<p>Great article! It is spot on. Thank you for sharing.</p>
<p>I think the overall article is pretty accurate. There is a bit of the author’s personality and bias shining through, but isn’t that what happens in all interviews? I also interview for Harvard and there are certain assessments that need to be made, but it is otherwise free form. You don’t have to talk about politics or god or any of that. I usually don’t. I talk about what molds them into the person they are before me. What can they show me in terms of character and thought that is not reflected in their SAT, grades, AP scores, and extracurricular positions. THAT is what the committee back in Cambridge wants. They can far better assess where the applicant stacks up in the pool of applicants, but they can’t assess character, drive and compassion.</p>
<p>CherryRose - first off good on you - you have made a lot of great posts and thoughtful comments and here’s hoping you and other frequent CC kids are accepted to fabulous schools. If the world is fair it will be so.</p>
<p>The main message I read in the article was: after you cover the basics of good grades and a few sports and ECs for breadth, you can stop worrying about what looks good to AOs and just… vigorously follow your own actual passions to the limit. Ironically, that WILL look good, and more, you will be a great person regardless of what college accepts you. </p>
<p>And that is an awesome point.</p>
<p>We also hear that Doctoroff is seeking people with active intellectual lives. It might be more his preference than any official policy. It certainly sounds accurate though. </p>
<p>To my eye, Harvard College students are no more materialistic than other students. Quite a high number become academics, scientists, policy experts, or non-profit people. Outright materialism is more the province of the B-School, and that is a different beast.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s not exactly fair, as many of my section mates joined or started non-profits and not with the intention of becoming financially wealthy. One, the family scion of a well-known apparel company, is now in the business of providing micro loans to cottage businesses, mostly operated by women, in India. Sure, when you link “business” and “Harvard”, you probably also think “investment banker” or “management consultant”, but many business school students don’t follow these paths, and many of those who do are extremely generous with their time and money.</p>
<p>I will also add something that might be of interest here as we’re talking about what Harvard is looking for in applicants. A B-school advisor explained it this way, “We’re like a bank. Banks try to loan money only to those who don’t really need it; that is, those who are a sure bet for paying it back. We’re looking for people who are already successful, candidates who will hit their mark with or without a Harvard education. Harvard doesn’t make anyone successful, we simply self-select those who are already there or on their way.” That has always stuck with me. Granted, the business school is a graduate program (students are older and bring relevant experience with them) but this idea seems right in line with one point the author of the article is trying to get across – show us how you are already on your way. If you possess the exceptional attributes the author is looking for, your life will be rich and rewarding (successful) with or without Harvard.</p>
<p>(I realize that, today, the bank analogy is laughable. This story is several decades old.)</p>
<p>My mother has been reading admissions at the Ivy where she’s been a professor since 1978 (yes she’s in her 70’s now) - same university I attended for undergrad and grad in Philosophy and my brother attended for undergrad and B school. I can say that over the years her- mostly funny, some very sad - stories have convinced me that college admissions at least at these top tier schools is pretty much a crap shoot (among qualified applicants) but that the qualities described in the Doctoroff article (authenticity, genuine intellectual engagement, and willingness to pursue idiosyncratic passions) really do move a committee, regardless of other variables. Above all, a candidate who can convey something of the character and richness of his/her inner life whether in the essay or interview (much less common now) goes a long way. My mother can still quote from striking essays she read decades ago. Literally. Now she daily laments what she perceives to be a drastic decline in the writing ability of even the most qualified candidates, and apparently her colleagues agree. I would guess that Doctoroff’s viewpoint is more universal than unique. So why did I squash my daughters desire to write this essay for BS app’s, "why I limit myself to 20 facebook ‘friends’’? Because I was afraid it was too ‘weird’ and would be misunderstood. I should have had more faith in the beauty of my D’s weirdness! Ah, live and learn. (sometimes too late…!)</p>
<p>Honeybee, about all these things you talked about, how can I make sure I stand out when I apply for college? What are the do’s and don’ts for college applications, etc? </p>
<p>Any advice for a freshman high school student?</p>
