I wonder how this will affect the competition for yield?
I feel liked DS16 dodged a bullet here. He would not have wanted to start accumulating a portfolio as a freshman. DD20 will likely actually enjoy being so organized but I do not know if she will apply to any of these schools. It may be wasted effort. I can see where a highly motivated kid with little formal guidance may be able to use this as somewhat of a substitute IF it provides a detailed description of the types of things to include.
Found the sister thread on the parents forum and it seems that most share my concerns.
Yes, I understand that some students might not meet requirements because of a lack of early planning. I don’t think this is the solution. If we can’t trust guidance counselors to get students on college prep tracks then I’m not sure why we’d trust them to effectively implement this.
Eta by the way, Michigan’s strict high school graduation requirements would almost certainly ensure enough credits in whatever subject.
What is going to go in the portfolio and what are they going to do with it?
Essays in our high school center around analyzing literature read in a class. Is that really what admissions officers want to read? I thought the essays were to get to know the student? Comparing and contrasting The Great Gatsby to The Grapes of Wrath might show writing skills and critical thinking skills or maybe regurgitation of what was discussed in class, but will it help them to gauge fit?
Will a physics lab report show them something that a score on the AP Physics exam doesn’t?
Kids in schools that spend more time teaching to state mandated tests will have less to include than those that can ignore those tests- how does that help the underprivileged again?
Don’t want a single point of failure? Use Common App and the Universal App.
I thought it was interesting that the article appears to have been updated with quotes from this thread?
This is posted in another forum. Since UMich is one of the 80 institutes involved, I forward it here.
Here is the direct link to the original article. You can find the coalition list on the bottom of the article.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/09/27/80-colleges-and-universities-announce-plan-new-application-and-new-approach?utm_source=Inside+Higher+Ed&utm_campaign=83f438e0c5-Breaking+News+Update+20150928&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1fcbc04421-83f438e0c5-197624133%3C/a%3E
I especially liked this comment below the article:
** Note: It seems that several threads were merged which is why the post order doesn’t necessarily make sense. **
The second link speaks to the issue that the schools must meet full demonstrated need, but do not have to be need blind. One college notes that they could easily meet full need, if they became need aware in their admissions policy. Is that better or worse for expanding access? Is it better for a family/student to borrow heavily for a really good school or not get admitted in the first place? Are colleges required to make their NPCs pretty accurate or can they gap from the NPC’s result? If the NPC is accurate, the applicants should understand that.
How is this new system going to help students that don’t have access to good guidance counselors or Naviance overcome those deficiencies?
Someone tell me what makes you think this portfolio will go to adcoms.
“Through a “collaboration platform,” students could choose whether to grant access to that information to others: counselors, teachers, and advisers from community-based organizations. Those whom students invite into their portfolios could offer advice and monitor the students’ progress, according to documents describing the group’s plans.”
All this is much like a parent and student collecting some examples of work that represents the kid’s interests and strengths, something to draw on when the time comes. Not much different than, say, how I saved certain reports I had produced at work or presentations I had made, in case I later needed to refer to them in a future resume.
I see no advantage from this portfolio concept to prep kids who already have versions of this look back with their counselors. Ii think some forget that amassing some sort of record isn’t uncommon among college savvy families. This just formalizes it for others. ?
This sounds like a horrible idea. College admissions are stressful enough. Now the kids need to start a portfolio freshman year…uuuuuuuugh!!!
This does not seem like a way to even the playing field, rather it seems to be a way for private, elite schools to use this to their students’ advantages.
I thought that schools were trying to make this crazy process less stressful.
8-}
Agree that this goes in the direction of decreasing access for lower income, first generation, and otherwise disadvantaged students (or, perhaps, students in high schools other than the most advantaged ones with ample counseling resources to remind and help students to build their portfolios from 9th grade to application season).
The more check box items are needed (or favorably considered) in the application, the more the school will lose disadvantaged applicants who may not even know that these items are needed until it is too late. Examples:
- SAT subject tests
- Counselor report
- Teacher recommendations (in some high schools, teachers ration recommendations, so a student who does not ask early enough does not get them)
- Interview
- CSS Profile
Now add a portfolio starting in 9th grade? How many students will even know about that? Perhaps those attending elite high schools with ample counseling resources… but perhaps those are the actual targeted students. I.e. a backhanded way of going back to the old days when certain high schools were fast track ways to get admitted to elite colleges.
What’s wrong with setting aside those documents or starting some sort of record? How is it somehow better to just toss them? Or rely on memory? You really think it’s less stressful to wake up later and try to figure out what you did, what you accomplished that was meaningful to you, at the time, or what some of your better work was?
The elite preps are already doing this in one way or another. What levels the field is offering the same sort of tool to others, including- as the articles state- kids without a high level of guidance counselors.
