<p>Allmusic, why do you think the Common App is a bad thing. My son used it and it minimized the time he needed to spend on paperwork! He applied to 6 colleges using it and completed the basic application in a few hours. He spent another half day on his college essay and cranked out a supplemental for Oberlin in another hour. One weekend in early October all his applications were done and emailed in.</p>
<p>Given the horror stories related here about the angst over the application process, the CA made it quite a painless process for our son.</p>
<p>Re the OP, it does sound like a UChicago type of process. But I take issue with the Tufts spokesman who thought that the benefits of the "new" applications approach would be known in a few years. Because they desire to accept students who will use their out of the box thinking to succeed in their post graduate life, it will take many more years to determine success in that context.</p>
<p>maybe I need to switch vitamins but this 'future leader' line puzzles me. Don't we almost without exception despise and crucify our leaders? isn't this one of the trademarks of our species? set em up, knock em down. Why is this holy grail of leader creationism always put out there as an absolute good? Anyone who wants to be a leader is nuts in my opinion. Anonymity is true delight,.</p>
<p>(except for you ariesathena whom i'd follow)</p>
<p>Good for Tufts. They've decided to think "outside the box" to admit students who think "outside the box." Why shouldn't they try to admit interesting people and not just a collection of SAT/ACT scores?</p>
<p>As I look around at the people I work with, the people I admire most and who seem to be succeeding best (there are bad ways to succeed - go see "The Devil Wears Prada") are often people with great leadership qualities, wonderfully creative minds and a capacity to problem solve in the worst of conditions. Their educational backgrounds have very little in common. They include a college drop-out, a PhD, a high school grad, and a humanities major with a knack for math who now is a whiz with spreadsheets. They include athletes, artists, frat boys, political junkies and nerds. The one skill they all share is the ability to work together, to work hard, and to get results. We have wonderful knockdown arguments and laughing fits that leave us crying. I couldn't imagine working in an environment where we all went to the same school, had the same major, had the same scores, etc.</p>
<p>If it wasn't clear before, it should be by now - Tufts deserves high praise for hiring Sternberg and taking this bold move to implement Sternberg's idea of multiple intelligence as part of the admissions process. "Successful intelligence is the ability to achieve success in life in terms of one's personal standards, within one's sociocultural context." Thinking outside the box then involves discerning the difference between critical thinking and wise thinking which involve different types of thinking processes. In this context, nothing could be worse than a packaged or over-edited essay.</p>
<p>Perhaps we should consider the possibility that what Tufts is doing has little to do with scientific research on multiple intelligences and a great deal to do with Tufts' position in the academic pecking order.</p>
<p>Tufts is a wonderful school that has a great deal to offer to highly qualified applicants. However, it is located in close geographic proximity to several other colleges that are more selective and have a greater national and international reputation. Tufts has understandable difficulty distinguishing the applicants who truly want to attend Tufts (but who, perhaps, did not apply Early Decision for financial reasons) from those for whom it is a glorified safety school. We know that Tufts doesn't want the latter sort of students (that's what "Tufts Syndrome" is all about, isn't it?)</p>
<p>The new questions that Tufts is adding to its application are a time-consuming pain in the posterior. They won't discourage applicants who have a serious interest in Tufts, but they will discourage students for whom Tufts is only one of many colleges on a long list. I suspect this is the idea, and I think it is a good one. Tufts will benefit if a larger proportion of its student body consists of people who really love it rather than those who have settled for it.</p>
<p>(Full disclosure: I am a parent. Thirtysomething years ago, I was admitted to Tufts and would have been delighted to go there, but I went elsewhere because the other college offered a much better financial aid package.)</p>
<p>I think the devil is in the details of how Sternberg and Tufts is going to define leadership in a quantitative wasy that will allow them to assess the effectiveness of this "new" admission initiative. Is this leadership while a student or later in life? Will the emphasis be on corporate/political leadership or some other variant? If Ariesathena's perception of her four years there are normative it sounds like Tufts doesn't require any new admission tactics.</p>
<p>It is unlikely Sternberg's motivation in leaving Yale for Tufts was to increase Tufts' yield. He firmly believes in his work and is looking for alternatives to SAT/ACT tests. To him this is one large experimental opportunity to test his position on intelligence.</p>
<p>The main risk would seem to be a reduced number of applicants. Except for ranking statistics, that shouldn't be a big deal. Most of those who decide not to apply probably weren't all that serious anyway.</p>
<p>At the same time, they might GAIN some applicants who feel their chances have been improved both by a less-stats oriented admission process and by (maybe) fewer total applicants.</p>
<p>At first I thought this would be part of the admissions interview--just you, a pad of paper, a #2 pencil, and some wacky out of the box questions. That would have been a great way to gauge creativity and original thinking. </p>
<p>It's a good thing to require essays--but sadly they aren't always 100% the students' own work.</p>
<p>This probably will reduce the number of applicants but will probably increase the yield. From a psychological standpoint of commitment that shares the fundamental propagation of fraternity hazing, no one is going to apply to Tufts while doing all that extra work without seriously considering matriculation.</p>
<p>Some of the most interesting interview questions (are you the doorknob or the door?) can yield a lot about how a student thinks on his feet. Personally, I think that is a more accurate way of assessing a student's ability to "think outside the box" than yet another essay question.</p>
<p>Originaloog, I dislike the Common App because it has made applying to 15 schools too easy, which is patently ridiculous. No kid needs to apply to that many schools, and it has majorly screwed up statistics and yields. With the Common App, all one needs is a bit of extra cash and a little more time. In the old days, you had to really WANT to go to a school to fill out a separate paper application, with separate essays, for each one.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>what is wrong with screwing up the statistics and yields? I thought yield was only a USNWR tool?</p></li>
<li><p>given the randomness of the admissions process at reach schools, why do you think 15 applicaitons is "ridiculous"?</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Why would an essay question, one that can be outsourced, belabored over for months, and polished to the max, "yield a lot about how a student thinks on his feet"? On his bottom, in front of a computer screen, maybe....</p>
<p>I don't see Tufts having any "yield problem". They easily fill their class to the exact number they want off the waitlist each year (if they even use it) and still end up rejecting a whole lot of top notch applicants.</p>
<p>BTW, MIT requires their own application all the way through (no CommApp at all). They're doing OK by USNews. </p>
<p>Just wondering, what happens if every single student enrolled at Tufts is actually a "leader"? Would it be a good place?</p>
<p>I don't think every student SHOULD be a leader. I think there is a place for many different types of people in college, and the world,a nd not everyone is destined to be in the limelight. Some very special people will be working behind the scenes, supporting others even (gasp) and they are exceptionally important as well.</p>
<p>Newmassdad, you will note that I was one who indicated that the essay WOULDN'T yield a lot about how a student thought on his feetm due exactly to the outsourcing issue you mention.</p>
<p>These are all great ideas - but creativity is subjective. Period. Subjectivity leads to grey area and grey area leads to obfuscation. It's the same as we have now. </p>
<p>Go Tufts! Glad that someone realizes that not every "leader of tomorrow" hits the ground running at age 14. It's wise to look ways to assess kids and their potential that goes beyond a GPA and SAT scores. It seems to me that a lot of the students who have the "numbers" to get into highly competitive schools are bright kids, but good soldiers who follow the rules, work hard, but don't take any many chances or risk thinking outside the box.</p>