<p>A lot of moderately selective colleges are “blind” in this sense, using only GPA and test scores. Some colleges are “blind” for a large portion of their classes (e.g. Texas public universities for the auto-admit portion of their classes). Open admission community colleges are trivially “blind” in this sense.</p>
<p>Of course, “blindness” at the admission office does not preclude racial discrimination from creeping into the inputs (e.g. high school teachers’ grading affected by how they view the student’s race).</p>
<ol>
<li><p>I interpreted this “Diversity needs to be defined more clearly and by a whole lot more than skin color.” as advocating a different approach. It does seem to imply using a new set of criteria, which strikes me a different approach to the issue. I guess it could be seen as the same approach with different criteria. But, my concern that it just muddles the process differently still exists.</p></li>
<li><p>You stated, "I ask you seriously, would you recommend that, if it is relevant, a student try to present himself as less privileged than what might be assumed by his race, community, school attended, etc. in the application? </p></li>
</ol>
<p>My point was rather simple (at least I thought so) - the student should just represent who he is. Or who he believes he is probably a better way of saying it. That requires no misrepresentation or political angles. </p>
<ol>
<li>You also stated: “If so, how, and where?” and “Perhaps it is also incumbent on the schools, though, to incorporate more questions that address subtler factors.” </li>
</ol>
<p>Excellent points and colleges are doing that. My kids went through the admin process last year and this year. The best I have seen at it are Stanford, Princeton and MIT. They do ask multiple subtle questions.</p>
<ol>
<li>Yes, no easy answer, I agree. That is exactly why I do not understand extrapolating using easy demographics that really say nothing about the internal person. That strikes me as assuming, not discerning, </li>
</ol>
<p>I prefer essay topics that ask the student to reflect on an idea, rather than a personal experience. Some kids have had pretty typical, normal, stable lives such that even their personally interesting challenges or conflicts or triumphs can seem too vanilla to impress. It can be done, of course, and I think my D managed very well. But S, being a more factual and black and white sort of person (whom we also need in top colleges) struggled. Besides, powerful and creative essay writing is not a prerequisite for many types of academic work, so an over-emphasis on that is kind of silly (as in 2 major essays and 5 minor essays for one application).</p>
<p>Sob stories don’t get you in. Face it, when talking about private tippy tops, there is no “sympathy vote.” I know no one believes me. Everyone thinks if it’s at all possible it’s not really about race or ethnicity, then it must be her mom was an addict and her house burnt down. C’mon. I</p>
<p>If you choose to write your essay about gun shots or Dad in jail, you miss a chance to show yourself. Let the GC detail the challenges. Use your chance wisely. </p>
<p>I agree, sob stories don’t get you in, but every time adcoms discuss essays, they make it clear that being original, interesting, creative, and not run-of-the-mill matters a lot. The best math student I know comes off as pretty boring to most people who meet him. How unfortunate that a school could reject him because he can’t show his personality well in an essay. He actually may not have an interesting personality, but is that crucial to every academic endeavor? I don’t think so. Note I am not talking about being about to communicate clearly. That IS important. </p>
<p>As regards to diversity, the essay is supposed to reveal individuality and distinctions . Yet if you listen to adcoms, they are looking for only a certain type of individual–the one who can write a compelling creative essay revealing himself–hence the selection process might not necessarily expand diversity. In fact, it might leave out very bright students who have Aspergers, for example.</p>
<p>Shoot, ucb, the key part isn’t his circumstances-- that’s a few words to set the scene. The winning point is" the foundation to grow and prosper." If he continued to develop it along the latter lines, used “show, not tell,” added how he had been building this fdn, a bit about his resilience- wove it into a tale and maybe with some small wit… </p>
<p>The whole must have been good. And contrast that to posters assuming the trump card is the sob. </p>
<p>As the mom of another talented white middle class girl, from a NY suburb, who didn’t get into a top 10 school despite having the “stats” I admit it bugs me when naive people react to a child’s admission to a top-10 school by saying “You should be proud!” as opposed to “Congratulations on your good luck!” In truth, all kids who are realistic candidates for these schools should feel proud. Considering the randomness of the process and the un-level playing field it makes no sense to judge kids based on where they get in. Unfortunately, some employers still do, which is what perpetuates the admissions angst and the allure of these schools. The good news is that, although a brilliant kid who did not get into a top-10 school may lose out on some opportunities, life and the job market are not zero sum games. Talent will out. They will be fine. As parents, it is our job to model pragmatism and acceptance and moving on so they don’t squander their talents by becoming cynical and embittered.That’s a dead end for them.</p>
