This Twitter thread written in response to the bizarrely one-sided N.Y. Times report is worth reviewing. https://twitter.com/dynarski/status/1007624830622031872?s=21
3 Likes
Almost everyone we know hires someone to prep for ACT/SAT even if it’s just a Princeton Review group class. Many take multiple tests and do well. I don’t know anyone “floundering” in college. Does anyone really know kids who took the test many times to get a high score, got into a school they don’t “deserve”, and are now struggling? I don’t think that’s a thing. A high test score on its own does not get a student into some college where they can’t do well. Those kids need strong transcripts as well for admission to low-admit schools.
7 Likes
I don’t think colleges use “nebulous” admissions criteria to make decisions. AOs are looking to make a diverse class of students in every way including majors, interests, strengths, as well as the obvious things like geography and race. A student cannot mold themselves into a candidate that every top college wants any given year because each year the pool of students is different. People need to understand that there’s some luck involved. Schools are going to take their legacies and athletes and then they go looking for kids to fill out the class - kids to write for the paper, play music, sing in the school musicals, and on and on. They fill in the holes trying to make sure that each class is balanced. All a student can (and should) do is work hard in high school and apply themselves to extracurriculars that interest them. For some, they will excel and those are the kids who have a shot at schools with low acceptance rates. It’s really kind of that simple.
Does everyone have an equal chance of being the type of student who is competitive for top school admissions? No. But many posters above have already made the point that one does not have to attend a top 50 (or whatever) school to get a great education and live a happy and productive life.
8 Likes
Certainly the first part of that statement is true, but after looking at the numbers as much as possible from as many sources as possible, I am not so sure about the second statement. Of course, perceived Asian discrimination is only an issue for a small subset of T40 universities, and perhaps at a few top LACs.
But even within that subset, I strongly suspect that Asians face roughly the same challenges as unhooked whites in gaining admission. Reflecting the demographics of 30+ years ago, Asians are not as well-represented among legacy applicants as whites (for instance at Harvard, 69% of legacy applicants are white versus 11% Asian), although no doubt this is changing . They also are not as well-represented among athletic recruits (again, 69% versus less than 9%) and among the “donor class and special interest” admits (67% versus 13%). All data above are from the Harvard litigation documents.
I am very sympathetic to the perception by Asians that the deck is stacked against them at places like Harvard. But in the end, as I wrote above, I am not convinced that the unhooked Asian applicant is being “discriminated” against as compared with unhooked white applicants. In the end, only 56% of white admits are unhooked, while 85% of Asians are.
If you believe, as I do, that an institutional priority of Harvard and other similarly hyper-selective universities is to maintain rough percentages of representation by race, there are simply fewer spots available for unhooked whites than unhooked Asians, in each case relative to the percentage representation in the admitted class that is being targeted. Personally, I am against this sort of targeting by race, but it is what it is, anyone who believes that is not what is being done is being willfully blind.
1 Like
Quite a change from a few decades ago, when SAT prep was commonly just trying the small number of sample questions in the test sign up booklet.
2 Likes
My comment mostly is addressing the heading. People will have others making decisions about them (passing judgement) based on their character for the rest of their lives. The idea that it would be different for admissions decisions seems counter to the very job of an admissions department. Others will be doing the same when interviewing for jobs, or frankly in nearly every personal interaction. It seems it’s often we as parents that want an advantage when it comes to admissions. That is why parents often spend so much money attempting to mold their children into what they think and hope an admissions dept. wants. Like others I think encouraging your student to be themselves and apply appropriately will make for a much less stressful process.
2 Likes
I think this is the correct analysis, but to make it more correct I will bring back the discussion of buckets that you mentioned earlier.
Unlike @EconPop, I believe that buckets are fundamental to understanding the differing admission criteria. Highly selective small and midsize colleges have target bucket sizes for various categories because they want a diverse class. There are dozens of buckets, including (listed in alphabetical order):
- Athletes, with sub-buckets for each sport
- Balancing of intended major (want enough Classics majors, can only handle so many CS majors)
- Big donors
- Fair share of academic superstars
- Fair share of future social leaders and politicians
- Geographical diversity
- Legacy
- Musicians, with some consideration for specific instruments
- SES diversity
- URM
Now it turns out that Asians tend to concentrate in some majors more than others, such as CS. CS enrollment has exploded recently to the point that it is straining some colleges ability to teach it. So every potential CS student is in effect competing against other potential CS students, making the threshold for admission higher. The unhooked white applicant trying for CS will have a very difficult time as well.
