<p>Harvard seems really to have the one large committee system, but of course each college is welcome to organize its admission process in its own way.</p>
<p>token, please think this through on the numbers.
Applications come through and at least two, hopefully three, people read each application word for word. Now a large committee meets and has their reports. Let's call this 9 to 5, Monday through Friday, starting the beginning of March, for four weeks. Do you think this committee will get its head around 1000 applicants a day?
I have complete respect (I hope not misplaced) that the Ivy schools give each application focussed attention. It is not a criticism, IMO, that twenty or thirty people do not bandy about the pluses and minuses of any particular candidate around a table.</p>
<p>Nobody has claimed that all applicants get a review in front of a committee of 30 people. It is the role of the regional admissions officials to trim the list of applicants. Those that are selected for discussion by the Committee may represent only a fraction of the initial applicant pool. The committee may only have 5 or 6 permanent members and some rotating members who then review the selected candidates. </p>
<p>Hernandez never claimed Dartmouth bypassed a formal committee process for some candidates. If a anything it is very likely the process at Dartmouth College is the same they use at the Tuck school of Business. It is consensus decision not an individual decision. Nobody gets a pass on the committee.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The decision making process at Tuck is an extensive group effort designed to ensure a fair and objective evaluation of each applicant. Initially, each application is read by two members of the admissions committee. The readers evaluate the applicant's strengths and weaknesses and make a recommendation whether to admit or deny. Later, the entire admissions committee meets as a group to discuss the applicants. At that time, the readers' comments are reviewed, and the group arrives at a final decision by consensus.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>cellar, on the information I have been able to glean, the process at Tuck and Dartmouth undergraduate are not the same at all.
I say this as a parent of a recent Dartmouth graduate who has come to pay attention to such things.
Not only do some undergraduate candidates bypass a formal committee at Dartmouth, almost all candidates do.</p>
<p>My statement is not that everyone gets LENGTHY consideration in front of a committee at any college, but only that the Harvard admission officer who spoke at Harvard on the last Friday in February this year said that every candidate's name is read before committee, and I believe her statement.</p>
<p>I do too.
This is a formality.
I would trust Harvard with my son or daughter's application as much or more than any other institution.
But committee consideration? No. And not necessary either.</p>
<p>Hmm I remember meeting the admissions officer from where I was accepted and he was the one who handled my area. It was kinda cool knowing who he was you know...I should've asked how it all works!</p>
<p>Danas:</p>
<p>Is this first hand information? Our D was admitted last year to Dartmouth and we spoke with our regional rep afterwards who indicated that all her applicants went in front of the committee. I am surprised they would do it differently by region. At Harvard there is definitely no alternative to committee review and a consensus decision on every applicant. It is even a two step process from subcommittee to full committee.
[quote]
Then, in February, the applications are divided up geographically among 20 subcommittees. Thus, all applicants from Illinois and Indiana would be considered by the same subcommittee. Then, "we present the case for each applicant like a lawyer would," says Fitzsimmons. Following debate, the subcommittee votes, with a majority needed to move along to the full committee of 35. There, the process is repeated in a grueling, two-week series of meetings. The debates and votes continue until the class has been whittled to the target number.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>token and cellar...
I have enough respect for the Ivy schools generally to have my first two kids apply. One is a recent graduate and another just finished her first year at another Ivy.
I think you are expecting magical stuff (and maybe believing PR) in admissions that is just plain unrealistic. These can be fine schools without buying into such things.
Please just work through the process in your heads given the numbers of applicants we are talking about. That's the best reality check I can think of.
Re: the quote. In February? I'm sorry, each application has gotten sufficient reads by then? I don't think so. Just matching the paperwork takes much of January. Don't you believe the stories about getting to the post office by December 31st?
No reason to be romantic about such stuff. The system is fair enough. Given you swallow the recruited athlete, legacy, URM, prof and administrator boost, politician and celebrity marks.</p>
<p>danas:</p>
<p>Essentially, if I understand you correctly, your information is just based on your opinion that a committee system is unworkable and that statements on the record by admissions officials are just PR. I don't buy your cynicism. I don't think you have a clue about how the process really works.</p>
<p>"Re: the quote. In February? I'm sorry, each application has gotten sufficient reads by then? I don't think so. Just matching the paperwork takes much of January. Don't you believe the stories about getting to the post office by December 31st?"</p>
<p>Token said that in February an adcom informed him/her (lol sorry) that "every candidate's name is read before committee," not that it's done by February.</p>
<p>That doesn't mean that each applicant gets a whole hour before the board.</p>
<p>cellar, I don't think I am a cynic here or I wouldn't have encouraged my kids to have followed this path.
Please use your own evaluative resources. Do you think a human committee at Harvard could have considered 27,462 applicants in the way you are imagining they did?</p>
<p>I'm gonna agree with danas, while at Harvard the committee may read every name, they probably only actually discuss those that actually have a chance at admission, as the apps which clearly have no chance of admittance, which at Harvard is probably a very large percentage, are probably some point early on marked as such.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Danas, here's your error - admissions folks don't work 9 to 5, especially not during the "high season" (January to March). They work 8 to 9??11? 12? at night, either reading apps (round the clock) or in committee. I was at a Harvard admissions session and one of the admissions officers started talking to me about something completely off-topic (I don't remember how it came up) but she happened to accidentally blurt out that she was working at the office at 11 p.m. at night in committee.</p>
<p>Funny how in that U Penn article, our 18 years of hard work is decided in 2-3 minutes...</p>
<p>I spoke to a Stanford admissions officer and she said two people read the app and then it goes to committee. I asked how much time the committee spends on each app and on average, it was just a few minutes.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Hernandez never claimed Dartmouth bypassed a formal committee process for some candidates.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>au contraire</p>
<p>On page 153, Michelle writes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
A great many files will not make it to the committee process at all because they are either very strong or very weak.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So the great message to take from this is that somehow you need to inject "spark" into your application...it looks like the essay is the best method for this, then.</p>
<p>Impossible is nothing.</p>
<p>As a side note, I'd like to be a Harvard adcom (with a decent pay of course).</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'd like to be a Harvard adcom
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I admire their work but I don't envy their job.</p>