<p>I apologize Amanda. Jumping the gun cause I didnt know anyone who applied to Texas A & M, who didnt live in Texas.</p>
<p>For those of you who are concerned your state flagship is taking more and more OOS and International students “forcing” Johnny and Suzy Instate to go to other public institutions, complain to your state legislatures for continuing to cut public support to “public” institutions of higher learning. The funding levels of many of the schools we would all like our children to attend are so pitifully low that the institutions cannot function without an infusion of cash from somewhere. If it’s not from the state taxpayers (through their legislatures) and the schools are limited with what they can charge in-state students for tuition either by law or what will fly politically (which is the case most places), then they HAVE to look elsewhere (OOS and international students who can pay more for the same product) just to keep the doors open.</p>
<p>“But most are smart enough to stop the courting when they get IMMEDIATE feedback on the futility of further pursuit. So, along those lines, a student should be able to submit a ‘request to date you’ note to the University. If the answer is …not if you were the last person on earth…then stop there. If the answer is…if your shower, shave and learn to chew with your mouth closed…maybe, if the answer is …looking good babe!..then continue the ‘courting’.”</p>
<p>That’s what the application IS, That’s the “request to date.” Then the uni says not yes or waitlist. </p>
<p>It seems like you want a preliminary pre-read before you send the app. You want the school to chance you.</p>
<p>Anyone who thinks there is no need for more transparency in the admissions to state universities need only look to what happened at the University of Illinois a few years ago. Hundreds of unqualified students were admitted because politicians in Chicago and Springfield put their thumb on the admissions people and made sure that the children of friends, donors and political cronies got in when otherwise they wouldn’t have. The fraud was so widespread it was known as a separate category of admittees, Category 1. </p>
<p>I don’t think it’s an administrative nightmare at all for those denied a spot to be told. For the $70 or more application fee, a student could be told just a few lines: (Your GPA and SAT were far below our average and your ECs were not sufficient to make up for it, for example).</p>
<p>They could publish anonymous examples of admitted applications and denied applications. They could be upfront with how the mushy, holistic scoring is done. </p>
<p>This is a state body using tax dollars to award a state benefit to only certain of the state’s citizens. It all needs to be transparent in order for the state citizen’s to know that it is being done fairly and honestly.</p>
<p>Inthebiz: Agreed. Having strong sports teams is also important to colleges’ ability to attract alumni support. Can’t imagine everyone would be OK with doing away with their teams once the scrutiny over “holistic” became public. [Report</a> finds alumni giving, among other areas, correlated with football success | Inside Higher Ed](<a href=“http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/07/03/report-finds-alumni-giving-among-other-areas-correlated-football-success]Report”>Report finds alumni giving, among other areas, correlated with football success)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The student can assess this based on the aggregate stats of all admitted students for a year. If his or her GPA and test scores are at or above average, the student can then surmise that it was lacking ECs or weak essays or recs that did the application in.</p>
<p>Also, it’s simplistic to keep talking about the $70 application fee as if it entitles the student to a perceived value of $70 worth of university admissions office time. It doesn’t work that way.</p>
<p>The state schools here do publish data on admittees, but that usually only extends as far as GPA and test scores. How the rest of application plays into the admissions decision is a mystery and needs some sunlight. Corruption, favoritism, cronyism and biases can exist, with a prime example being the corruption at the University of Illinois.</p>
<p>And then what happens when the assistant editor of the school paper gets in but the editor of the school paper doesn’t, and gets told “your ECs weren’t good enough”? Blah blah blah. The only way you can do this is to have specified weights - that being editor is worth 10 points but assistant editor is only worth 8, and so forth. All for the people who so desperately want a magic formula.</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>But they could include in their rejection letter that you are an idiot.</p>
<p>In a large university system there’s no need for ECs to even come into consideration. I’m sure if the university needs fresh blood for the student newspaper there will be several to choose from. It makes zero difference to the composition of the class if a particular admit was an editor or simply an underling. It might make a difference to a small LAC who has to support all the clubs and activities and will only have a couple hundred kids from which to pick. I don’t often disagree with you Pizza, but when you are talking about 5,000 freshman plus or minus year after year after year in a big public uni system there isn’t really isn’t any compelling reason why the admittance could NOT be formulaic.</p>
<p>Sure there is. It’s called football.</p>
