<p>I do think there are exceptions to how colleges view this. I have read all those books, but do not think they are the “last word” on this. An example would be U of Chicago… based on personal experience with my kid, last year GREAT test scores were enough to overcome a not-fantastic GPA for acceptance. No hook, decent but not mind-blowing essays, good ECs (but not mind-blowing again), strong (but not “best kid ever” recommendations). I am convinced it was the test scores. Add to that U of C’s desire to overtake Yale in rankings, I think they want to boost that SAT midpoint as much as they can… and my kid benefitted. Does the Common Data Set show that? Nope (although good luck finding it for U of C anyway…). But there IS some variety in how colleges look at it.</p>
<p>Here is another example: I think for some schools both gender and geographic location can increase an applicant’s chances. But how it is used is different by school. A tech school may be looking for more women. A regional school may like to say they have students from more states. But some schools don’t take it into account at all. You simplify this too much at your own risk…</p>
<p>Thank you all for GEM of Information. I’m learning quite a bit. I have changed my attitude, don’t go for the best school, go for what is best fit for you.</p>
<p>You just have to be lucky to get into a school that is highly selective and it happens to be best fit for you. Geographically, financially, acedmically and socially. The problem is if school is going to be good then there is also going to be high demand for it, making it selective.</p>
It’s interesting to see how the gender ratios have changed over the years at some of the well-known tech schools. I do believe that the admissions committees have been intentionally attempting to correct the gender skew.</p>
<p>In recent years (M:F):
MIT - 55:45
Caltech - 61:39
Georgia Tech - 68:32</p>
<p>I remember that when I was applying to MIT and Caltech, the gender ratios were far from parity. IIRC, MIT at the time was 70:30 and Caltech was closer to 78:22. <em>shrug</em></p>
<p>My opinion- The elite schools likely computer cut 80% of the applications based on a programmed minimum index (Grades & SAT). Of that 80%, the essay and EC’s are probably quickly reviewed for some indication of untapped potential, but I doubt if very many make it back into the consideration pile. Of the remaining 20%, course load, grade trends, essays, Rec’s and EC’s are likely used to reduce the pile down to that of 2X the needed applicants. The final selection is probably then based on demographics and the intangible qualities as noted by the admissions officer. The big question is - Who makes the final selection because I don’t think it’s the front line admissions officer.</p>
Not sure who you are defining as a “front line admissions officer.”</p>
<p>Final selection is likely made by an experienced committee. The process might take place as follows: A one-page summary sheet is prepared on each applicant that includes scores, GPA, and other highlights. While those application highlights are projected onto a screen, one or two “advocates” (committee members who are very familiar with the applicant) make the case for acceptance, i.e., discuss background/talents/abilities/accomplishments/interests and why the student would be a good fit for the incoming class. Other committee members ask specific questions about the candidate. A short discussion ensues. Committee members then vote their support by giving some sort of numerical score. If there are any serious concerns raised during the discussion, certain committee members might be tasked with gathering more information about the applicant by contacting high school guidance counselors/mentors/teachers/coaches. In this case, the final decision may be postponed until the next time the committee meets. Rinse and repeat for the next candidate.</p>
<p>All of this would take place after substantial screening on a numerical basis (academic-index) as well as a subjective basis (other admissions officers).</p>
<p>Anyone who initially scans the file, trying to find an applicant worthy of holistic fairy dust.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I read this before, but I just don’t see how Adcom can get through ten’s of thousands of applications without the computer cut (or recommended cut). The computer probably recommends the cuts, but as stated before, a human will likely give the file a quick review to search for potential. I’d agree that the human might have the last word, but the computer creates the recommended cut list and baring holistic greatness, I’d bet it’s a tough list to get off.</p>
What may happen is that a regional admissions officer, who is familiar with the applicants in his area, may handpick a few students to be reviewed in committee. Doing so would circumvent the computer-mediated cut process and guarantee “holistic” review. I’d be willing to bet that the UC schools really do employ some sort of computer-mediated screen. I would think that the top-tier private institutions would do things by hand. With certain admissions committees, I wouldn’t doubt that every application essay is guaranteed 2-3 reads by a human being.</p>
<p>It’s several people looking at files for a few months, and that’s pretty much what they do. They spend about 20 minutes per file. Some are quickly sent to the reject pile, to have one last person look over. Some to the instant admit pile for the head person to verify, and the rest to the pile to be gone over by others, talked over, and voted on. It’s not done by computer. Well, I don’t know about schools like UCLA with such a crazy number of applicants and probably less of a holistic approach, but this is basically how it’s done.</p>
<p>@redpoint: You seem rather certain that you know how things are done by most college admissions committees. What is your personal experience with this? Have you personally served on an admissions committee? Or are you basing your comments solely on what you have read? Just curious…</p>
<p>I’ve just read several books on the subject, and have been to a few lectures, and they describe a similar process. I’ve never read that applicants are pre-sorted and rejected by computer.</p>
<p>Doesn’t it make sense that admissions committees would employ computer-mediated processes to help them sort through the large stack of applications submitted? It would be incredibly convenient to set up a system by which some sort of academic-index is calculated and data parsed so that a condensed summary sheet for each applicant is automatically generated. After all, the Common App has been submitted electronically for many years now. Please note that I’m not arguing that computers are generating accept/reject notices on their own (in most cases). I have no doubt that humans establish the thresholds for issuing “accept” or “reject” decisions…and certain candidates who don’t make the numerical cut might still secure acceptances on account of other info in their applications.</p>
<p>On a related note, the California State University system (different from the UC system) doesn’t require any essays. In many cases, CSU admissions decisions are made on the basis of quantitative data (GPA, standardized test scores, etc.) alone. I believe that deserving students who fall outside the usual acceptance numbers can submit additional info (supplemental essays, letters of recommendation, etc.) and apply under the auspices of “Educational Opportunity” programs.</p>