stanford, or the Ivies like Harvard, give a special pass to children of graduates, especially when those graduates have leveraged their privileged positions to such a degree that they can amplify that leverage with donations to their alma maters. Other kinds of exceptions are freely offered whenever the school sees some political or financial gain as a significant possibility.
Nevertheless, Stanford has “standards.”
And because Ms. Yousafzai has not taken the SAT, she does not meet Stanford’s demanding “criteria.”
It is worth noting here that these criteria – as “established” by such standardized exams as the SAT and the ACT – are effectively meaningless. An increasing number of studies are showing that these test have NO PREDICTIVE VALUE when it comes to either academic success (in the form of GPA) or graduation rates. So useless are these tests, that an increasing number of colleges are dropping them as a requirement for entrance.
The problem with standardized tests is that they presuppose a theory of measurement that has no legitimate application to human beings and educational processes. In order to make a measurement, the thing being measured must manifest some form or kind of uniformity that can then be broken out into standard and interchangeable units that can then be counted. This is no mean set of assumptions. Criticisms of the monstrosity that is standardized testing may be found all over the web. (Diane Ravitch’s blog is as good a place as any to start.) However, the issue is not limited to just and only education or social measurement. Fundamental problems of both a methodological and metaphysical kind remain unaddressed in, for example, contemporary gravitational cosmology.
Many schools have abandoned these meaningless tests for the personal interview and an essay. As it happens, Ms. Yousafzai has actually demonstrated a measure of skill as an essayist – you see, not many incoming Frosh have delivered a speech before the Nobel committee and Swedish royalty. In addition, and with regard to the interview part of the process, Ms. Yousafzai may actually have already demonstrated that she has the whole “personal presence” thing more or less under control.
But fear not for Americas waning academic performance in the world! Such trivialities will not be permitted to count anywhere in our premier universities on the Left Coast!
Because, you see, Stanford has “standards.”
Oh, I should have said this earlier, but h/t to Diane Ravitch for the alert on the original story.
LikeLike
She may need Stanford even less than Stanford needs her.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed.
LikeLike
PS. Did you disappear from Facebook?
LikeLike
Yeah, for the time being, at least. I deactivated my account 2 weeks ago because everything on FB was turning into a source of pain, stress, confrontation, and conflict. I’m going to stay off for at least another two weeks, at which I’ll have a blog post ready on “28 Days,” the semi-official de-tox framework for addictions.
I may or may not return to FB, which amuses me on tautological grounds. There are some things about FB that I miss, but a few very intensely unpleasant things that I do not miss at all. The challenge for me is to try and figure out how to manage those things in such a way that it does not delaminate my soul. I’m not sure I’ve the tools to do that.
Meanwhile, you’re always free to share my blog posts with anyone, anywhere.
LikeLike
I get that. I wouldn’t be on Facebook, except that most of my close friends (who are nonetheless geographically far away) do most of their social interaction there. And I find a lot of worthwhile things to read from people I’m “friends” with or following there. But I’ve been realizing I spend too much of my down/free time refreshing my feed, rather than devoting it to some sustained project or reading…
LikeLike
The proximate reason I had to notice your absence: I was hoping to get any commentary you might have on the following article: http://www.philosophersmag.com/index.php/tpm-mag-articles/11-essays/69-in-praise-of-specialisation
(Since this has nothing to do with the topic of the post, feel free to delete, etc. But maybe I can prod you to do a post on the topic of this article.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Heh — It’s easy; just ask. I’ll have to read the article, but just seeing the “lead” makes me bristle a bit. (Specialization is no excuse for inaccessibility — a surgeon should be able to explain the procedure and why it is necessary to a patient. Perhaps upon reading, more subtleties will appear.)
LikeLike
By the bye, I did post on that article. Upon rereading my post, I can tell it would be improved by copy-editing and more careful (less colorful) efforts at expression. But, as a blog post, I’m satisfied to just roll with it.
LikeLike
Reminds me of William James, “The PhD Octopus”. Harvard did not have the SAT then, but the principle stands. And where was the PhD for George Herbert Mead?? Did that lack stop John Dewey from hiring Mead and working with him until Mead died?
She’s better off at a place like Oberlin (as it was) or maybe Berkeley (huge, but there are good people, and Berkeley is a better town than Palo Alto)
LikeLiked by 1 person
And for all of that, I’m not sure Berkeley is all that much bigger than Stanford.
LikeLike
Pingback: “Specialization Is For Insects” | THE QUANTUM of EXPLANATION
They only say that she has to take it.
LikeLike
Something they DO NOT bother to say to a great many applicants, most notably those that come from money, or are otherwise grandfathered in to the system. Plus, the requirement itself is *meaningless*. The tests bear no relationship to academic success, and Ms. Yousafzai has already demonstrated an overwhelming degree of intelligence and composure.
LikeLike