<p>That’s true (about football) but for the most part those players aren’t necessary competing for academic seats alongside other non-athletic consideration applicants anyway…they need to meet a minimum threshold so if they are getting rejected it’s either because they aren’t a good enough player or they can’t meet the minimum academic threshold. The college most likely isn’t currently considering them side by side to the remaining freshman.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Or if the student had ever done anything related to journalism in the past. College is a time when students expand their horizons and try things they have never done before. Somehow my son, who had only ever pursued guitar as a solitary activity in high school, ended up in a jazz quartet at his college this year. Next year he might try to walk on his D3 football team, with absolutely no football experience. And that’s just at a very small school. Simply by their sheer size state schools are going to have a wide range of talents represented in the student body.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So you are OK with a non-formula when it suits the university’s needs (i.e., building a football team) but not for any other reason. What’s the difference between that and holistic admissions then? Are public institutions allowed to craft the composition of the student body according to their own interests or aren’t they?</p>
<p>"Dear football applicant -</p>
<p>We are rejecting you. Your grades are good So are your SAT scores. You know how to block.</p>
<p>But you aren’t fat enough.</p>
<p>Sincerely…"</p>
<p>P.S. Next time, more bacon on the ice cream.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is NOT a process of “rejection.” It is a process of selection. It may look like rejection when you get turned down, but the bottom line is you didn’t make the cut. The “cut” depends on what they are looking for and it varies – it varies over time, it varies by who is doing the reading, it varies by what athletic coaches and faculty and other admission stakeholders are requesting or demanding. </p>
<p>Given that you are in California, you know that there is a college spot for every state resident, somewhere. If the applicant meets eligibility criteria, they will be given a UC slot-- it just might end up being in Merced rather than Berkeley. If the applicant falls short of UC criteria, there are spots at the CSU’s, with preference given for local applicants – just remember to apply early. Not good enough for a CSU? Go to community college – and enroll in a program for guaranteed transfers status to a UC. </p>
<p>The reason any student doesn’t get accepted is always the same: they liked somebody else better. </p>
<p>It seems to me that the problem seems to be with the mindset of people who have a sense of entitlement and are so self-focused that they can’t seem to understand that the world is filled with <em>other people</em> who are equally or more important and meritorious as they are. Sorry: it isn’t about YOU. It’s about the others. </p>
<p>And if you can’t figure that out, maybe that’s part of the problem. (Maybe you didn’t get in because your essay revealed off-putting aspects of your personality. So what do you want to see in the rejection letter-- “We’re sorry, but we think you are selfish and annoying and we don’t want you coming to our party” ?).</p>
<p>mini: :)</p>
<p>More likely what I think people are after is something like this:</p>
<p>Dear Podunk U applicant,</p>
<p>We have reviewed your application. After careful consideration, we have determined that while your grades and test scores are good, the reference from your history teacher was not as strong as those from similar students we accepted. She only used the word “very” twice, and we are looking for at least three Statements of Relative Superiority from Education Professionals (SRSEPs). Moreover, your essay came in at 488 words, and according to our Enthusiasm and Commitment Index (ECI) you only received a 97.6 percent on that section of the application compared with students who wrote 497 words or more. Therefore, under the Taxpayer Value Matrix (TVM) we are forced to reject you.</p>
<p>All these posts only point out the real problem. We are all just guessing at what goes on. Who is the watchdog if all the reasons for decisions apart from scores are kept secret?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This made me laugh out loud…</p>
<p>I get what you are trying to say, but being told you are not good enough to be selected is a rejection. By flipping the term to “not selected” you are just sugar coating a fact to make it more palatable. </p>
<p>The old “lipstick on a pig” analogy. </p>
<p>That said:
I don’t think that a school providing individual feedback on why a student was rejected would provide much of a benefit. And it may make it more difficult for students to move on in a time crunch situation. </p>
<p>However, I know that schools publish the stats of their admitted class, do they publish stats of all of the students that apply? I have always been curious how many students apply to schools they do not have a chance in hades of getting into without a true miracle. </p>
<p>I think schools could find ways to be more transparent, and more honest with students about their chances of being admitted. But then some of those students might not apply, and that would not be good for the schools numbers, would it?</p>
<p>What’s the point? The stats of the accepted will be > the stats of the applicant pool. No new news.</p>