If kids want a competitive college, the clock doesn’t magically start in spring of junior year. Starting your look back then would be tougher, imo.
Where to start.
The whole point of the portfolio is to ultimately show it off to adcoms.
The wealth prep school kid will have a counselor to help the kid carefully select all the best work; will have teachers help the kid produce amazing papers/labs/whatever after umpteen drafts to make it perfect (and sometimes hardly the kid’s own work by the end of it); will have 24/7/365 computer access to keep the portfolio updated; and overall will create a deep, beautiful, shining record of years of accomplishments, albeit maybe not all on the strength his/her own steam - but shhh! Of course the kids did this all by themselves!
The poor kid will have nobody to even tell him/her about the existence of portfolio thing; if there is some counselor to tell the kids, it will be announced once or twice; the few computers at the school that work will be accessible during limited hours; nobody will help this kid produce beautiful work - or any work; the kid with a poor, or more likely NO portfolio as a result of unfortunate circumstances/lack of guidance will compare unfavorably with the kid who turns in Hemingway-worthy work that he accomplished “all by himself!”
And the question will be, gee, we gave EVERYONE the opportunity to do this portfolio, so clearly the kids who took advantage of the opportunity are the best and most worthy applicants.
^ I don’t see in the articles that adcoms will see this. And adcoms are not sitting around with nothing better to do than read your portfolio every year. You don’t save a piece of work just to show it with your app. It just becomes a reference point, a folder. They are saying the open access would allow “counselors, teachers, and advisers from community-based organizations” to review with you, perhaps ask thought-provoking questions.
I don’t see it saying adcoms will do this. If I missed it, someone will point out the lines.
There are many programs in existence that do seek to help the less advantaged kids. Not enough, but they exist, volunteer and other.
Why not give the under-supported kids the same sorts of tools your kids and mine have at home and in their schools?
As ever I am waiting for more info and clarification to come out, not assuming.
@lookingforward, this is not giving under-supported kids ANY tools. Without sufficient guidance counselors, teachers and organizations in place to assist these kids with this portfolio, not to mention the computers/storage/physical equipment itself, it may as well not exist for them. So how is that helping them?
Now, if those few colleges with the 10 - 30+ billion endowments were actually funding THOSE things, I could see how that would help.
Ok, not handing it to them. But making the platform available. Not mandatory.
And this applies to the colleges that meet the criteria- not every college out there.
*The colleges came together to fix a problem that researchers have noted for years: Complex admissions processes deter students from applying, and those who come from low-income families can’t afford the counselors and classes within reach of their wealthier peers.
High schools, for example, can already buy software to help counselors track their students through the application process, but many can’t afford it.
“This is a free tool that will be open to counselors in those types of schools and even in community-based organizations,” said Zina Evans, vice president for enrollment management at the University of Florida, a member of the coalition.* http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/colleges-application-process_5609dccce4b0768126fedadd
@lookingforward, here is what I saw in the article that makes me think that adcoms would see the portfolio documents:
“The coalition will introduce a new online application. Like the Common Application, there will be some factual information that students would need to enter only once (name, high school, etc.). But once an applicant hits short answers or essay or other sections, each college would prepare its own questions. The idea is to link many of the questions to material that applicants would have put in their portfolios, so applicants are not scrambling for ideas on essays but are relying on work they did in high school.”
I have to say that I agree with much of what @prospect1 is saying. My second D is at the very large (and rated excellent) public school that has 2 guidance counselors for approximately 650 kids. There is no way those GCs are going to be able to help the kids that this is supposed to help. No.Way. They simply don’t have the resources.
I believe that’s: once a student “registers” and begins to use the tool, the college can supply questions. I simply can’t imagine an adcom for a competitive college having time to respond personally. They’re already on the go all year long.
There are automated ways, including scanning for keywords, that could be used to shoot back auto questions. I’m imagining generic. The “materials” in the portfolios that trigger the questions could be categorical, eg, he added a sample essay, he gets thinking points back from the college. Not personalized editorial remarks. Much like my fitness site knows I checked their knee exercises and now keeps sending me new bits about knees. Same as online marketing works.
Wait and see. We don’t know yet.
This part is just a tool.
What is the cost of implementing this “tool”? Who will administer it and fix it when bugs pop up? How will the poor kids access it? Who will help the poor kids access it? Who will help the poor kids create and upload materials for it?
And if the whole purpose is just to shoot back auto/generic questions to these kids, what good is it? Assuming the kid gets past all the other hurdles, if this kid uploads some sadly inadequate, poor grammar, bad spelling piece of work, who is going to help him to make it better? The generic auto response?
Sorry, I smell a rat here. No way is this “tool” being implement to help the poor kids. Makes no sense.
I think the biggest problem is that otherwise good potential students aren’t getting the counseling needed for college prep. This encourages students without access to such advantages to start college planning early, which is in their best interest.