Pages

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

The Medium is the (Social) Message, part II



A great writer, Pico Iyer, in an essay on St Patrick's Cathedral, talks about the ways in which human nature has changed rapidly in the last century:

 Giant figures are talking and strutting and singing on enormous screens above me, and someone is chattering away on the mini-screen in the cab from which I just stepped. Nine people at this street corner are shouting into thin air, wearing wires around their chins and jabbing at the screens in their hands. One teenager, I read recently, sent 300,000 text messages in a month—or 10 a minute for every minute of her waking day, assuming that she was awake 16 hours a day. There are more cell phones than people on the planet now, almost (ten mobiles for every one at the beginning of the century). Even by the end of the past century, the average human being in a country such as ours saw as many images in a day as a Victorian inhaled in a lifetime.

Aside from being a perfect example of how to begin an essay, the facts speak to me. We live in a world so full of information that one day is more than a lifetime for most of the rest who lived as humans on the planet. By far.
At the moment I find this a blessing. But in another moment and another blog entry I will examine 'the accursed share'. But today I want to celebrate how social media helps us connect in all the senses of the word. Below are just a few of the interactions I had on various media yesterday. There are far more emails and other items but these seem most pertinent to this blog.

The first is a snippet of a question I posted last night on Quora.com. I have said this in various forms before, but there are some (and an article came out yesterday supporting this) who think that Quora will replace Facebook. We will see. In any case, it takes of an issue related to college admission. The responses from one member are cogent and sincere. I hope mine are too.
 

*******************************************************************************



Dan Zhang, Computer Engineering PhD student at U... 
1 vote by Parke Muth

No, why?

---

1. Students being on the "cutting edge" shouldn't necessarily be rewarded. This could be due to their parents' wealth rather than their personal abilities.

2. Quora is one of many similar sites. Universities should not discriminate based on the choice of website.

3. Quora is not necessarily the future. I don't really see a difference between Quora and Yahoo Answers. The main difference is the community, which has nothing to do with the website itself.

4. Colleges do not have enough time to carefully browse the answers for every student. Generally, colleges only spend ~30 minutes per student.

5. Allowing colleges to see your Quora posts means that you must filter your answers with that in mind. For example, I would no longer be able to post controversial answers or questions (see my answer history for some examples).
  
Parke Muth
Hi Dan,
I think you are right to have that immediate response.
here is my thinking on this:
I. In part it would demonstrate that some students are on the cutting edge.  Alex Wu posted some things about quora today that led me to think of  this question. If quora is the future shouldn't colleges and  universities see who is aware of what the future is. I quote a lot: "the future is already here, it is simply unevenly distributed" William Gibson.

II. More importantly, if they are on quora, then it would give a great  window into the mind of a student. What kinds of questions are they  asking? What questions are they answering? I think these two things  might be much more useful than an essay that has been through many sets  of eyes and hands before it reaches an admission office.
Dan Zhang
1. Students being on the "cutting edge" shouldn't necessarily be rewarded. This could be due to their parents' wealth rather than their personal abilities.

2. Quora is one of many similar sites. Universities should not discriminate based on the choice of website.

3. Quora is not necessarily the future. I don't really see a difference between Quora and Yahoo Answers. The main difference is the community, which has nothing to do with the website itself.

4. Colleges do not have enough time to carefully browse the answers for every student. Generally, colleges only spend ~30 minutes per student.

5. Allowing colleges to see your Quora posts means that you must filter your answers with that in mind. For example, I would no longer be able to post controversial answers or questions (see my answer history for some examples).
Parke Muth
Dan, you have made my night. I am glad to have asked this questions and earned your replies. They are cogent and precise. Thank you.
Let me see if I can respond in ways that might flesh this out a bit.

I. I am not sure there is a direct correlation between being on the 'cutting edge' and wealth. Do you have data to back this up?

