NAVIGATOR

Wednesday, February 09, 2000 Dialogue   Legos may replace entrance exams   Scott Marchand KERNEL COLUMNIST   The grades are in.   Presidential hopeful Bill Bradley, who was a Rhodes scholar and graduated magna cum laude from Princeton University, scored a 485 in the verbal category on his SAT. On the other hand, George W. Bush scored a 566 in the verbal category on his SAT and went on to be a C student at Yale University.   Are either of these men intellectually fit to be the next leader of our country? Probably, but I doubt either could tell you whether ergasiophobia is synonymous with fecklessness or if smog really is a portmanteau. And should they?   The argument about the reliability of standardized test scores to determine one's success in the future has plagued us for years. Cultural biases in test questions as well as the lack of such tests to measure one's creativity and other indelible characteristics needed to succeed in life are inherently hard to measure. However standardized tests like the ACT, MCAT, GRE, and LSAT, are staples, dare I say ubiquitous elements, in nearly all undergraduate and graduate admission processes.   Until now that is.   Nine courageous schools in this country have embarked on a mission to reinvent the evaluation process for undergraduate students. Colorado College, Rutgers, Delaware, and the University of Michigan are just a few of the bellwether institutions standing amid the alien corn.   What revolutionary testing instrument are the schools using to weed out those unworthy to walk in the hallowed halls of their academic institutions? Is it some cutting-edge computer program? Don't be silly. Computers are too antiquated for such an important task.   No, no, these schools have thrown down the gauntlet. No longer will they utilize pencil and paper to measure a prospective student's moxie. Instead, if you want to be an alum of these schools you first must demonstrate your ability to lead, to take the initiative, to be a team player while building ...   ... a robot made of Legos.   That's right. I said Legos. The truly marvelous plastic toy that represents the marriage between plain building blocks and Lincoln Logs is now the evaluative instrument of choice in these schools' entrance exams.   Here's how it works. A group of eight to 10 students are given a box full of Lego pieces and told that they have 10 minutes to build a robot identical to one sitting in an adjacent room. Then each group member is allowed to look at the robot without taking any notes. The members are then evaluated while snapping together their version of the robot from memory. Evaluators do not look for dexterity or coordination but rather students who emerge as leaders.   Of course there are other activities and workshops used to judge the students' abilities in this process, but those don't involve plastic building blocks. And, as far as I'm concerned, none of the other evaluative tools are necessary.   I doff my cap to the administrators for their ingenuity and dogged perseverance to find an evaluation method so capable of exposing the true merits of every 18-year-old preparing for college. Why stop there? Could we not extend the use of other games to test the knowledge and skills necessary to succeed in a given field. Instead of the MCAT, let's have aspiring physicians test their skills at Operation. What about using the board game Life for social workers and Clue for those interested in criminal justice? The possibilities are endless.   Unfortunately, for students interested in public policy or administration, the only choice is pin the tail on the donkey, or I guess the elephant, depending on your political affiliation.       Kernel Columnist Scott Marchand is a public policy graduate student. His views do not necessarily represent those of the Kernel.   Current Headlines Dialogue

The Student Newspaper at the University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky