<p>Step 1. A simple first phase on line application with a list of colleges to have it available to. Includes official Standardized test scores, letters of rec, generic essay, etc. available to invited college eyes only or to all colleges if you choose. </p>
<p>Step 2. Interested colleges respond with an early evaluation of what they saw and list of additional information they would like to see. Students would have an idea of what schools were still in play.</p>
<p>Step 3. Interviews and Final application to those colleges the student still wishes to consider. </p>
<p>Step 4. Responses from colleges would be posted on internet on a set date (followed by snail mail)</p>
<p>What would the ideal admissions process look like? </p>
<br>
<p>From whose viewpoint ... your process seemed to be aimed at making the process much easier for the student ... it seems it creates an extra review for all the colleges.</p>
<p>In addition, the idea of a common process sounds good but I would expect the admission process/needs at large publics like Ohio State and small specialized privates like Deep Springs to be radically different. Not, just to be different, but becaue application processes fit the fabric of the two schools ... two radically different admission processes for two radically different schools.</p>
<p>I think it is great the US schools pick their students in their own unique ways to fit their schools ... I believe it would be horrible if all the schools were fit into a standardized vanilla process ... or said another way I think MIT and Middlebury having their own unique admission processes is a very good thing.</p>
<p>I would add a program that allows students to spend 2 weeks or so on the college's campus, sitting in on classes, before they chose where they were going to spend their next 4 years.</p>
<p>Colleges would get a <em>complete</em> life story of the applicant from birth- not just high school. Information would be checked and verified. </p>
<p>College essays would be written in a closed room with a time limit.</p>
<p>Colleges would get a <em>complete</em> life story of the applicant from birth- not just high school. Information would be checked and verified. </p>
<br>
<p>hmm ... if you modify that to a complete financial history over the last 18 years I think that would make the financial aod process much fairer (and infinitely more cumbersome)</p>
<p>Agreed that financial history is a huge (maybe the most important) part of someone's life story, and should no doubt be a bigger part of college admissions. But I also think the rest of their life story could help adcoms look at these kids as more than just numbers on a page and overpolished essays.</p>
<p>Colleges would get a <em>complete</em> life story of the applicant from birth- not >just high school. Information would be checked and verified. </p>
<p>College essays would be written in a closed room with a time limit.</p>
<br>
<p>Those are both ridiculous. 1) Unnecessary invasion of privacy much? 2) That's not how real writing is done. Real writing allows for revision and reflection.</p>
<p>By that standard, neither the current SAT II Writing test "real writing." The point is to get apples-to-apples comparisons of material produced under controlled circumstances by the students themselves. They should all be equally "rough" but a better writer should stand out over not-so-good writers.</p>
<p>Revision and reflection is overrated. The way things work right now, somebody could steal an essay off the internet (this would be a good place for that), have their friend write it, get professional help etc. This especially benefits those who know how to play the college game. These days you really don't have to be a good writer to turn in a good essay. In the end, the only reason colleges believe that you wrote that essay yourself? The honor system. And frankly, the honor system is overrated too. </p>
<p>And on the "unnecessary invasion of privacy" bit. The large majority of the time, you're fighting for a spot, they're not fighting for you. So they have the right to ask whatever they legally feel like asking. </p>
<p>And they're not just fighting for your brain. If all that mattered were your brain, college admissions would depend on nothing but test scores. They're fighting for your person as a whole. That's why lower test scores and a lot of community service will get you further than perfect test scores and no extra curriculars. So since they're looking at your person as a whole, trying to judge whether you are going to positively contribute to their university, why should they be looking at nothing more than 2-3 years of grades, some standardized test scores, an (unreliable) essay, and a list of a few things you did in high school (plus maybe an interview)? I just don't think the process is thorough enough to really judge potential.</p>
<p>"By that standard, neither the current SAT II Writing test "real writing.""</p>
<p>Exactly. The Writing SAT II doesn't test writing ability. Ability to answer multiple choice questions and produce formulaic drivel in a pinch, yes. Truly good writing, no (and before you ask, I did well on the Writing SAT II). I've known far too many people who could write brilliantly under real world conditions who flopped on the SAT II... you could argue that a score under 500 or so indicates a serious deficit in basic grammar knowledge, but once you're over a certain threshold SAT II score has very little to do with writing ability. In the college board's garbage rating system, simple and cliche wins out over exciting imagery ever time.</p>
<p>Making college essays timed would be a disaster. Some people just don't work best that way! "Here you go, poor nervous applicant... produce something technically correct that showcases both your personality and your writing ability. You have three hours. Go." That's ridiculous.</p>
<p>How can you possibly say that timed writing has anything to do with the real world writing process? Part of writing is revising, editing, and proofreading... someone who doesn't have those skills isn't going very far with written communication until they gain them.</p>