<p>@TheGFG stated, “Besides, powerful and creative essay writing is not a prerequisite for many types of academic work, so an over-emphasis on that is kind of silly (as in 2 major essays and 5 minor essays for one application).” </p>
<p>I totally agree over-emphasis on any one piece is not necessary or even advantageous. That is why I gave a list with etc at the end: essays, ECs, LORs, portfolios etc. </p>
<p>And yet, awcntdb, having a range of ECs or a deep one often requires money, access, and time. A kid can’t do that without transportation or if they have to work after school or if nothing good is offered at his high school. LORs are likely given more weight when coming from a teacher/GC with experience in writing them - not an overworked or low quality teacher or GC that many under-privileged students are stuck with. It is much more difficult for a kid in those circumstances to present a good package. </p>
<p>@mom2and - Yes, those issues do exist. And adcoms understand that some schools are stronger in GCs than others. Disparities will never disappear, as there is no equality in what students can do and have done. </p>
<p>What I am saying is how the student represents himself in relation to whatever he did is what should be front and center, even if it was just mowing grass. Each application package should be judged based on what the student does with it, not what is specifically in the package.</p>
<p>awcntdb, thank you for your respectful response to my comment. I wrote it quickly and too ironically. My point wasn’t to claim that you said diversity was bad, but to draw attention to the kinds of diversity that you accepted and the kinds you didn’t. Clearly your model think that it is okay to admit for gender diversity and geographical diversity. Why these types? Women are over-represented among successful students; why should men have affirmative action, but not blacks? Northeasterners are over-represented in elite applicants; why should they be penalized and Asians not? </p>
<p>Basically I was trying to make sense of your model of admissions and its basic assumptions.</p>
<p>Who is to say… maybe going through hardships actually DOES make you a better student? Maybe that is a legitimate predictor of future success. It’s certainly possible that someone who never had hardship would be less likely to make it through college.</p>
<p>Also, even kids born in to money and privilege have difficulties in life that they can draw upon to build character and use in their college essays. </p>
<p>I haven’t read all of the posts but in terms of diversity…</p>
<p>Why is it okay for a student, who comes from a well heeled family, quaint safe neighborhood, 2 parent family, a fridge replete with copious amounts of food, wonderful vacations, the best schools, with the best teachers and top notch college counselors, SAT prep because said student has deficiencies, high priced tutors et al. to use the things that he has absolutely no control over to get into the top schools? Remember, it’s his parents who have provided all of these wonderful accoutrements of life. He was given help at every turn. From birth. </p>
<p>But when a student who has grown up in abject poverty has busted his hump to stay out of harms way(literally), has suffered through life’s terrible atrocities, went without food, had to work part time to help keep the lights on, possibly went without heat on bitterly cold nights, possibly has a mother or father who is chemically dependent, horrible schools, with no books or teachers who don’t teach because they don’t care or they can’t because the classroom is a zoo, no support whatsoever from the GCs and let’s not even ask if this student has the luxury of a college counselor. But still has managed to do exceptionally well & gain entry into a HSC…This kid was also born into a situation that he has no control over. But he did it WITHOUT the bells & whistles. Why is his success looked down upon? Why is it assumed that he didn’t do as well as his suburban counterparts? </p>
<p>I myself am sick and tired of the senseless whining about the black kids who took something away…some peoples lives are a DAILY disappointment. And their basic needs go unmet. They don’t have the luxury of frivolous wants. </p>
<p>And whenever I pass through Yale’s campus, which is probably 10 -15 times per week, all I see are SWFs. When I do see a brown face, I’m amazed! So trust me, they are not taking all of the spots! </p>
<p>I never said the student from your son’s class who was admitted to Georgetown was a URM. I also never said I thought your son was unhappy. I do believe, based on your comments in that thread and your knowledge of the life of a young woman who was neither a friend of your son’s nor the child of a friend of yours (knowledge that extends several years beyond her college graduation) that you do believe if she hadn’t been accepted, your son might have been. Why you would follow the career of a young woman you don’t even know so closely, I can’t imagine.</p>
