On Wednesday, the students from the Acton MBA were named by The Princeton Review as The Most Competitive MBA’s in America for the seventh straight year, and the Acton School of Business also won the Best Administered title.

On Thursday, as part of investigating the power of diagnostic frameworks, the Acton MBA’s squared off against the Acton Academy Launchpadders in an eighty minute, Harvard Business School style Socratic discussion.

For several days, Launchpadders dug deeply into the story of David Martin, a young business school graduate who in 1996 longed to open an internet cafe in Jamaica.   Preparation included using the Acton MBA’s Ultimate FIT Framework; Understanding Customers Framework and tools such as Unit Economics and spreadsheets.

Who won?   Use the this link and the password DWBH18 (just think: “Don’t Worry, Be Happy”) and you can judge for yourself. (The discussion starts about five minutes into the video.)

In the end, the judges were unanimous: Launchpadders triumphed for the second victory in a row.

Perhaps someone should notify The Princeton Review.

Launchpadders have been on a Decision Making Quest, where through discussions, simulations and hands-on activities we’ve explored the best processes, recipes and algorithms for making decisions.

At the simplest end of the spectrum is the study of probability, where the outcome repeated, independent probabilistic decisions can be modeled mathematically.  Thursday night, we put the equations to the test with a Casino Night.

Launchpadders studied probability and the odds of different games of chance.  Then LPers  estimated the likely profits given the number of guests who would attend, each who would be given 20 chips and invited to play games for one hour and forty-five minutes.

Based on the estimates, LPers bid Eagle Bucks for the right to host a table of Craps, Blackjack; Roulette; Baccarat or Slot Machines, with the profits (or losses) from each table accruing to the owner.

After a night of spirited play, followed by an auction for prizes —  with its own set of decision-making lessons — Launchpadders learned at least one important lesson:

Play long enough, and the house always wins!

If nothing else, LPers learned never to wager precious time and hard earned money against hopeless odds, because in this case, the past history of losers in the City of Dreams will  determine  the future of those who foolishly tempt fate again.

Pointing out the deficiencies in traditional education, public or private, seldom is worth the effort.

It’s not easy to attract, equip and inspire parents and young people who care more about learning than prestige and comfort, and who are willing to stay the course when a young person stumbles.

Most of the world sees “education” as a way to “provide cogs for a productive society;” or “getting my child in a competitive college so I feel like a successful parent” or something akin to  belonging to a prestigious country club.   Since at Acton we care more about learning than education, arguing seems beside the point.

Occasionally, however, competence — or incompetence – is displayed in such a compelling way it’s worth sharing.  The chart above brings to mind the sage advice: “When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.”

Who ensures “excellence” in an Acton Academy studio?  The Acton Eagles, of course.

But shouldn’t an adult be grading papers, handing back drafts covered with red ink?  Well, in a word, “no.”

First, criticizing a young person for grammar errors seldom leads to a love of writing.

Secondly, a single teacher can’t provide enough one on one customized writing critique; and

Finally, an adult issuing judgment robs young people from learning how to offer powerful critique, which in itself buildings writing skills and enthusiasm.

So we trust young people to hold high standards, whether in approving a Genre Badge (for writing) or offering between three and five in-depth critiques during the development of each finished piece.

Personal Finance is this session’s genre, where each Eagle will face an opponent to  debate real-world  questions like “Is College Worth the Cost,” or “Should I buy life insurance?”

This week the studio was abuzz with practice debates and high-quality critique offered in small groups and in front of the entire studio.

At the end of each rehearsal warm/cool or Six Traits critique was offered to support rewrites and subsequent rehearsals, with comments like: “Strong  evidence to back up your points, but your tone sounded too combative” or “Your opening statement hooked me and was supported by compelling evidence but your closing lacked a clear call to action.”

Lesson learned: our Eagles don’t need an adult to hold high standards or improve their writing and critical thinking.  A peer is a far better substitute.  Because young people are far more capable than we ever imagine.