[jbangert]

this style of evaluating people (what interesting things have you done) is quite problematic at that age, and forces students to do things for show from early one. I know there are a lot of people who do really exciting things even at a young age (e.g. Running a flight school or competing in the olympics), but if that becomes the sole way of grading/comparing students/getting scholarships, we create pressure to do impressive-sounding things, which leads to the weird US college application system (days filled with extracurriculars, taking classes early, the essay-writing industry, etc.). IMHO, it is much preferable if the 'front door' into elite schools and scholarships exists based on grades and the like( of course, there should be flexibility for admitting extraordinarily accomplished people -- there just shouldn't be any shame in getting in just by hard work/studying/general smarts, so you can be honest about your successes).

[cperciva]

Right, I wish grades were reliable enough that we could put more weight on them.

The "days filled with extracurriculars" problem you mention is why I generally ignore "volunteered at senior's home / hospital / soup kitchen / etc." activities. When I say that I'm looking for exceptional achievements, a large part of what I mean is "has this student done something which nobody could or would conceivably do just for the sake of boosting their chances at getting a scholarship?"