If there are 6000 ED (Early Decision) application for undergraduate programs, and 1500 applicants are to be selected, how does the admissions committee sort and filter through the applications? Some ideas, I could think of:
Set minimum criteria (GPA/ACT/SAT) for elimination => filter by state wise => filter by race => filter by undergrad major => etc.
Filter by race => set minimum criteria (GPA/ACT/SAT) for elimination => filter by state => filter by undergrad major => etc.
Filter by state => Filter by race => set minimum criteria (GPA/ACT/SAT) for elimination => filter by undergrad major => etc.
Filter by undergrad major => Filter by state => Filter by race => set minimum criteria (GPA/ACT/SAT) for elimination => etc.
Filter by undergrad major => Filter by race => Filter by state => set minimum criteria (GPA/ACT/SAT) for elimination => etc.
Just curious to understand.
Looking for any feedback based on personal experience and NOT from imagination. Thanks in advance.
What is the reason for this question? Nothing you find out about the process will help you gain admittance.
You’re probably overthinking this. Most likely, they sort all the applicants according to region and then plop them on the desks of the readers assigned to those regions. I highly doubt they’re presorting by race. The AO’s just read the files in whatever order they arrive and make their notations on them. After the whole process is done and the committee knows who they want to admit, the class is further “shaped” to meet their goals. That is my guess.
Completely agree with your excellent question. No answer will help in gaining admittance:-).
This is more of an intellectual query. It was bothering me how these colleges actually scrub thru 1000s of applications.
Even though no college will state that race is a factor, I see this very clearly. An asian with high GPA/ACT/SAT compared to white or black or latino has a lower probability of getting.
Please understand that I am not trying to go against the process but simply trying to better understand for my intellectual inquisitiveness.
I think it’s an interesting question, OP! My first thought was that they could cull the low GPAs/SATs first. However, maybe ED pools are generally too strong for that to be of much use? I would definitely imagine that some schools, at least, would start with the stats, and then every applicant who survives that cut deserves a closer look at the “soft” stuff – essays, ECs, race, gender.
If you google Duke, they have a process like that! I think the regional adcoms do that first cut. They are upfront about it, though they don’t tell you the “cutoff”.
Without doubt they apply a “holistic” approach. And indeed if you research the topic, looking for interviews with directors of admissions at very selective universities, you get a partial answer to your question. You can even try to ask this question at admissions open houses. They’ll provide you a partial answer to your question, and it’s unlikely to shed much light on how it works in practice.
If you were to ask this question in Great Britain or France or Germany you’re more likely to get the quantitative formula you’re looking for.
That’s what is so puzzling. Sometimes it makes me wonder if these schools truly mean what they say? Are they truly non-discriminatory? Do they really want good students? Do they truly look for the best?
If their process is unknown, but the selection is made by human beings, how can any approach be rational and equitable to all?
I don’t think legacies are done in a separate process as it is against “the rules.” They are certainly given an extra look, but they aren’t evaluated as a group as the athletes are.
I have been interviewing for Penn for 17 years and have interviewed over 400 applicants. I do not know anything about the process although I have had dinnesr, drinks, and meetings with Admission Officers and the Dean. I have worked as a researcher at MIT and Harvard and been an administrator at Brandeis.
Admissions is extremely tight lipped. I have a friend who is alumna who worked in Admissions when she was an undergraduate. She knows absolutely nothing about the process.
Not 1 legacy that I have interviewed has been accepted. EA or RD.
Asians make up about 32% of the student population at Penn. They are 6-8 % of the general population according to the census. ???
Caucasians are about 78% of the general population. For the past 4-5 years their admitted rate is in the 44-46% range.
I interview SEAS, CAS, and Wharton. I have not noticed any difference in the kids who are accepted in the 3 schools or in ay one major. I interview math, sciences, AI, CS, Econ, Linguistics, Women's Studies, .
Interviewers do not have access to your GPA, SATs/ACT, essays, etc.
Is one group being discriminated against? Are there quotas? Is the criteria for any group different? Is the criteria for any major different. Who knows. If so, I am against it. BUT. In the 50s when I was a student the NYT reported that there were quotas on Jewish people and people of my European ethnicity. I was one of my kind in CW (btw there was 1 African American in CW at the time), there were 2 of my kind in the College (the senior went on to be the 1 in med school), there was 1 in the law school, 1 in the graduate school and 1 in Wharton. I can say that my SATs, GPA, and class standing (valedictorian in a school that was ranked third in the nation) was about what you expect for HPY now. My nearest competition went to Harvard. (SAT scores have gone up since my day for several reasons: the tests have changed making them easier, we only got 1 chance at the SATs and if you take them twice you are supposed to get a 100 point jump, and we did not have trial tests.) One of my teachers was a Penn graduate, she fought for me, and that is how I beat the quotas - at least that is my belief. She suggested I apply to Northwestern and I was accepted there during my interview - I guess it was my safe school although we did not have or know of that concept…
I have met outstanding kids who are all colors and all races, religions and ethnicities… And, I have met lots who were likeable but reaching.
This demographic info is gathered from the reports that the DP published every year. That is about all I have been able to understand about the process…
I know a lot of you hate the word holistic. But I believe it.
Some will tell you the interview carries no weight. I would hope that is not true. Over the years about 20 kids have been extremely difficult: rude, combative, condescending, made xenophobic comments, lied, and exhibited egregious behavior. I would hope that would have some weight with Admissions.
Thank you. Thank you and Thank you. Your detailed response is absolutely beautiful and reassuring. Some of your questions and comments are exactly what I was looking for. I presume you are in (or from) IL.
@amanivy I’ve interviewed for another Ivy a few years longer than you – roughly fewer kids than you however. As I see it given the surplus of applicants, I’m pretty confident that the interview for the bulk of the kids won’t make a difference – the bulk of kids are not in the grey area. They’re either in 3 groups, I would guess: clearly shoo-ins, otherwise competitive or clearly not competitive.
I think our interviews are only relevant to the 2nd group – which isn’t a large percentage. (for the first group: PERHAPS they might cause the admissions office to reconsider a shoo-in if an EXTREMELY negative report came in with serious red-flags.) For the 2nd group, where the admissions officers are clearly on the fence, our reports can nudge an argument one way or another. I have no reason to believe otherwise.
To the OP: why obsess over something that you can’t really affect? Are you not going to present yourself in the best possible light? SO what if Penn may favor some factor in another kid’s app over yours? Maybe something in your app catches a reader’s eye. Great. But to waste energy and emotion trying to guess what this “something” is is foolish. You present the most “excellent” version of yourself and hope that it matches what the Penn reader’s definition of “excellent”. What more can be done?
I think someone asked about how ED affects admissions chances, so here are my thoughts on early admissions:
When I visited Penn, the admissions officer giving the information session explicitly said that Penn likes to reward applicants who have committed to Penn and see Penn as their absolute first choice. This was one of the reasons, he said, that the early acceptance rate is higher (the other reason being it’s a self-selecting strong group). I think Penn is quite unique in this respect though among the Ivies - no other Ivy I visited actually explicitly stated there was an advantage to applying early.
I also heard that if you are a legacy, you only really benefit if you apply to that school early. Apparently schools favor legacy applicants to extend an already strong community, so if you don’t prioritize that school, they don’t see you as fulfilling their objectives.