In contrast, if there was a talented applicant who was truly interested in the Classics, then that applicant would have an easier time with admission, regardless of race.
3 Likes
That’s an interesting perspective. I have never felt my character was judged in a job application. My ability to do the job, of course, and general social ability ( often called fit) were always judged, but my character? Never. Nor did I see it as an examination of my self-worth. In contrast,colleges seem explicit that they are somehow arbiters of that.
2 Likes
How can anyone claim to be able to judge an applicant’s character just by reading his/her “personal” essays, whose authenticity can’t be fully corroborated in many ways, and LoRs that are written by people who the applicant select and whose interaction with the applicant may be highly limited?
7 Likes
This is why I think interviews should be a bigger part of the college application.
People will judge you (what type of person you are, your character, etc) thousands of times during your lifetime. Often with a lot less to go on than colleges have. Its just part of life. Big test is whether you let that define you. No one should let that happen particularly not someone who views him/herself worthy of “elite” college admission. But if you are a Top X or bust family, you are much more likely to let it define you.
2 Likes
People do often judge other people. And often mostly based on stereotypes. Is that what we want for college admissions?
This is why I think the process in general heavily favors those who excel at creative writing. What does that truly have to do with “character”? Nothing really.
1 Like
Did the company do a backround check, did they check with your past employers, did they ask open ended questions? I am guessing a greater effort was put into ascertaining characters that they felt important than they might have let on. Hiring someone with the skills needed is important but hiring people who are honest, hardworking, reliable, and loyal are in many ways equally important. I think if students believe colleges are the arbiters of their self worth then the student has given them that power. It’s not called “self” worth for nothing. It wasn’t 55 years ago or so we were asked to judge others by the “content of their character” not by… even though he said color of their skin one could fill in the blank.
Colleges don’t do any of that-and the open ended essays could be written by anyone. The reference letters are cherry picked to be uniformly positive, not an assessment of all the teachers’ opinions. For that matter, the background checks run by employers are indicative of little other than not having a major, relatively recent, felony.
Do you think reviewing transcripts, essays, letters of recommendation, test scores (if applicable), etc. is basing admission on stereotypes?
Larger point was that we are judged all the time. Throughout our entire lives. People seem to disagree with that though.
Colleges have a lot more info on which to make those judgments than most which are made otherwise.
Biggest point though is not to let those define you. People make changes to their lives, doing things that make them uncomfortable/outside their element, etc. all the time to get to a desired end (place in school, job, clients/customers, friends, etc). Not everyone does that though and not to the same extent (and that includes college). Not sure why college is viewed as being unique.
Yes, I think the Harvard lawsuit, among others, indicates admissions officers do have sterotypes-the math oriented introverted Asian kid, the rich prep school frat boy, etc
1 Like
My guess is that character judgement by the AOs isn’t based on transcripts and test scores.
Like what, besides essays and LoRs, for the vast majority of applicants?
How an applicant should view the judgement by a relative stranger is a completely different issue. The issue is the judgement itself. Should it be rendered in the first place based on very limited information?
2 Likes
Ok. Here is what should happen. Every college should be required to send an AO to every applicants house and spend at least one week talking with him or her, following them around, seeing how they live, observe him/her in class, see type of person they are. Also spend time with family and friends. And talk with every teacher he/she has every had. Fellow students at well. And someone from every organization to which they belong. As well as members of their communities (and if they moved in their lifetimes, the prior communities as well). Anything short of that is an unfair judgment.
Its insanity. That can only come from places like this site.
The colleges set up the rules. Don’t like them? Don’t apply? Bought into the Top X or bust myth? That is your issue.
Schools care about themselves. They don’t care about those applying to them. They want to do what is in their best interests; not yours. Very ironic that people are complaining about these entities passing judgment on their kids when those entities are doing no such thing. They are just determining who they want in their class that year.
Yet another reason to avoid the Top X or bust myth.