{ 張亨來 }

ijkaylin:

brotylz:

let-me-free:

Stuyvesant High School is not only “a good high school”.  It is a place for the best and the brightest.  There’s a reason middle school students study their asses off for the SHSAT.  There’s a reason people work so hard just for that one chance to get into Stuy.  Because it’s where the best belong, and they want to be the best.  

It’s ridiculous to change the admissions process in exchange for “racial integration”.  The SHSAT does not look at your race when you bubble it; it only looks at your score.  That’s the basis for picking out the smartest kids that belong.  So if coincidentally, we happen to be mostly Asian, it’s not fucking intentional.  People of every other race have the exact same chance we do.  I’m not going to be racist and say that Asians are smarter; our parents are just trained to think that we must make Stuyvesant or be forever condemned.  

It would not be fair if Stuyvesant’s admissions process was altered to include a “minimum academic requirement”.  That takes away the chance of a lifetime for many superstar students.  A 99th percentile student can lose his or her seat to a sub-par student.  A student that can excel at Stuy might end up at some obscure high school, while the 70th percentile student who got the seat might end up struggling at Stuy.  The workload at Stuy is designed for only the best and the most dedicated.

Our generation is slowly dying as it is.  Please don’t take away one of the best sanctuaries for intellectuals.

Things like this never cease to amaze me. 

I’m also not quite sure where I stand on this at all, but a couple of things bothered me about a previous reblogged post. 

Sanctuary for intellectuals? As much as I’d love to agree with this person, I really can’t. While I’d hate to belittle, having graduated from Stuy, I can honestly say that not the entire Stuyvesant population is as dedicated or “bright” as they may seem. There’s a difference between intellect and intelligence. I’d agree that MOST Stuy kids are intelligent, but to say that most of them are also intellectual is a claim that I would not confidently make. 

I fail to see how one score that you get in the 8th grade can honestly determine your full potential.

“It would not be fair if Stuyvesant’s admissions process was altered to include a “minimum academic requirement. That takes away the chance of a lifetime for many superstar students.” 

If one were truly a superstar student, why would Stuyvesant be the only chance of a lifetime? I agree that getting into Stuyvesant, a high school with a prestigious reputation, would definitely provide an advantage for a driven student. But such a driven student would also see Stuyvesant as just the beginning. If such a “superstar” student (one who would’ve done well at Stuy) were to end up at an obscure high school, I have no doubt that this student would do spectacularly well in another environment. 

On a different note, basing admissions off socioeconomic status of your parents makes a lot more sense than creating another case of affirmative action.

Of course, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I just disagree with the wording of the post.

The person who wrote “[Stuyvesant is] where the best belong” needs to brush up on her biology. Weakness accumulates within species lacking diversity in its gene pool, making it susceptible to extinction. A high school that admits students based purely on academic metrics results in a student body that is highly specialized in standardized testing. A student body that is narrowly focused on academic performance becomes similarly impotent and stagnant. Admitting only students deemed academically excellent will make Stuyvesant an academically competitive institution, but in no way an intellectually vibrant community.

The person who wrote “if coincidentally, we happen to be mostly Asian, it’s not fucking intentional” should brush up on her social studies. Contrary to her uninformed and naive outlook, people of every race do not have the “exact same chance [Asians] do”. Standardized test scores and marking period grades fail to capture real-life factors that impact one’s academic performance. The claim that “Asian parents are just trained to think that we must make Stuyvesant or be forever condemned”means that the scores of these students are inflated because they received a boost from external factors. Conversely, African-American or Hispanic students having lower scores does not mean they are “sub-par student[s]”. In fact, they may be more hardworking, committed, and talented students for having to overcome their socioeconomic background to achieve these scores in the first place. As such, it is arguable that they may be actually more qualified than a higher-scoring Asian student.

Finally, the person who wrote “don’t take away one of the best sanctuaries for intellectuals” needs to deepen her maturity and broaden her outlook. The last time I checked, scoring high on your SAT did not qualify you to be an “intellectual”. In fact, overemphasis on academic might very well breed anti-intellectualism. A disproportional number of students from top high schools attend top colleges, and a disproportional number of students from top colleges find work in finance and consulting (about 1/3 for Columbia). The tunnel vision focus for “results” in the form of higher scores and better grades translates into the insatiable drive for higher salaries and larger bonuses. Finance and consulting may be challenging, interesting, competitive, exciting - but “intellectual”, it is not.

Yes, the person who wrote “our generation is slowly dying” may be right about that. But our generation is slowly dying not because we’re extending educational opportunities to those who would otherwise not be able to attain them due to - not academic shortcomings - but socioeconomic handicaps. Our generation is slowly dying because the “very best” of our generation seems to be increasingly self-entitled and increasingly narrow-sighted. It’s because our generation seems to be increasingly obsessed with the superficial rather than the substantive - be it hinging one’s self-worth on one’s tax bracket, or equating getting into Stuyvesant as “the chance of a lifetime for many [and only] superstar students”.