<p>This ^^ is consistent with what I said in post #13.</p>
<p>Ah, I see. I feel much better now :P</p>
<p>
[quote]
Edit: YEP - you're right. "Tufts currently meets full need for students it admits but does not engage in need-blind admissions."
<a href="http://ugtaskforce.tufts.edu/interim...htm#Need-Blind%5B/url%5D">http://ugtaskforce.tufts.edu/interim...htm#Need-Blind</a></p>
<p>From the Tufts website. That scares and saddens me.
[/quote]
Looking around at Tufts</a> - Task Force on the Undergraduate Experience it appears to be 6+ years old, so most of it no longer applies.<br>
If I remember correctly, I think I heard that my class (2012) was admitted need-blind. And here's a quote regarding 2013 from Bacow's latest email (3/11/09):
[quote]
...Despite economic uncertainty, this year's applications were just a hair under last year's record. We admitted our early decision applicants on a need-blind basis, and the class accepted to date is far and away the strongest academically that we have ever admitted to Tufts....
[/quote]
</p>
<p>^Ah, I was considering posting the e-mail up too, but couldn't find it in the sea of e-mails in my trumpeter account :P Thanks for posting. I've always thought that Tufts was need-blind, it has never crossed my mind that it wasn't need blind.</p>
<p>Tufts is running a business. So I would not hold it against them if they could not hold to their need-blind ideals during this RD admission cycle, given the recent drubbing their endowment took during the Maddoff scandal. It does seem from the other postings that they were able to go need-blind during the ED cycles, which makes sense given that the yield on those students is extremely high, and most don't expect significant aid when they apply ED.</p>
<p>Really interesting article...quite intimidating though. </p>
<p>I understand that no one's real name was disclosed but still, it must be awkward to read this article and realize one of the students is you (descriptions are pretty detailed). In fact, one of these kids sounds exactly like my best friend who applied to Amherst...spooky.</p>
<p>well sure she got all straight A's in all honors classes and aced her SATs, but so what? As if that's an easy accomplishment. "Where's the moving essay about how much she loves her family??!!" How about, I love my family so much that I studied to 3 am in the morning for 3 years so I could get straight A's in all honors classes and ace my SATs. You mean if I don't brag about it and exploit my family, I am somehow less attractive as a candidate? Unbelievable.</p>
<p>The goal of admitting a class isn't to 'reward' students for their accomplishments, it's to build an intentional community of people who can achieve great things because of their own abilities and the skills/perspectives/knowledge they will learn from their peers. I know that especially in the CC community people focus on the idea of merit. "What have I done to earn that spot?" Our office does not think of the process that way.</p>
<p>For that reason, every single admit we make is an affirmative action, regardless of your background. Someone reads your application and sees the ways in which you will add to the class and advocates on your behalf. Diversity in all its forms, whether its socioeconomic status or sexual orientation or geography, is important so every Tufts student will have the opportunity to be exposed to as many life experiences as possible. Overcoming significant adversity is one of many, many ways an applicant can demonstrate that. For every student admitted because of hurdles surmounted, there are many more who are admitted simple because the way they think is exciting. They approach problems with creative ideas, or they can think practically about how to motivate their peers, or they understand that a Tufts education is a commitment to giving back. Or they one any number of things that make an admissions officer sit up and think a little (or a lot). </p>
<p>Not a single kid who will be in the class of 2013 was admitted based on academics alone. Each of you who will receive good news was admitted for being more than just smart - your lives and personalities played a role in every decision.</p>
<p>This article is of general college admission interest, and the thread should be posted on College Admissions subforum as well.</p>
<p>OK. You're trying to build an 'intentional community' -- but I think some of us would still like to know what's inherently more interesting about a transgendered individual than about a Girl Scout. I think a lot of what you're claiming is neutral is really about making value judgments. I know lots of bright, well-rounded Christian kids who've been on mission trips whom I consider to be knowledgeable, thoughtful individuals. However, I'm concerned that your twenty-something, liberal admissions interviews inherently consider a Christian boring and a transexual exciting. The brag sheet you publish in your alumni magazine notes proudly that you have transgendered individuals and people raised by lesbians. I still don't understand what it is that makes these individuals inherently more interesting than boy scouts and kids who've been raised by missionaries.</p>
<p>Momzie,</p>
<p>The answer to the above question is simple demographics. If varied experience and insight is integral to increasing a class' potential - and thus the potential of each individual within the class - than we must admit individuals with those varied backgrounds. I'll borrow from your example: (arbitrary numbers) if we have 12,000 Christian students in our applicant pool and 5 transgendered students, then the transgendered perspective is clearly harder to represent. We are, of course, not looking for parity in the number of transgendered students vs the number of Christians, but those demographic consideration must play a role in a community built intentionally for its variety. It's not that one perspective is "more interesting" or "more valuable" than another, it's that some perspectives are harder to find. Also, I'm not really sure from where the transgendered vs Christian dynamic you set up comes, it's not like we're choosing between one or the other.</p>
<p>Your example of an individual raised by missionaries is poorly chosen, by the way. Considering the reality of Tufts as a secular, left-leaning, New England located institution, a student raised by missionaries would be mighty interesting, you see.</p>
<p>I agree with Dan- it's schools like the UC's here in California that are more numbers-based. Test scores, GPAs, with minor considerations for ECs and essays. Tufts seems more about community (granted, a rather over-achieving community)- which is the very reason it's my d's number one choice. She doesn't want a cookie cutter education or a cookie cutter community.</p>
<p>She was admitted to UC Davis btw, cheaper and closer, but of course she has to love a school 3,000 miles away!!!</p>
<p>......pick up a copy of the book The Gatekeepers by Jacques Steinberg. It focuses on Wesleyan, but I imagine it reflects the admissions office practice in many schools.</p>
<p>however, I do think that Dean Coffin is in the vanguard of looking at more dynamic, creative ways to craft an admitted class to Tufts.</p>
<p>And it is a craft.</p>
<p>^^ i LOVED that book, that was during my phase of "inside the college admissions life" psychoness</p>
<p>^^ I don't know about you all, but I think Momzie's post with the words "transexual", "girl scout", "lesbian", "boy scout" and "missionary" all in one sentence pretty much guarantees this thread will get some interesting Google hits.</p>
<p>Just sayin'...</p>
<p>Yeah - if we could only work Jumbos into it somehow.....;)</p>
<p>The Gatekeepers was my reading assignment after I was hired but before I actually started working. Though there are many differences between Tufts and Wesleyan's office at the time the book was written, the cycle of work and life that Jacques Steinberg describes for admissions officers has been true to my experience.</p>
<p>Also:
[quote]
^^ I don't know about you all, but I think Momzie's post with the words "transexual", "girl scout", "lesbian", "boy scout" and "missionary" all in one sentence pretty much guarantees this thread will get some interesting Google hits.</p>
<p>Just sayin'...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That made me laugh out loud.</p>
<p>^Lolz, me too.</p>
<p>Quote:
"I don’t know about you all, but I think Momzie’s post with the words “transexual”, “girl scout”, “lesbian”, “boy scout” and “missionary” all in one sentence pretty much guarantees this thread will get some interesting Google hits.</p>
<p>Just sayin’… "</p>
<p>AHAHAHAHAHAHA. Lucky that my brother isn’t home otherwise he would call me a creep for laughing out loud.</p>