OK, let’s perhaps broaden the question. Would they ever Google a candidate by name? For some ECs. especially with a leadership position, an applicant’s name would pop up in a general Google search. The other side to that is other (perhaps less desirable?) things could also pop up. Googling someone is always a crapshoot, but it is one way to see who’s who. There have long been rumors about AOs checking an applicant’s social media (with the corollary warnings about privacy settings and not posting stupid/offensive/illegal things). Although, I guess that could backfire with a candidate with a common name as you might get a number of false hits.
So I guess in essence my question is about the level and manner of due diligence on the part of AOs vs how much in the application they take at face value.
You bring up good points. Social media can help or hurt as there might be matches, that match on common names and will take lot to disambiguate that info and more frankly should univs check that for outside univ activities? On most popular leadership/accomplishment, I can envision them checking like “Won the Miami invitational Chess tournament and became a IM/GM in chess” through Google. But if someone posts a link to The High School Mathematical Contest in Modeling (HiMCM)® and The Middle Mathematical Contest in Modeling (MidMCM) - COMAP and say my team won the HiMCM championship (BTW this is prestigious), it will take someone not familiar with that website probably a good 15-20 min to verify or not at all as team participant names are withheld and only team names are published. This while they are speedreading 100s of apps. Note the entire side door scandal was they did not even check when someone faked rowing/fencing champion for college sports automatic quotas.
I can see they doing that for major awards like Chairman/Chancellor award candidates that some Univs have, but not for apps.
Yes, that makes sense. As I said above in my original question (about seeking greater context for non-school ECs via Google), I think such things would only HELP my daughter by providing more info than she was able to include in the app - and she has a very distinct name, so if you Google it, it’s almost definitely her. She did get an LOR request so is already under augmented review, so wonder about the chances that they will do further “research” on her.
Hopefully they read your DD’s accomplishments. But I would operate under the assumption that they only read what is shared in Common App and nothing else. At the very best, I could envision someone at a private college doing that but at state colleges with 100 thousand + apps with low tuitions, completely different story.
UC reviewers do not see the student’s name, so it’s unlikely that they would be able to look her up individually. But if an organization is listed as an EC and they are unfamiliar with it, it’s possible that they might google the organization to find out more about it.
UC admissions officers say that reviewers are blocked from seeing the name, race, ethnicity and gender of applicants to avoid bias. The state Constitution bars affirmative action in public education based on race, ethnicity and gender but socioeconomic status may be considered.
When S22 applied last year, he saw there were profile views on his LinkedIn from a couple of UC employees but the profile views did not have sufficient info to confirm that it was admissions. But the activity happened in March prior to decision release.
Huh, I didn’t realize that they didn’t see names! Although with LORs, the names are obviously there (at least the first one), and her app contains a publication citation with her full name as co-author - so wouldn’t be hard to figure it out if they wanted to. But, yes, with thousands and thousands of applications to get through, they likely don’t put much “detective work” into the ECs.
Oh that’s interesting. I hadn’t even thought about LinkedIn, but that would also be great if they took the time to look - although if they generally don’t have access to applicants’ names, hard to say how they would find the profiles. So much mystery in UC admissions
It could have been in a different part of the process from general admissions. For example, when considering an applicant for Regents or a special program such as MET, it’s possible the same anti-bias restrictions don’t apply and they may be able to see more information… I don’t know.
Just for clarification, the UC’s do not use the common application since they have their own UC application. Also links are not allowed on the application. Besides the random EC audit, several campuses utilize the Augmented/supplemental review and in UCB’s case it is the submission of LOR’s. If there is a question regarding anything on the application, the UC’s have resources to confirm the information.
Which is also interesting because a lot applicants talk about their race, ethnicity, and/or gender in their PIQs when talking about various life experiences/perspectives. And, again, with publications, the names will definitely be there. So I get the effort, but seems impossible to ensure in practice.
Schools have shared that they have fact checked - one called up the org to ask if the student was in charge of the budget which he said he was in his app- the place said no he was just a student volunteer. Also, some ivies have called the guidance counselor to ask about certain ECs. These were non-UC schools. The other school was top 25.
But if, in fact, the AOs don’t see student names, how would they do that? Unless it’s at a later stage of the process where identifying info is revealed as the final step?
Ah, I see your edit that these were non-UC schools. So it would interesting to know if and under what circumstances UCs might do the same. Maybe as suggested above, when under scholarship consideration?
Yes, I am sure a lot of PIQs reveal these aspects of an applicant, and this is one reason why application readers and admissions staff receive anti-bias training. Here’s some information: Moving Beyond Bias | People & Culture
It’s also possible some name information might sneak into a PIQ as well (“I’m the only person in the Tamagotchi family who doesn’t like to eat fish heads…”) but probably not for most applicants.
I actually found that the UC app activities section + additional info was plenty of space to describe (at least compared to the common app ). I think they give us 350 characters, and if you’re describing a volunteer activity, they give you a separate space with a similar word count just to detail what the organization is and what their purpose is–before you go on to describe your own contributions. But, I did add in links wherever I could. Even if they don’t open it, I hope it provides credibility.
). I think they give us 350 characters, and if you’re describing a volunteer activity, they give you a separate space with a similar word count just to detail what the organization is and what their purpose is–before you go on to describe your own contributions. But, I did add in links wherever I could. Even if they don’t open it, I hope it provides credibility.