<p>^ Good explanation. It’s only a “crapshoot”, “random”, or any other term for people not involved in the admission committee. The adcom knows exactly want they want, and admit students based upon that. Its not like they toss all the applications on the floor and start picking them up and say “the first 2100 are in!”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I never said this. I said it’s a crapshoot in the sense of being unpredictable.</p>
<p>My point is that AS FAR AS WE KNOW, they MIGHT AS WELL roll dice (at least with the base-level qualified applicants) to see who gets in. From the applicant’s perspective, the process <em>seems</em> like a crapshoot, and IMO, it might as well be.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Even that claim is dubious. Knowing any of a large set of considered factors would result in predictions that are better than random chance would suggest.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There is an element of randomness, and separately an element of subjectivity. There are very few things in life that are not impacted by randomness.</p>
<p>^Well-stated. :)</p>
<p>"A surprisingly poorly thought out argument… "</p>
<p>Yes, it took my breath away. The rest of the book was pretty good, but since he was miles off base on the one topic I knew a lot about, it made me very skeptical about his other arguments that I didn’t know enough about to judge.</p>
<p>Yes, it’s a bad idea, but nonetheless it’s unreasonable to question Mr. Matthews’ talents, merits, or intelligence for publishing the column. There needs to be a bit of clear-sightedness before broadsiding undergraduate student publications or their participating members unless they publish something blatantly out of line or infringe upon common protocol. They’re largely comprised of overburdened college students pressed by deadlines to draft and submit articles/columns for the designated issue, which inevitably hampers an optimum level of refinement and overall quality. Journalists are bound to suffer from inadvertent falsifications, frequent inconsistencies, an occasional baseless assertion, and generally prosaic writing quality. Editorialists are pressed to write something novel and intriguing in conjunction with the additional pressure of having personal identity associated with an inherently contestable stance. Admittedly, most of the editorials are rhetorically and notionally insipid, but because it’s a Harvard publication shouldn’t prescribe the impractical standards normally imposed upon professional syndicates.</p>
<p>(The infinitely more despairing tidbit from The Crimson recently was the front-page press concerning the activity of the Westboro Baptist Church. I won’t present circumstantial detail, but I’ll simply assert that it should never be a priority to commentate on the meanderings of a hate group that deserves pity more than scorn or local coverage.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Agreed. Smart people can certainly come up with dumb arguments sometimes.</p>
<p>I know him because I just completed the comp for the Ed Board. Great guy, and certainly not an idiot. I still don’t agree with his piece though.</p>
<p>It’s sad how many people simply do not understand the admissions process. There isn’t a SINGLE point in the process where ANYTHING whatsoever is random. The Harvard adcom knows exactly what the school needs, and they meticulously choose from an extremely large pool of very qualified candidates. They have ~2100 spots to fill, while keeping in mind that they need to uphold many of the institution’s priorities (percentage of minorities, percentage of international students, low-income yet qualified students, students whose parents will contribute to the endowment, legacy students, athletes, etc.) That leaves very few places for everyone else. A lottery system would most likely result in the following:</p>
<p>-No (or very few) slightly under-qualified developmental admits.
-Very few athletes.
-Very few minority students.</p>
<p>^Those alone would irreversibly ruin Harvard as we know it. I hope the article was written satirically.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree, just because certain decisions are unexpected, doesn’t make the process random</p>
<p>One of the reasons the process appears random to applicants is they do not get to see their competition’s package, with its unique essays, SSR report and teacher recommendations. If you speak with any admissions director – either from Harvard or any other college – they will tell you they take great care in deciding whom to admit. Then again, there’s a flip-side to the admissions process: [Dirty</a> Secrets of College Admissions - The Daily Beast](<a href=“http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-01-09/dirty-secrets-of-college-admissions/]Dirty”>The Daily Beast: The Latest in Politics, Media & Entertainment News)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. High schoolers can be so one-dimensional that they often fail to acknowledge that numbers are but a portion of one’s application.</p>