The only way I could see this system helping less advantaged kids is if this tool were ONLY available to them. But opening it up to all applicants just imposes yet another hurdle, and gives the uber-privileged yet another tool to boost their admission profile at the expense of the unassisted kids whose portfolios won’t be as pretty, if they exist at all.
Some kids get all the help money can buy and other kids get…none. It’s hard for me to understand how giving the disadvantaged kids some help makes them even worse off.
If it helps advantaged applicants significantly more than it helps disadvantaged applicants then the net effect is to hurt the disadvantaged applicants.
I’m not sure how I feel about it, but I do think and have said often that kids apply to too many colleges. If using a tool that helps them focus on a smaller number of colleges by creating a process that is more unique to the colleges causes kids to be more focused on a smaller group of colleges then I’m all for it.
Yes, @momofthreeboys, I do like that aspect. More hurdles do seem to have that effect. Although, this list is only about 80 colleges; so the push down effect might mean even MORE applications to the remaining thousands of colleges out there.
It can’t hurt to offer them a tool the advantaged already have. What’s the real fear here? And it is reported to be free.
This means kids have a format in which to start a folder and consider the sorts of questions we talk to our own kids about. I always tell people to vet, but nothing yet says the advantaged will swoop on this and muscle out the other kids. They can use it as others do, but what is the other option for kids not family-savvy to the process? Just sit there with nothing, no way to know how to assess?
So let’s wait and see.
I’m not sure how this will work out either. But let’s learn more before judging. The first little toe of this isn’t even available until Jan 2016.
Feeling just a bit weary regarding all the adjustments the present Junior class (including my own) is going to have to endure…1st class to take the new PSAT in a couple weeks, first class to have to take the new SAT, and now this…nuts!
Several people here just don’t seem to be getting the point that poor kids are not even going to be aware of this tool. Yes, maybe it is theoretically available to them, but if no guidance counselors tell them about it and their parents aren’t aware of it, they aren’t going to use it. The kids who need it the most aren’t going to find out it exists until senior year, while the prep school kids will have been assembling their portfolios for years.
From what I’ve read about this (and I said something similar somewhere in another thread… but I can’t find it due to the merging), anyone who thinks that this is going to give a boost to poor students and not to students with better access to resources is either lying to themselves (or us) or has never worked with poor students.
Each additional task expected by universities is one more burden for poor students.
If universities want to move to this type of app system, that is their prerogative (though I have an issue with public schools making the process more burdensome in general). But don’t frame it in terms of “helping the poor” when anyone who has ever actually worked with poor (or otherwise disadvantaged) students can see right through that. It’s almost insulting.
It would be really nice if when admins merge posts (and relocate to a completely different subforum!), they’d let the original posters know. I thought my thread (which I’d bookmarked) had died and now I realize it was merged into another one. I’m pretty much lost now!
@romanigypsyeyes says:
Whatever else one thinks about this effort, I don’t think this is a fair criticism. For example, one of the organizers of the coalition is Seth Allen, Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid at Pomona. Pomona is ranked as one of the top 10 colleges doing the most for low income students. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/09/17/upshot/top-colleges-doing-the-most-for-low-income-students.html. They organizers behind this effort do, in fact, have experience working with poor students.http://www.pomona.edu/news/2014/01/16-pomona-college-increase-low-income-students-and-community-college-transfer-students
And the poor or under-served students the coalition schools are looking for are those with some proven potential, depth and breadth, the sorts who would thrive with the next level of academic challenges and make good use of support. (Same as they look for now.) There are many good mentoring programs that give bright, accomplished, low SES kids a leg up, an opportunity to think through the college goals and how to reach them. But not enough. And many depend on volunteers. Many great kids are left without that help.
Why not offer some tools for the thinking, the self evaluation and goal setting- and that later help with pulling the application together? It can be used in conjunction with adult support or individually.
Look at the list of the member schools. No directionals (though some have pre-professional programs,) 70%+ grad rates. Plus the aid component. (Those eliminate plenty of colleges and universities.) Mostly, the sort of colleges that require some reasonable 3 or 4 year strategy for admit success.
I don’t know if this will work or be another hare-brained attempt du jour. None of us know if the right sorts of analysis and critical thinking went into it. But some here are mighty quick to dismiss it, before we know much. Many of us on CC are already thinking for our kids when they reach 9th, if not sooner. Admit it or not, we help hone their thinking. Why settle for, “Well, no one helped me?”
Top 10 out of the small subset of highly selective colleges, which overall do not enroll that high a percentage of Pell grant recipients.
Notice the collection of UCs at the top of that list? Here is what they do to improve access to low income students:
Application does not require any of the following:
- Counselor report
- Teacher recommendations
- Interview
- SAT subject tests
- Transcripts (required on matriculation for verification of self-reported courses and grades)
Financial aid application does not require:
- CSS Profile
- Non-custodial parent information
Financial aid for in-state students is generally good.
In other words, there are fewer items needed for the application, particularly things that depend on others (counselor, teachers, non-custodial parent) to complete in a timely manner and things that students in a school where few go to college may not be aware of until too late (SAT subject tests, CSS Profile).
just go back to paper forms you get attached to the back of the catalog!
UCB really hit the nail on the head. When it comes to low income applicants, and in particular those with truly terrible family and community support (think, inner city vs small town/rural), LESS is MORE.
Every single new thing that is required of them (don’t call this “optional” - if it exists, its absence will be noted) is just one more barrier, one more hurdle, one more thing that will dissuade them from applying.
These kids have real world, pressing worries that consume their time in ways you can’t understand unless you have spent even a little bit of time with them. Problems that have no solutions I can think of. Putting together a portfolio that’s good enough to compete with Richie Rich’s portfolio isn’t ever going to be high on their list. Why bother? Other than a few astonishing superstars, most disadvantaged kids will not have the energy to leap yet another hurdle tossed their way.
UC’s are a shining example of how to do it right. What’s so hard about duplicating their methods? IF, of course, the goal truly is to capture more disadvantaged students (which, I continue to doubt is the real goal).
This isn’t about the ‘Why Bother?’ kids. Not the low energy sorts. Sorry, but look at most of the colleges listed.
And the UCs are an example, not a shining one.
An opinion piece on this new application from an enrollment manager at Depaul (who’s also known for his obsession with admission/enrollment data) just appeared in the Washington Post. The author is not impressed with the supposed intent of the application to boost enrollment from under-served low-socioeconomic students
and anecdotes from a conference of admission professionals:
Such negative feedback to the new Coalition, that they announced today that rollout now delayed at least to April…was scheduled for January reveal.
What class will be the first one to be affected? If the rollout is April, current juniors will not get affected by it, right? Since you need to develop the portfolio…?