the admissions committee do a “post-mortem” IE pull the files of the kids who were rescinded, go over them and try to see “what they missed” Clearly, these kids are NOT who Harvard wants to admit. (put aside your beliefs on privacy, their JUDGMENT was horrible at the very least) I assume this incident was evaluated, I just wonder to what degree.
Even if Admissions did a “post-mortem,” I seriously doubt they would find something they “missed.” To be admitted to Harvard a student must have it all – meaning that top test scores and grades are the minimum threshold. A student’s essays must be well written, demonstrate maturity, good judgement and like-ability. In addition, teacher and GC recommendations must be exemplary and corroborate the same qualities. And, the interview report must reiterate all the above and not indicate any “red flags.” No matter how smart a person may be, or how wonderful their recommendations, sometimes they do stupid things. To wit: Several years ago, Harvard forced 70 students to withdraw from the school for cheating (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/02/education/harvard-forced-dozens-to-leave-in-cheating-scandal.html). I highly doubt Admissions bothered to do a “post-mortem” then of what they missed. Ditto with last year.
So, when something goes off the rails at your job, it makes international news….your boss doesn’t have a meeting about it and try to find ways to avoid it happening again in the future? You think they are happy having Jared Kushner as an alum, who was NOT up to the task academically but Daddy bought his way in? Of course Harvard considers all of these things that detract from their mission. They must. If they don’t they should.
William Fitzsimmons would be the first person to admit the admissions process is far from perfect and they often make mistakes. To wit: Ted Kaczynski (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski). However, I highly doubt anything in Mr. K’s file would have indicated his future path, or whether a post-mortem of his file would have turned up any indicators.
@gibby -
I am not an expert on the Unabomber, but I did watch the recent mini-series and read about him. It seemed to me that he had some personality quirks, but was clearly intelligent and that the psychological experiments he became involved in at Harvard may have impacted how he ultimately turned out. Perhaps, if he hadn’t participate in them or if he had gone to Yale, he might not have become the Unabomber.
^^ All too true. Whatever Ted Kaczynski endured during his time at Harvard may have indeed impacted his future self. All that said, Admissions does make mistakes, and while they may try to learn from their mistakes, AO’s rely HEAVILY on teacher and GC recommendations. And, if those recommendations don’t report anything out of the ordinary, nor does the interview report – Admissions is then given the “green light” to move forward with an applicant’s file. I’m not sure what the OP envisions might be learned by a post-mortem, as any off-handed comment by a teacher or GC would have raised a red flag, thereby disqualifying the student at the onset.
I agree with that. Plus, with the amount of applications that schools are seeing now, it might be possible to miss or fail to delve into something. As well, most people who are applying to a school like Harvard probably go to great lengths to portray themselves in the most positive light, to get recs from people who genuinely like and believe in them, etc.
MODERATOR’S NOTE:
Whether they do or not, they will not tell you. Similarly, whether or not Harvard admissions held a post-mortem is irrelevant, because they won’t tell you. Nor should they; it’s not your concern.
Regardless, since nobody can answer the question definitively, and the rules of the forum prohibit debate, I am closing this thread.