<p>Some people just don't work best taking timed multiple choice tests. Should we get rid of timed multiple choice tests too? Some people don't work best at interviews. Should we get rid of interviews?</p>
<p>You're right. Timed writing, like timed multiple choice tests, have very little to do with the real world. But you're not applying to the real world, you're applying to college. </p>
<p>Yes, revising, editing, proofreading are very important. But how does a college know that it's you doing the revising, editing and proofreading?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Revision and reflection is overrated. The way things work right now, somebody could steal an essay off the internet (this would be a good place for that), have their friend write it, get professional help etc. This especially benefits those who know how to play the college game. These days you really don't have to be a good writer to turn in a good essay. In the end, the only reason colleges believe that you wrote that essay yourself? The honor system. And frankly, the honor system is overrated too. </p>
<p>And on the "unnecessary invasion of privacy" bit. The large majority of the time, you're fighting for a spot, they're not fighting for you. So they have the right to ask whatever they legally feel like asking. </p>
<p>And they're not just fighting for your brain. If all that mattered were your brain, college admissions would depend on nothing but test scores. They're fighting for your person as a whole. That's why lower test scores and a lot of community service will get you further than perfect test scores and no extra curriculars. So since they're looking at your person as a whole, trying to judge whether you are going to positively contribute to their university, why should they be looking at nothing more than 2-3 years of grades, some standardized test scores, an (unreliable) essay, and a list of a few things you did in high school (plus maybe an interview)? I just don't think the process is thorough enough to really judge potential.
[/quote]
The fact that schools are theoretically legally entitled to ask many, many invasive questions doesn't mean that they should, or that they have the ethical right. Colleges and adcoms are not god, regardless of whether many severely misguided people on this website worship them. There is no reason for them to be omniscient--whether or not little Johnny got sent to the principal's office a lot in middle school or ran with scissors in kindergarten or failed math in fifth grade are all completely immaterial to whether little Johnny will be successful in college.</p>
<p>Time college essays and the person who can churn out something decent in one go wins out over someone who needs two or three drafts to create brilliance. How is that fair? Some people simply need time for their ideas to percolate; having to respond on the spot to a topic that's just been sprung on you (and that's how it'd have to work, since if you let topics out in advance the asses who buy and sell essays in the current system would just memorize the goods and regurgitate) simply is not conducive to good output for many people.</p>
<p>The Writing SAT II already exists to test timed writing ability. In college, you need to write papers as well as take multiple choice tests. Shouldn't there be a counterpart to the paper-writing process in the application rigamarole?</p>
<p>There is a great reason for them to be omniscient: context. Adcoms ought to be able to understand the applicant's numbers, letters and extra-curriculars in <em>context</em>. </p>
<p>I ask again: How does admissions know that you are the essay writer?</p>
<p>Colleges don't need to be omniscient to have context. What more context do they really need? They have basic socioeconomic context already. Your system lets colleges hold an applicant's entire life against them.</p>
<p>There are two basic models for what schools are looking for. One is potential--will someone do well in college? The other is whether they've "earned it"--does their high school work deserve to be "rewarded"? The fact that many schools care so much about grades applicants got four years prior and are unwilling to take a chance on someone who has grown over time suggests that they subscribe more to the second model than they usually admit. That is stupid. Relating who someone was when they were 14 to who they are when they're 18 can only be done in a meaningful way if you actually know the person. Otherwise, the outdated information is just misleading.</p>
<p>How do colleges know if a student wrote their term paper? If they were willing to shell out enough money, they can get something custom written for them and no one will ever know. At some point, it all hinges on a question of honor and trust.</p>
<p>His username is BigBrother. Maybe we can take this as an indication he's being slightly facetious.</p>
<p>Also, I agree with you guys on the SAT II. I prepped with a book beforehand, and followed the formula they suggested almost to the letter. I ended up with an 11 out of 12 on the essay section. I almost certainly wouldn't have gone with that format if I hadn't known in advance what they were looking for, though I can't say how that would have affected my scores.</p>
<p>Colleges might peak at the socioeconomic context of an applicant, but clearly it's an extremely minor part of the admissions process. IMO, this is the biggest flaw in current admissions policy.</p>
<p>Look, they aren't going to hold people accountable for old crimes. You keep referring to them using it <em>against</em> an applicant, which I think would almost never happen. It's merely for reference. And why do they need reference? Because clearly, "potential" is the better of your two models, and I don't think the current process allows colleges to predict potential at all. Because potential isn't what you did do, it's what you <em>can</em> do, and to even begin to judge something like that requires as much information as possible. Not just SAT scores and GPA. </p>
<p>How do colleges know if a student wrote their term paper? They don't, but a term paper doesn't hold nearly as much weight as a college application essay. A term paper can change someone's grade, a college admissions essay can change someone's life.</p>