<p>Please don’t misunderstand my post. I’m saying that nobody, unless they’re directly involved in a college’s admissions process, has “the big picture” and therefore they have no basis for concluding that any student was accepted or denied for any specific reason. To assume you can study the “big picture” and accurately conclude the acceptance was based on the color of their skin is ludicrous. </p>
<p>Since regional bias is one of the subjects touched on by the OP, it’s worth noting that the threshhold for what is considered arrogant or bragging is a lot lower in the Midwest than it is on the East Coast. As a consequence, the East Coast ivy league adcom reading an application may prefer the “confident, assertive” kid from the East Coast over the “shy” kid from the Midwest who made an effort to not seem arrogant. Conversely, someone reading the apps from the Midwest may prefer the second kid, who was modest and down-to-earth while perceiving the first kid as arrogant.</p>
<p>If we’re being honest, one reason that a thread like this came into being is that “diversity” in terms of college admissions has come to be understood as non-white, and usually non-Asian too. In actuality, colleges truly want a wide range of people with varying interests, hobbies, backgrounds, philosophies, etc. Yet, when they hold a “diversity event,” by "diversity they don’t mean a mixture of musicians and athletes and gay and straight and STEM and humanities and so on. They mean African-American, Hispanic, and Native-American students. That is who is invited to those campus events and who they are trying hard to attract. They create separate mailings for them and special scholarship days and so on.</p>
<p>This goes to awcntb’s question about what is diversity. The problem is, in order to address racial under-representation, the colleges are essentially defining their default as white and non-Asian such that people of color are the ones who are diverse or bring diversity and need to be attracted. I find this racial default to be problematic for a lot reasons, one of which being that races are assumed to be monolithic in nature as far as opportunities available to them, and as far as their diverseness or non-diverseness from some arbitrary default. Is it any wonder, then, that people might see being white as a disadvantage in admissions? </p>
<p>Austin, you said: “Making the assumption that kids you don’t deem worthy received acceptances because of things you know nothing about (good LORs written by people who “feel sorry” for the “less qualified” student or based on the color of their skin) is beyond distasteful.” </p>
<p>By mentioning “color of their skin” you inserted race into a story that had nothing to do with race. And secondly, this is a different thread so it’s unfair to take comments out of the very big and long context of that other thread and insert them here. </p>
<p>"Yet, when they hold a “diversity event,” by “diversity they don’t mean a mixture of musicians and athletes and gay and straight and STEM and humanities and so on. They mean African-American, Hispanic, and Native-American students.”</p>
<p>Why do you assume that is true? OR do you have some inside information you can share? In my observation, I think diversity means all of those things… plus introvert/extrovert, shy/assertive, etc. Race, culture, income, etc are all part of what makes up diversity. If this is not true I’d like to understand where your knowledge comes from. </p>
<p>@TheGFG I must humbly disagree with you. In October of 2012, dd and I attended a diversity event at Yale. There were families from ALL races AND religions there. There were hijabs, yarmulkes, kooofis, saris. White, black, African, Asians, you name it, they were there. I asked a few parents at DDs school if they planned on attending, they looked at me as if I was nuts and said no, the event wasn’t for them! Really? I think that suburban families sometimes create a divide that isn’t there.</p>
<p>Another anecdote, this same family has a daughter who is a junior, and she was applying for a summer program at Yale. My daughter got in the year before but turned it down to go to Choate for the summer. Her daughter didn’t get in, her comment to me was “Suzy just wasn’t the right color I guess” HUH? What? Are you serious? I then looked at the pictures on Yale’s website…it was like a beautiful rainbow…and to be honest, there were far more white and Asian kids than black. At the next PTSO meeting, I called her on it and said that she needed to take a look at the pics…it was glaringly obvious that she was looking to make baseless assumptions. She apologized and turned red. But how dare she just assume that the only color that filled the program was black!!! </p>
<p>So again, all the senseless whining must stop. Especially when I travel through the old campus of Yale and see nothing but white. If my dd had not made it in, I would not have complained about Yale being racist and only wanting rich, white kids…I would have chalked it up to her not cutting the mustard. And told her to move on. </p>
<p>It’s called being resilient and I think colleges like that. They are drawn to kids who can succeed while fighting to stay alive.</p>