David Brooks: How the Ivy League Broke America

[Colonoscopy]

Always an interesting big thinker. Basically argues that our elite institutions have helped to foment a class divide (that leads to populist backlash politically) by their meritocratic selection criteria of intelligence and little else.

Read article free here: (long)

https://archive.ph/zupt8

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

Force them to play in the FCS playoffs, the cheap bastards.

 

[torbee]

I almost posted that here last week, then realized it was too long and too smart for the average HBOT dipshit.

 

[Colonoscopy]

I almost posted that here last week, then realized it was too long and too smart for the average HBOT dipshit.

Yeah me too, the length of that goddamn article. Thankfully that archive for paywall articles seems to have everything you might be interested in. Going to use it more.

 

[hawkeyetraveler]

Great read, thanks OP.

In a prior life I ran a very large technology organization with team members in 60 countries. One thing I found frequently was that people from countries like China, Taiwan, India were excellent when given a specific task and specific direction, but struggled with finding creative solutions to problems - even at senior levels. Like any generalization this is not true for everyone, but it was on average the case. Contrast with American and Western European workers who on average needed less specific direction.

I worry our focus purely on standardized scores as a measure of student achievement will lead to the same problem here…namely that students won’t have the creative and entrepreneurial skills required to discover society’s next advancements. IMO we should not be holding up China as a paragon of learning. Rather we should understand that one of the things that makes America great is (was??) our ability to team effectively, to think out of the box and to innovate.

 

[mnole03]

Great read, thanks OP.

In a prior life I ran a very large technology organization with team members in 60 countries. One thing I found frequently was that people from countries like China, Taiwan, India were excellent when given a specific task and specific direction, but struggled with finding creative solutions to problems - even at senior levels. Like any generalization this is not true for everyone, but it was on average the case. Contrast with American and Western European workers who on average needed less specific direction.

I worry our focus purely on standardized scores as a measure of student achievement will lead to the same problem here…namely that students won’t have the creative and entrepreneurial skills required to discover society’s next advancements. IMO we should not be holding up China as a paragon of learning. Rather we should understand that one of the things that makes America great is (was??) our ability to team effectively, to think out of the box and to innovate.

I believe that is much more philosophy and social dogma.

Korea is a great example. There is almost zero entrepreneurial spirit. People aren’t encouraged to think outside of the box. If you quit your large corporate job to join a startup, your family would be ashamed. When Koreans move to the United States they tend to bring that mindset with them. It’s gone within a generation.

 

[hawkeyetraveler]

I believe that is much more philosophy and social dogma.

Korea is a great example. There is almost zero entrepreneurial spirit. People aren’t encouraged to think outside of the box. If you quit your large corporate job to join a startup, your family would be ashamed. When Koreans move to the United States they tend to bring that mindset with them. It’s gone within a generation, though.

I am a huge believer that part of the reason for our innovative success is we let kids to play unsupervised, to fail, to run around outside without supervision. It allowed us to learn social skills, self organizing behaviors and creative thinking. When things get hyper structured I think those skills get minimized and I think that is not a great thing for our future.

 

[Colonoscopy]

When things get hyper structured I think those skills get minimized and I think that is not a great thing for our future.

This. Hyper-structured environment (can) leads to boring and uncreative. When Brooks makes the argument that we're selecting for intelligence he's saying the process is leading to the cultivation of lots of people that are really good test takers but not so good at lots of other things. When they gain power they select more like themselves and on it goes.

 

[Colonoscopy]

Great read, thanks OP.

In a prior life I ran a very large technology organization with team members in 60 countries. One thing I found frequently was that people from countries like China, Taiwan, India were excellent when given a specific task and specific direction, but struggled with finding creative solutions to problems - even at senior levels. Like any generalization this is not true for everyone, but it was on average the case. Contrast with American and Western European workers who on average needed less specific direction.

Have had the same experience with some of the Indian and East Asian contractors we've had on software projects. Great at following specs -- sorting through convoluted business logic and or dealing with off-spec issues and coming up with a solution? Nope.

Personally, my strength was always finding solutions to problems -- toss it at me and I'll figure out something. But methodically working my way through chapters, memorizing stuff and test taking? Nope, sucked at that. I had to be stimulated by the problem or I was bored and mediocre.

(of course in retrospect, I probably was a bit ADD and probably would've been put on meds)

I've run into really lots of smart, capable people that you'd want in leadership positions that just weren't a good fit for our education system.