Of course, one problem is it’s an unfunded Federal mandate; Duke (and MANY other universities) will be obligated to spend considerable staff time and overhead expenses to provide this documentation, with no compensation from either the USG or the individuals who request their records (capital and resources that could be allocated for other purposes). While this may seem trivial, it’s a good example of why the costs for higher education – and everything else – inflate (in my opinion).
I hope this provides some information of interest to you.
@TopTier Good thing I got my request in before they go the way of Yale and Stanford destroying the admissions officer’s comments before students matriculate.
@spuding102: I’m not at all sure I like – or approve of – this entire FERPA “admissions file openness.” Obviously, we all theoretically value “transparency;” however, could FERPA have the unanticipated result of unduly constraining comments by teachers, GCs, other recommenders, and even alumni interviewers? Candor in such important admissions documents is ESSENTIAL, but some individuals are certain to be less straightforward if they believe the admitted student will be able to review comments and recommendations, both positive and negative.
Then, there’s the question of many thousands of unreimbursed dollars expended annually that could otherwise be allocated to FA, IT enhancements, library improvements . . .
@TopTier Im not sure that allowing students to view their admissions file will have that effect. It is not that many students requesting access to their files and I am not sure that admissions officers would be scared to write their honest opinions-after all the students are already at the school why would they care? Also, the comments are likely to be positive because the students did after all get accepted. Transparency is important in the process and FERPA provides such transparency. The general tone from all admissions offices is “we make the decisions we make and we rather not have to explain each one”. FERPA allows students to understand what they did right and wrong in the admissions process. I know I will certainly take the comments as objective criticism and build on my advantages and try to fix my shortcomings when applying to medical school.
I appreciate your comments and I agree with most of them. However, let me offer a scenario for your astute consideration:
One of your classmates completes Duke with stellar results (we could expect no less ), graduates from Stanford Law, and eventually settles in a fine Midwestern town, where he is both a rising attorney and a leading Dukie. One of his Duke volunteer leadership responsibilities is interviewing undergraduate applicants. His law firm’s senior partner’s daughter ardently wants to attend Duke and he’s her interviewer. Without FERPA, he can be absolutely candid in his post-interview recommendation and remarks. However, with FERPA, he might – obviously we would hope he would not – be less than forthright, because he recognizes the (unlikely, to be sure) possibility that his interview report may eventually be read by his boss.
Okay, it’s abundantly clear the foregoing scenario is a quite contrived: (1) the several circumstances individually are not too likely, and the combined probability is darn unlikely; (2) no FERPA without matriculation, so the interview report probably is not terribly adverse; (3) alumni interviews are generally of inconsequential admissions importance; and (4) most students won’t request their admissions files.
Nevertheless – and this is my primary point – it’s ALWAYS poor managerial practice to allow interview reports, recommendations, etc. to EVER be seen by the subject (incidentally, this is specifically why those interviewed incident to security clearance investigations have the statutory RIGHT to have the report of their interview withheld, if the subject requests a copy of his file).
Therefore, one one hand, I agree re your use of FERPA-generated information as a valuable learning tool. However, there is a downside: (1) people are not obtuse and some will recognize that their comments and recommendations may potentially be read by the subject; accordingly (2) some individuals may be less than candid, which fundamentally undermines the efficacy and the legitimacy of the process.
@TopTier thanks for your reply. While I agree that the above situation is unlikely to happen, if an interviewer does feel uncomfortable interviewing someone with some sort of connection to him, I believe that the interviewer can decline that particular interview and have someone else do it. For example, If I was assigned to interview someone with connections to me (in any way), I would consider it unethical for me to interview them (after all how can I give a fair assessment knowing that my job is potentially on the line). Lets deal with the normal interview case in which the interviewer does not know the applicant (in any form) from beforehand. In this case, FERPA would probably not undermine a candid report since after all, only people who matriculate can see their file and their interview report is unlikely to be bad considering they were admitted. Even if the interview report is not as kind as one would hope, it would not matter to most interviewers (in my opinion) because they have no connection to the applicant and will probably never see them again.
@spuding102: Not necessarily, which is why specified a “fine Midwestern town.” In most major metropolises, we have quite a few AAAC interviewers – and, in fact, I would never interview anyone with whom I had a potentially perceived “conflict of interest” – but in some areas there would be no other alum to conduct the interview. Therefore, the alumnus might feel compelled to perform the interview, rather than failing both the student and the university.
@TopTier, while possible, the above situation is truly highly unlikely. In my opinion, transparency is worth the slim chance of such a situation happening.
@spuding102: I believe it’s a demonstrably poor managerial policy for ANY situation . . . but universities, especially those like Duke, are different, with PC über alles (including “irrational” transparency) part of their DNA.
), graduates from Stanford Law, and eventually settles in a fine Midwestern town, where he is both a rising attorney and a leading Dukie. One of his Duke volunteer leadership responsibilities is interviewing undergraduate applicants. His law firm’s senior partner’s daughter ardently wants to attend Duke and he’s her interviewer. Without FERPA, he can be absolutely candid in his post-interview recommendation and remarks. However, with FERPA, he might – obviously we would hope he would not – be less than forthright, because he recognizes the (unlikely, to be sure) possibility that his interview report may eventually be read by his boss.