Some people claim that universities should only accept young people with the highest marks. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The success of a university is vitally dependent upon its alumni achievement. Therefore, enrolling the most likely candidates is the priority for all universities’ admission offices. It is notable that some of them set academic excellence as the only evaluation for admission. Personally, I disagree with this idea. Such standard, to some extent, limits the quality of knowledge acquisition and neglects the prominent performance of students in after-school activities. Memorizing all the facts and solutions from textbooks enables students to get distinctions and furthermore, to get in to a decent university. This learning methodology leads to the lack of critical thinking and reflection on new information, which eventually results in inefficiency to process and acquire knowledge.
Some students who advance in study as well as demonstrate their achievement in lab researches, community services and leaderships truly deserve a more comprehensive evaluation to judge their academic capacity. Moreover, some students perform better in sports or arts than exams should also be given the chance to further explore their interests in a decent university.
It is perhaps genuine that such selection stimulates students’ dedication to study and itself is by far the fairest way to classified candidates from the most qualified to the least, while other indicatorssuch as after-class activities and lab researches are too abstract to compare and to evaluate.
However, whether the knowledge or exam-taking techniques are acquired or not still remains doubted. Evaluating abstract fingures is not likely to be a problem nowadays, when worldwide education institutions have practiced it for decades.