<p>shinelikemystar - If you’ve already read the article that CherryRose linked to (above), another thing you can do is read some of the threads in the [Ask</a> The Dean](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/ask-dean-topics/]Ask”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/ask-dean-topics/) forum here on CC. Some of them answer just those questions. It will give you something to do while you’re waiting for M10 to get here . . . :)</p>
<p>@shinelikemystar. Take challenging courses. Do things you find interesting. Have informed opinions (grounded in some facts or research). Be passionate about something over a sustained period of time. There is no “prescription” for what to do right - if we posted a list, then everyone would do it and it would negate the point. The schools aren’t trying to recruit a “stat” they’re trying to recruit a hard working, flesh and blood, imperfect but fascinating student who will contribute as much as he/she takes on campus. </p>
<p>Do you know how many students try to BS their way through an interview because they think there are right answers to the questions (there aren’t)? Or regurgitate things they hear at home but can’t explain a basis for the opinion?</p>
<p>So don’t try to guess. Because it would be like someone telling you the key to college admissions is to be a great Tuba player and you apply the year they have too many tubas and need a harpsichord, cymbals and a bass drum. Or worse - everyone takes up the tuba and you’re right back where you started. Be yourself. Trying to second guess the system will leave you just looking like one of many in an already too full pile.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, they’re all so busy running around trying to raise their profiles with NTAs (see CherryRose’s horrifying link) that they don’t have time to read. They don’t have time to think. They don’t have time to observe. They don’t have time to write for fun.</p>
<p>I also interview for my alma mater. I’ve found the hard questions are these: So, read any good books lately? and, Why are you (participating in EC)/What have you learned from (participating in EC)? Many very smart, very ambitious students don’t have time to reflect. Reflection takes time, leisure, and a value structure which tolerates unusual answers. </p>
<p>Andrew S. Doctoroff may mean well, but middle schoolers are not helped by well-meaning people trying to tell them how to get into Harvard. College admissions fear is robbing students of their youth. I think that’s a bad thing.</p>
<p>I’m not sure that is who he is aiming at. I run into a lot of parents who start “prepping” their students in middle school and they arrive for college interviews so overprepped that they can’t think for themselves. I’ve had some interviews this year that made me want to pull my hair out because I couldn’t get the student off his/her pre-rehearsed script. Throw them a curveball (like "what’s the last book you read not assigned by an adult) and they look like deer caught in the headlights. I think that is his audience. </p>
<p>Let kids be kids - is my motto. When I interview I want to see the real student - warts and all, passions abounding, mistakes a-plenty. Not the overly prepped Stepford version created by well-meaning adults chasing an IVY dream.</p>
<p>I agree with my esteemed colleague ExieMITAlum, and add:</p>
<p>Provide opportunities for your children to develop passions that enable them to become <em>self-motivated</em> learners; then they can be kids, while <em>they</em> dig into things. What the passion is is far less important than they find things they are passionate about.</p>
<p>That will get you further than any amount of pushing in any particular direction, or arbitrary amount of coaching or prepping.</p>
<p>Pretentious, stuffy, naive?!?! I found the article spot on in a way that is most refreshing (and true) So much of our age of political correctness has glossed over the obvious so as not to offend. It’s so nice to hear someone tell it like it is. </p>
<p>I will begin looking at colleges with my son this summer for the fall of 2013. I have no illusions. I only know one thing – there is a school out there that will be a good fit for my son.</p>
<p>My issue with the article, even M10 when I received a bunch of waitlists and one rejection because I needed full FA (has been stated explicitly by schools), is that it exaggerates the entire “meritocracy” assumption of admissions too much. “If you’ve got IT, then welcome to Harvard! If you’re just faking, we’ll find you out!” That’s not true. These instututions are meritocracies, but only to an extent. I’m not saying that the things Doctoroff describes shouldn’t be pursued- they should- but in the admissions world, what you can do and have done doesn’t change what you can’t. That “meritocracy only to an exent” is a disclaimer I feel is too often overlooked amid glossy promises like this one.</p>
<p>Here is a (less serious, but enlightening) rebuttal: [How</a> to Get into Harvard, According to Harvard Alum With No Idea What He?s Talking About > andrew s. doctoroff, college admissions, eighth graders, Harvard, huffington post | IvyGate](<a href=“http://www.ivygateblog.com/2012/02/how-to-get-into-harvard-according-to-harvard-alum-with-no-idea-what-hes-talking-about/]How”>http://www.ivygateblog.com/2012/02/how-to-get-into-harvard-according-to-harvard-alum-with-no-idea-what-hes-talking-about/). I thought the comments quite interesting.</p>
