Bwrk?

jamimom
Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:09:45 +0000

The term was “released” to the public in Rachel Toors’ book on college admissions based on her experience on the adcom at Duke. There are a slew of admissions shorthand terms but that one hit home because it does fit the vast majority of candidates. Even accepted candidates. Don’t know what they call the candidates who are bright but not well rounded.

The “hook” business has gone a bit crazy since several of these adcom tell all books have hit the shelves. The fact of the matter is that most 17-18 year olds do not have real hooks. There are a small number who are URMs (which is really not a hook but just a state of being that is so underrepresented), there are the legacies (and that is really more of a tip at the most selective schools, unless your parent is also a major contributor and known at the university), there is development (again a tiny category), there is celebrity (another tiny category), and there is the athletic card. These are all the more visible hooks. The biggest hook anyone can have is if you happen to have a skill that the college wants or needs that particular year. That general athletic hook is useless in an unimportant, overrepresented sport, or if there are too many like you applying that year. And contrary to beliefs, it is not the left handed oboe player who builds robots, that catches the adcoms’ eyes. There are specific wish list things in composing a class. The current admissions pool and current state of things at a school determine all of this.