This is the first draft of my "what matters to you and why" essay for the Stanford supplement. Being that the draft is so early, any criticism is welcome.
I value collaboration because of what it's produced.
Humanities most profitable ventures have been a product of collaboration. There is active collaboration, as in Wikipedia, Mozilla, and Linux. Then there is passive collaboration, found in supercomputing collectives and reCAPTCHAs (did you know you were digitizing books by filling out those annoying security questions?). The scientific and transportation revolutions, along with dozens of democratic revolutions were and ARE all driven by collaboration.
I also love collaboration because I love people (admittedly, some more than others). Now, I frequently work independently and sometimes even prefer doing so (this is particularly true of research for Speech and Debate where I tend to read and understand the full text of relevant bills rather than settle for an online summary). The deciding factor between collaboration and working independently is in the quality and dedication, the selection, of the people I would be working with. But of those times when I have the privilege to work with brilliant young men and women, there is no hesitation. There is no secondary factor, there is no ego to preserve, worth to prove, or command-and-control desire to satisfy when I engage in collaboration. There is only the joy and pride in being a part of something great, and in the comradery of my collaborators.
I love collaboration because each of the three possible dynamics has something in it for me. Should the group already have strong leadership, I get to learn from a strong leader. Should I be called on to become a leader, I have a chance to exercise that which I've spent so much time learning, and more importantly, I get to help people reach their potential. Should the group function so well and so autonomously that it needs no leader? Well, that reward seems self-evident.
Collaboration. It's the stuff of people, it's the stuff of revolutions, and it's the stuff of leaders. It's what I love and it's what I value.
Seems like you did a good job of it, with appropriate examples leading the rest of the essay.
There is one part of the essay where you say you like to help ppl. And another part that says you only tend to collaborate with brilliant ppl. So, mainly, no help is given (from you that is) to those who are more needy of help if they do not obtain the luck or skill needed to be in part of collaboration with you.
So, you might want to state you intentions clearly. How exactly do you intend to help those reach their potential if they are all already brilliant? Wouldnt you make better, more evident progress to help someone who has no set of skills or brilliance at all?
It is a short essay, so a person might connect a paragraph to the next quite easily. So, choose your words carefully.
read my stanford essay too?
"Humanities most profitable ventures have been a product of collaboration" -> "products "
"as in Wikipedia, Mozilla, and Linux" -> "such as "
Very well written essay! I think it's a very strong message. Read my Penn Essay please?
I've revised the essay pretty thoroughly. New feedback? Prompt: What matters to you, and why?
______________________________________________________________________ _________________________________
I love collaboration because of what it's produced, and how it feels.
Humanity's most profitable ventures have been products of collaboration. The Apollo program, Wikipedia, Mozilla and Linux, stand among the obvious triumphs. Beyond these? Passive collaboration manifest in supercomputing collectives and the transcription of books via Louis von Ahn's reCAPTCHA system (Yes, by filling out security forms online, you are transcribing books into digital format for the benefit of mankind).
The scientific and transportation revolutions, along with dozens of democratic revolutions were and ARE all driven by collaboration.
While I am fully capable of working independently (and even prefer to in the preliminary stage of a project), I'm inevitably compelled to work with other people. My favorite part of AP U.S. History was posting the link to the study session chat room via Facebook the night before a test. Even if I was the most prepared person in the class I knew I was helping others by creating the chat room and staying online regardless of what immediate benefit I received. In Calculus I regularly scanned and distributed review materials to my fellow students via email; a little work from me contributed to the success of dozens of students and it felt fantastic.
The role of "facilitator" comes natural to me, but I don't need that role to love collaboration. The reward of leadership is neither title nor privilege-- it is to see your followers thrive, and your cause move forward. If the group functions so well that it needs no leader, the cause will move forward and therein lies the same reward of leadership. So when I collaborate with brilliant young men and women, there is no ego to preserve, worth to prove, or command-and-control desire to satisfy. There is only the joy and pride in being a part of something great, and in the camaraderie of my collaborators.
Collaboration. It's the stuff of leaders and the fuel of great movements. It's what I love and it's what I value.
Great work! Your message is clear and your vocabulary is nice and elevated. With that being said, there a few little nitpicks I have:
In the very opening sentence, your use of the 'it has' conjunction threw me off. I'd suggest leaving it at two words, since it adds a little more formality to the piece and gives your hook a little more poignancy in my eyes.
"The Apollo program, Wikipedia, Mozilla and Linux, stand..." should be "The Apollo program, Wikipedia, Mozilla, and Linux stand..." - The pause given by the comma after 'Linux' created an awkward space when I read it in my head.
"Passive collaboration manifest in supercomputing collectives..." - The beginning of this sentence confused me a smidge. Could it be a missing plural on manifests? Perhaps manifests itself?
But like I said, great work. It was easy to read and flowed well. Best of luck on your application!
I like the message and i did no know that we were digitizing books(i had no idea) but you seem to focus too much on the collaboration of others when you really need to focus on how you collaborate because or else it sounds like an oline article with no individual input.
PLZ PLZ help me with my stanford essay any help is appreaciated :))
