What if the secret to success...
 

is failure?

Although this article is wildly overwritten, there are some really interesting nuggets in there.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/magazine/what-if-the-secret-to-success-is-failure.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=general&src=me

And I think this speaks a lot to the issues that have been discussed here about girls who have done exceedingly well through high school and then bomb out in rush and/or in college.

The survey is this:
http://www.nytimes.com/schoolbook/2011/09/14/q-and-a-can-you-teach-character/

Would the CPA (character point average) be a benefit in rush? That would be a huge bummer for some girls but would help narrow down your guest list to the girls who will 1-make grades every semester, 2-not drop out of college and 3-stay involved with the chapter through her entire academic life and beyond.

I bet the girl with the high CPA would receive her list of invites, acknowledge her cuts, and move on.

I'm picturing the rush party from hell where we ask the rushees to fill out this quick survey and then we'll sing a song! OK, maybe not. But it would be interesting to provide this survey to the rushees prior to rush and see how they succeed through rush and then through college.

I could also see working some of these questions into rush conversation.

Hi Dubai:
Thanks for sharing a very thought-provoking article. So much of this is generalizable to almost all facets of life - ranging from rush to academics to employment situations and beyond.

I really like the idea of the survey, but I think it would be a huge pain in the ass to implement into rush. It looks like it requires input from 4 teachers, presumably from high school. If this was part of standard college application materials, along with rec letters and the rest, that would make it a little more practical for application in the rush process. Hell, that would probably make a huge improvement on the whole college admissions process, weeding out all those people who, in my opinion, should not go to college. Okay, stepping off my soapbox now.

You're right, the CPA would help chapters determine which girls are going to be worthwhile members and which ones aren't. You can't always tell which girls are going to join for a year an then quit and which girls are in it for life. I can imagine that it would help chapters decide who to invite back, based on more than just first impressions and resumes.

Meh.

Some people don't test well, period. Some people don't shine until they get into a sorority (or vice versa). We all have sisters who we thought just joined to party and ended up bleeding for the sorority...and those with high GPAs, glowing resumes and personal recommendations who ended up being big blobs of lard.

As far as people who shouldn't go to college, that is largely the fault of the parents who just don't want to hear that Susie could make way more and be way happier as a hairdresser than she would as a doctor. All the tests in the world aren't going to change that - mainly because a lot of the time it's their own kid telling them they don't want to go.

Pretty much.

I know that I didn't come into my own until I got to college. One of the nice things about college is that, for the most part, you're starting out with a clean slate. While sororities need recommendations essentially vouching for you, they're not getting a full "character summary" and I don't think they need it.

I'm confused by your response. This isn't what the article is saying at ALL. It's saying that there are better determiners for life-success than grades and those things are quantifiable.

And someone correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there lots of studies that say students who went to college make X amount more than those who didn't, but those who go to podunk U are just as likely to make the big bucks as those who went to an Ivy League school? That getting into the super-competitive school (as a result of good grades) is not a predictor of long-term success? But of course, this study defines success as things other than money.

I don't think this exact survey could work in rush, but I could picture some sort of variation on this being usable. Yes, 4 teacher evaluations from high school would be great, but that is completely unrealistic and I hadn't even thought of that. Or just using some of these questions in conversation, although this would have to be done skillfully. Maybe in a colony environment?

My college comment was re victoriana's response - i.e. that there are many people in college who SHOULD NOT be in college.

And this survey = a test. Maybe someone who was a great big slacker ass in high school because they hated it there will do a 180 in college. As for using it in rush, I can't imagine asking someone "so, do you usually keep your temper in check?"

Not only that, I would argue that getting a high score on these things doesn't always show "character." They could also show "terrifed to do anything wrong because my parents might beat the crap out of me."

@33girl, the basis of this concept is to differentiate between the kid who hasn't "blossomed" yet (and who might do that 180 in college) and the one who looks good on paper but is headed for failure. Why? Because this looks at underlying character traits that are a strong indicator of future success, rather than just looking at prior accomplishments. Those two examples you cite -- the surprising sorority bleeders vs the blobs of lard -- are exactly why DubaiSis shared this concept as an alternative for evaluating potential members. Sure, the way this concept is executed in the school systems cited wouldn't work for sorority recruitment, but the concept is still worth exploring.

What if you had the test filled out by those rec writers? Instead of 4 teachers completing it, you had 2 rec writers - in place of a regular recommendation?