<p>P.S. Periwinkle, if you see this, I think you’d enjoy the above article.</p>
<p>This was a well written article and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. As a high school senior, however, I feel that this man has been blinded by the fact that he’s interviewing people who are trying to get into Harvard.</p>
<p>For example:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Obviously, as a Harvard interviewer, the people that he talks with are going to have above average grades and test scores. Him saying that grades and test scores are “unimpressive” is akin to me watching thousands of NBA games and coming to the conclusion that being a 6’10"+ power forward is not impressive, since pretty much everyone grows up to be that tall anyway.</p>
<p>The reality is that less .001% of the world’s population is that tall, and there are even less people who have the coordination and skill to play basketball. In the same way, Harvard applicants are already self-selected for having superb academic achievements. Most do, and those that do not are either wasting their application fee, or have African/Hispanic blood running through their bodies. </p>
<p>In light of this, are we to the conclusion that the GPAs and test scores of Harvard applicants are unimpressive? By no means!</p>
<p>Of course, I realize that he probably knew this when writing the article, and that a small part of him just wanted to stir up controversy. Judging by the length of my post, I guess he succeeded.</p>
<p>^ pretty good analogy but I would interpret the situation very differently.</p>
<p>An NBA scout does not walk around the streets hoping to find a center … he goes to NCAA DI games and to European Pro games. In other words the scout does not go to the population where finding a 6’10" person is rare … but to a population where there are a lot of 6’10" guys and where they are trying to find the ones that truely stand out.</p>
<p>Harvard accepts something like 2000 students a years. There are 30,000 high schools in the United States … so there are 30,000 valedictorian (assuming 1 a school). Even if valedictorian were the only set of high school students Harvard considered the acceptance rate would only be something like 6% (if they all applied). There are WAY more highly qualified students than there are spots for Harvard.</p>
<p>Being a NCAA DI center is an amazing accomplishment … however, it in no way means the NBA will necessarily think you stand out compared to other potential centers. Having great grades and SATs is an amazing accomplishment … however, it in no way means Harvard will necessarily think you stand out compared to other potential candidates.</p>
<p>@3togo - It’s also a pretty big assumption that all valedictorians score anywhere close to 2100 on their SATs. That’s one of the reasons schools use several metrics. The only kids who go on to ranked schools from our district are athletes, and usually only runners since running requires little special equipment and is easily quantified. If you’re fast, you’re fast. Most of our top ten graduating seniors go on to community college or state schools because they can’t seem to break 1900 on the SAT. Only the top quartile even sits the exam and the school average hovers around 1500. A friend of mine’s daughter was told by an AO at Williams that she had two choices, either study and retake the SAT or run faster.</p>
<p>I think all this talk about following your passions is great as a life lesson, but I don’t know how well it actually plays out in college admissions. I guess your passions have to fall within the confines of what the school wants.</p>
<p>
[Harvard</a> College Admissions § Applying: Taking Time Off](<a href=“http://www.admissions.college.harvard.edu/apply/time_off/index.html]Harvard”>http://www.admissions.college.harvard.edu/apply/time_off/index.html)</p>
<p>I selected excerpts from “Time Out or Burn Out for the Next Generation”, by William R. Fitzsimmons, Dean of Admissions, Harvard College, Marlyn E. McGrath, Director of Admissions, Harvard College, and Charles Ducey, Adjunct Lecturer in Psychology, Harvard Graduate School of Education. I recommend everyone read the entire opinion piece. I do believe the authors know whereof they write. They outline the methods some people use to attempt to package their children, as CherryRose has pointed out. Unlike a single alumni interviewer, they are privy to the entire pool.</p>
<p>How do you produce “dazed survivors of some bewildering life-long boot-camp?” You pontificate to 8th graders about the qualities they’ll need for their interview for Harvard. You assert there are acceptable responses to discussions of personal faith. (Do you think Martin Luther would have passed the test?) You assert that the eighth graders really need to start working towards the moment of (alumni interview) judgement.</p>
<p>Basically, Doctoroff is attempting to condition us to become exactly what he just said we shouldn’t become.</p>
<p>I like the impression Doctoroff has of his influence in Ivy League admission decisions. It’s straight out of Risky Business.</p>
<p>“Princeton can use a man like Joel?! You’re as good as in!”</p>
<p>I think this is a very strong article. I’ve thought about most of his questions, but I would be surprised if any more than 20 people in my grade have:(.</p>