II. You are correct. Let's say a range of options should be included on the Common Application.

III. See II (this is a paltry attempt to be funny)

IV. You are far too generous in your time assessment. In my 30 years of doing evaluations I would say my average per student was much closer to 15 minutes. All admission officers at highly selective schools are under huge time constraints. So are our primary care physicians. Good decisions can be made quickly with the proper training (a question I will raise with respect to admission readers in the future). Despite the current Gladwell bashing that serves as sport for some, his 'blink/think' meme is useful I think.
V. Everyone is filtering on quora. Some want free answers to questions they would normally have to pay huge sums for (this has happened to me and I cannot believe how lucky I have been), so they try to sound smart and eager.
Some want to show how smart they are (guilty as charged in my case).
Some want dates.
Some want to rant (guilty again).
etc.
Why choose prospective college students as the only ones who might have to think about the nature of their questions? Could this actually have the effect of raising the level of questions on quora from a demographic that is largely absent here? Won't it serve to hear more voices who have valuable things to say? I don't know the answers but I think the questions are worth raising.
I think controversial answers are indeed risky. But if you have read what I have written about applying to schools in US News you would see this is exactly my advice. I want students who are not afraid to raise tough and controversial questions. Others may not. Sorry, do not. I now have proof of this from quora and other sites. So you are right at least partly on this point.
But I think stirring the pot is worth it as long as those doing so have the motives of raising good issues instead of tearing things down for the sake of the fun such a mess makes.
Dan Zhang
I. Here you go: http://www.sciencedirect.com/sci...

Quick summary: poor people (especially in other countries) do not have ready access to the internet (generally depending on internet cafes, etc).

I postulate that this should still hold true in American inner cities. Someone selling drugs to provide for their younger sibling does not have hours to spend on Quora.

V. From what I know, even admissions counselors at the same school can have different criteria for students. The risk of providing controversial answers is not worth the reward.

Plus, what's controversial for high schoolers can sound really stupid for educated adults.
Parke Muth
Dan,
Thank you again for taking the time to reply. I will try to be quick too. That rarely happens even if my intentions are good, so forgive me if I ramble.

I. The article you sent: "Internet access in Africa: empirical evidence from Kenya and Nigeria", covers a very specific group of people in the world. It is sad and true that so many there do not have access to computers. I know some people who are trying to help but it is an overwhelming task. On the other hand, the people this article refers to have nothing, it is sad to say, with the demographic I am referring to. In other words, the people who apply to highly selective schools from around the world are almost all, highly educated. Virtually none of the people who are referred to in this article have even the slightest chance of being admitted to a highly selective school. Given that this is the case, should schools not use information that is likely to be available to the vast majority of their applicant pool. This certainly is not fair in a global sense but all but 10 of the top schools in the US use the ability to pay as a major factor in selecting those international students who are offered admission. This is not fair either but the economics of the day at schools make this is necessity.

II. You are certainly correct about inner cities, but not quite as correct as you are in number 1. First off, a drug dealer's chances of being admitted to a highly selective school are again astronomically small. The meth labs that go up at places like MIT are often rich kids surprisingly enough. It’s a kick rather than an economic decision.
On the other hand, there are many foundations, from Gates to Questbridge to specific university centered programs that provide tutoring, computers, and college advice for free. Those tiny few who can make it through such terrible circumstances are often the most recruited students at Yale, Harvard and Princeton. I say this having read applications for many years as a part of the Ron Brown Scholar program. These are students from all across the US who are given scholarships to attend any school they choose. The winners are kids whose life stories would put any of us in tears. My tears have stained applications for this program for years, but hey are tears of joy and sadness. They are the lucky few who have found that education is the key to escape the cycle of poverty. All too often it is the quick fix, like drug dealing, that prevents students from choosing the long term path. If a student works hard in a terrible environment, and does well, they will get a full paid education at the best schools in the country.

V.  As for risks, again you may well be right. In a cost benefit analysis it is likely in one's best interest to play it safe. On the other hand, those who have risen above and beyond what people like me can do or have done, are often the ones who did indeed have the guts to take immense risks. People like Steve jobs and many other billionaires did no get where they are playing it safe. There are mountains of books and data that demonstrate that risk takers and entrepreneurs and innovators are the 1% who really matte in the world. It is not their money but their passion and ability to get normal folks like me to follow who inspire global change. When I read an application of someone like that I take more than 30 minutes. I write them personally and tell them that wherever they go, to keep on pushing and experimenting. I don't care where they go to school; I care that they know there are people out there rooting for them. Even if they don't get into any Ivy, it does not matter. Their willingness to go all in is what at least to me we don't have enough of today. Our politicians are proof of this. Nothing happens that is not painstaking pushed through focus groups. They are unwilling to take a risk and make tough choices. Where I come from Jefferson has deity status. He put his life on the line, died virtually penniless, and did a lot of controversial things (some would condemn the Louisiana Purchase even today). But history pretty much has borne out he did a great service to his country and the world. The Declaration is a revolutionary document. Had he and others played it safe we might have very different accents than the ones we have now.

Thank you again for your time and words. I have learned much.

No comments:

Post a Comment