Most colleges today use the Common Application. For those of you who do not know, the Common Application is basically an undergraduate application system that allows students to fill up a certain online form, and apply to various schools with that same form. It makes application more effective, as students only need to fill up one form, and can have it sent to a number of different schools.

I appreciate the effectiveness of the application format. The problem, though, in my opinion, is when schools take that as the only way to apply. By doing that, they’re forcing all students to fit into that one template, and in my opinion, it takes away any individuality from the student. A college application, in my opinion, is not much different from a job application. The application (your recommendations, transcripts, etc) are like your resume – it’s a reflection of who you are, an extension of your identity. By forcefitting all applicants into the same format, schools are taking away any option for creative expression.

Imagine if, when you apply for a job, the company requires your resume to be in a fixed format. That doesn’t quite fly, does it? Yes, they might have personal particulars forms which they need you to fill up, but the bulk of your job application – your resume – is your own. It’s up to you to create. That’s why you have so many creative and unique resumes (and a quick search on google will turn up even more).

Why should college applications limit students to that one plain bland format? Sure, give a personal information form for administrative purposes if you need. And yes, definitely, offer the Common Application as an option, because most students will just use it anyway for ease of application. But give students the option of standing out and letting their personality shine through their application, if they are willing to put in the work to create such an application. Don’t limit students and take away any option for remarkableness. Students are unique individuals too.

So, all that said, here’s the personal part which you can skip over if you’re not too interested – my application. While I initially wanted to do something like a box, a 3-dimensional application that was interactive, and could be felt and handled, I realized that I’d be better served doing an application which could be filed away (because that’s what the school is going to do anyway) and still maintain its uniqueness and impact. So here’s what I did.

Basically, I bought a folder, and made 4 A6-sized booklets, which each summarized a different portion of my life. You can download the pdfs to see what I put into the b0oklets, if you wish – about me, activities, academics, appraisals. On the right, I inserted the necessary supporting documents and essays, with a note detailing the different sections. On top of the whole application, I attached a cover letter explaining my application, acknowledging that their website requests for application to be done via the Common App, but stating my objection to that (basically my argument above), and explaining that as such, I had done up my own application.

In essence, I included all the information they required, but in my own format. It’ll be interesting to see which schools accept the application. And yes, I know, it might seem a bit self-indulgent. But I think if I really believe that the Common App falls short, I should be willing to take a stand on it. I’ve always been about being your own person, standing by your beliefs, and being unique. And I figured I needed to really let that show through my application – to really “let my true colors shine through”, if you will.

So yeah, all that said. What do you think? Am I being too stubborn and self-indulgent here? Or is it a good thing that I’m trying to stand out and stand by my beliefs?

clipped from hellomynameisscott.blogspot.com

“I guess I didn’t realize you had to attend school to be a student,” I said.

Nothing much I need to add to it, I think.

What are you studying?

I understand where she’s coming from. And I’ve heard that statement so many times, especially when people ask me about why I quit school. But I don’t agree. The question is, why play it safe? As Seth Godin has said, in today’s world, ‘safe is risky”.

The semi-finals of the World 10-Ball Championship between Niels Feijen and Darren Appleton was a great example. Feijen consistently went for safety shots. Even when he could make the offensive shot, he chose to go down the safe path. And eventually, he lost out.

If you play not to lose, you won’t win. You won’t make the right decisions, and ultimately, you won’t come up on top. As the book “Sway” by Ori and Rom Brafman points out, fear of loss is one of the main reasons behind bad decisions. Kathy Sierra has talked about “death by risk aversion” as well.

If you want to be the best, you have to take risks. And why settle for anything less than the best?

Go check it out.

Then ask yourself, why don’t todays schools do that? Because honestly, I think they should.

Take part, and make a difference by checking out Once Upon a School. Anyone can do it.

Simply stated, an entrepreneur is someone who identifies a “need” or a problem, and then figures out a solution. Of course, comprehensive goals, strategies, and execution plans must be developed and implemented in order to achieve success with any entrepreneurial endeavor, but it all begins with a “need.”

It’s a great post, but just as I commented there, I think that holds true for all educators, not just music ones.

So, to all you educators out there. What needs are you addressing? What possibilities can you explore?

That got me thinking. I’m not sure about America, but over here in Singapore, most schools don’t have much of a web presence. And most schools aren’t making the most of web tools. And reading that basically got me thinking about how schools could make better use of web (or Web 2.0) tools.

The first idea that came to mind is Twitter. Those of you who are on Twitter (and if you’re not, you really should be) would have seen how it has been used during the Superbowl, the Oscars, and even during Podcamps and various events. It provides a way to have live discussions – live ‘commentary’, if you will – about the ongoing event. Couldn’t we transfer the way Twitter is used in Podcamps to the education system – for use during lectures, for example?

That’s just the first, most instinctive idea that came to mind. What do you think? And what other ways do you think schools can make use of Web 2.0 tools?

Part of the wiki, though, is a (much shorter) list of new skills, that weren’t necessary in the past, but are today. This is what catches my eye most. And the question that I want to ask is, do you think these new skills should be taught in school more?

Maybe not all should. But I do think that skills like maintaining online identity are getting more and more important, and the formal education system should do a better job of teaching these skills. What do you think?

“Social facilitation is the tendency for people to be aroused into better performance on simple tasks (or tasks at which they are expert or that have become autonomous) when under the eye of others, rather than while they are alone. Complex tasks (or tasks at which people are not skilled), however, are often performed in an inferior manner in such situations. “

It’s an interesting phenomena. And apparently (based on a UC Berkeley podcast I was listening to), the “others” don’t even have to be actively watching. The mere presence of another person causes better performance on simple tasks, and inferior performance at complex tasks.

What that really got me thinking about was education. Education is mainly about complex tasks, isn’t it? Learning to do tasks at which you are not yet skilled at. So would it be better served done alone? That raises the question of effectiveness of self-education (mainly done alone) vs formal education (with people around, classroom setting, etc).

Just questions to think about. I don’t have fixed thoughts or opinions about this, at least not yet. There are other factors, such as networking and social interaction. But it’s an interesting question for me.

Could self-education be scientifically more effective for learning?

But in today’s world, with the internet and all, the information and facts and theories can be found easily, can’t it? Just a quick search on Google. What we need, as Seth Godin pointed out, is curiosity. Knowing information, and being able to apply it to solve problems is all well and good. And yes, we need a certain amount of that. But in order to push towards the future, we need to encourage our students to question more, don’t we? We need to learn to question things that are commonly accepted. We need people who aren’t afraid to go against societies limits, and push the boundaries of innovation.

And that’s one area where schools fail, I think. In school, we are taught to follow the rules. We are taught to use the “correct” answers, instead of questioning whether the answers are indeed correct. And if we do question, or if we go against the commonly accepted ‘correct’ answers, we get punished for it (graded poorly, etc).

That’s no way to encourage curiosity, is it?