I know some graduate research programs that refuse to accept anyone unless thoroughly vetted for authenticity. Particularly, international students. They have to be known personally by the department. Why? So many cases of fraud. Those are just the ones they know about.
Anyone who believes that there aren’t students in many colleges who are frauds is naive. One of my former classmates was discussing this at a reunion a few years ago. He unearthed some frauds many years after the fact. He had tremendous resources in his position and took interest in the endeavor. He was thoroughly shocked at his findings that he acknowledged were likely just the tip of the iceberg
@sunnyschool I lived through what you described last year with my D19. Let me tell you I thought it would never end. We were on the hunt for merit. It got to the point at the end of the process I almost just didn’t care about it. The essays were endless. They didn’t stop when the apps were done. There were the competitive scholarships at the schools that required more essays. Then there were some interviews as well. The worst was a scholarship for full tuition for 15 spots and they were interviewing 350-400 kids. We decided it was done so they could get kids on campus.
Did we drop the ball? We did once. Trying to keep everything straight was a nightmare. Thankfully D19 reduced her AP classes by 1 which helped some, but still with work and life it was a crazy ride.
Overall, I just have to think that schools have to value the SAT/ACT the most. I know I would. That is the one thing that is closest to a level playing field. At least all the kids were taking the same basic test.
However, when the applicant cohort includes a larger number of high scorers than the number to be admitted (or offered the top end scholarship), then some other means of distinguishing them must be used. Also, SAT/ACT scores are not the strongest correlate of college performance (high school record is), and it is possible to cheat on test scores (see some of the Varsity Blues incidents involving having the test taken by someone else, or claiming disability extra time when there is no real disability, or cheating on reused SATs (which should not have been reused in the first place)).
Now, in some other countries, university admission is based exclusively on a standardized test, probably because high school records are far too untrustworthy to be usable for that purpose. But the standardized tests include far more difficult problems to distinguish between the academically elite and super-elite students, unlike in the US where the main target is to help the majority of colleges distinguish between students with what they see as poor, marginal, good, and great potential, not help the small number of most selective colleges distinguish between great, elite, and super-elite students.
At the other end of the scale, countries where high school records are trusted enough to be comparable across high schools may not need external standardized testing at all (although some may embed standardized testing into their course grading).
Since high school record is uneven and we don’t have a national curriculum, the correlation exhibited isn’t very useful by itself. Only AP courses with its standardized tests are useful for that purpose, but they aren’t offered consistently across all schools. So the best predictors for college performance are AP courses/scores (if available), followed by SAT/ACT scores.
Harvard’s admissions director in 2009 did mention that the correlation between frosh applicant academic credentials and college grades was AP or IB scores > SAT subject scores or writing section of the SAT or ACT > high school grades > SAT or ACT (excluding the writing section). Of course, this was before gaming the writing section of the SAT became widespread.
UC research also found (pre-2004) that high school grades > SAT II > SAT I in predicting college grades.
Either way, for standardized tests, those which measure learning or achievement appear to be superior predictors than the SAT or ACT, which are less predictive than those other standardized tests (AP, IB, SAT subject) or high school grades.
SAT and ACT have an incumbency advantage, so colleges may be reluctant to switch to SAT subject tests because that would cause them to lose applicants. Greater emphasis on AP and IB tests would limit access for those students without AP or IB courses available to them.
@ucbalumnus You said:
“Of course, this was before gaming the writing section of the SAT became widespread.”
I’m curious, how was the SAT writing section gamed?
Apparently, some test prep companies managed to reverse-engineer the scoring rubric so that they taught students how to write essays that scored well on the scoring rubric, sometimes by memorization. Apparently, the scoring rubric did not require that the meaning of the essay had to make sense or be at least plausibly believable.
There were threads about this years ago on these forums, often tinged with racism against Asians, because some of the more detectable cases were international students from China and Korea who could not actually write English very well despite good scores on the SAT writing section.
Remember, a standardized test is typically a proxy measure for something else. But when test takers figure out how to improve their score on the proxy measure without improving what it is a proxy measure for, that tends to dilute the value of the proxy measure in terms of measuring the something else that is the real target.
I’m pretty sure I’m in the minority on this: I think the essay section of the standardized test (SAT or ACT) should be made into a full-length (3 hours?) test by itself. It doesn’t need to be scored, but the essay should be sent to the colleges alongside with all other application materials. It tells the colleges how well the student writes independently and it can be compared to the other essays the student submits.
The easiest solution for college essays would be for students to pick 3 topics from a list of 6, and write their college essays in a proctored room like the SAT or SAT II. The student could still write the “why I want to go to X school” essay at home, but this way it would be very tough to cheat on the essay. Sure, kids would work on probable topics and then shape their essay to the actual topic, but they would still have to do all of the writing themselves.
Colleges don’t seem too interested in these type of essays…
There are several things colleges and universities could do in order to improve the selection process’ reliability in identifying students who match what they ostensibly (but rarely specifically, by the way) state they are seeking for their class. But they don’t do most of these things because in the end, they want to keep the process as general as possible because they want to retain complete flexibility. Most important is LAST MINUTE flexibility.
The notion that all (or even most) colleges and universities have some long term plan and strategy to shape their classes which is religiously and consistently followed is simply not true. Turnover in executive leadership (academic and non academic), in marketing depts., in admissions…all throw any best-laid plans out the windows of the hallowed halls of academia. Many universities have decentralized marketing depts., housed in each of the colleges. There are major universities routinely mentioned here in CC who can’t even get the various colleges to agree on the nuances of the logo. I spent tow years in the middle of an argument inside one such university debating a minor change in approach. Argument ended when president turned-over and they picked new things to argue about and never agree on.
There ARE certain things that the schools consistently seek in their classes, and those things are the same in virtually all colleges and universities. Underlying all of this is the deeply held belief among faculty that THEY can educate ANY type of student. They resist any and all attempts by marketing and admissions to focus on any segment of the market (we want leaders! We want quiet, thoughtful types! No…wait…our ranking is slipping, we need more high stats kids!). The MARKET does a fabulous job of attracting certain types of kids based on whatever brand a college or university happened to fall into.
If you randomly chose 10 faculty members from the t50 or so schools and asked them to describe the unique traits of their undergraduate student body, you would not be able to match what the faculty says and the college’s websites or marketing brochures du jour.
It is not that colleges and universities are accepting of fraud and such; they are not. But it doesn’t take a genius to think of much, much better ways for schools to ensure they are getting what they think they are getting. But that is not where they want to put their resources and energy, and there is a reason for that. They want full and complete control over the process, including changing the criteria in the middle of the process; having a system which sifts out a ton of applicants early in the process based on some objective criteria (a requirement that a student can write a cohesive essay within 3 hours would cut the pool down, for elite colleges, by 80%, e.g.) takes much of their flexibility away. And would drastically change the game that the elite schools have mastered. And the elite schools call the shots in this game. Others follow, hoping to be able to play well enough to stay in the game.
“I think it gets easier when they see people like Chelsea Clinton, Malia Obama, and Jared Kushner being accepted to top places, to say nothing of the information out of the Varsity Blues scandal.”
Clinton and Obama both had parents who have been routinely described as brilliant. I knew several Republicans who met and worked with President Clinton who described him as the sharpest mind they had ever encountered in their lives. One friend who worked on the staff for a Republican senator said he hated the guy but despite having gone to Harvard and routinely meeting brilliant people no one he had ever met had matched Clintons intelligence. Would it be surprising that his offspring could gain entry to a highly prestigious university? Read the description of the economic policy people charged with giving the 2008 candidates a briefing on the economic crisis and how impressed they were with Obama’s lighting fast intelligence. And Michele Obama attended an Ivy on her own merit. Again not surprising that they’d have a child with the ability to do the same. Moreover like President G.W Bush the Obamas saw that an Ivy was not right for all their children (Sasha is now at U of M…Barbara Bush went to Yale but her less academic sister to UT Austin). I don’t get any varsity blues vibe from any of them. .
As for Kushner, this seems like a different story but at least it was done through wholly legal means.
“You’re citing one kid. One story that got national attention.”
Well you just need one to break the “house of cards” position by colleges that reviews are holistic with many people involved so less chance of error, it’s a fair process etc… And then you have the ten kids that had their admissions rescinded by Harvard, who at that time thought those kids would change the world for the better!
“Clinton and Obama both had parents who have been routinely described as brilliant.”
Ok, but you’re admitting the student, not the parents right? Well maybe you are admitting the family in the case of Harvard or Stanford.
Re: the essays. Having a student write an essay in even three hours would really be only one step up from a rough draft. I’m a decent writer, but my best writing comes with a couple of days to think about and reflect on what I wrote…and I edit and revise.
The essays on the standardized tests…including state administered writing prompts measures a kid’s ability to write a rough draft…not a final copy.
I’ve often wondered this, too. A consultant here years ago wrote about being involved in a “bazillion” back-and-forth emails with a student about their essay. That was a heavily edited essay!
It’s probably the first time in their lives for some 17-year-old to embellish, to exaggerate, or worse when writing their college essays under the guidance of adults. It can’t be a good lesson for them, can it?
“Clinton and Obama both had parents who have been routinely described as brilliant.”
Ok, but you’re admitting the student, not the parents right? Well maybe you are admitting the family in the case of Harvard or Stanford“
My point was that it would not be surprising for the child of one of our finest minds to also have those skills. Intelligence is at least somewhat heritable.
Personally, I find very few people are moral or honest when it comes to their kids being weighed unfavorably in college admissions or really any other contest. Why do parents allow participation trophies, allow for all types of actions which put their kids in the best light. Not many who qualify for a leg up in admissions whether it’s based on athletics, race, income or any of a dozen other things-doesn’t take it. Think about it.
Why don’t we just have a number, no data on sex, income, place of birth, etc. And use that as a metric to discern who gets in? The notion that college acceptances are holistic and somehow that makes it more " fair" is not reliable. There are just too many qualified people from all walks of life and too few spots.
I don’t care if someone want to write their kids essay. I don’t because some other parent may have done some other thing that I would never ever do. What I do care about is the pretense that this or that is unfair, when certainly many/most knowledgeable parents are doing it.
As a parent, one has to ask themselves am I bringing up my children to be good people? Or am I bringing up my children to be “successful” and make their way in the world regardless of how they get there. Not the same thing at all.
My D didn’t apply to our family alma mater in part because she didn’t want anyone thinking she only got in because she was a legacy. We did not push her to use her “leg up” and I’m sure we are not alone.