Is The College Admissions Process Broken?

[gwnorth]

There are only a handful of programs in Canada that are in the same league of competitiveness for admission as the highly selective US universities. With the exception of UBC, holistic admissions is a “by major” requirement and the only reason they exist is because the high level of demand for those very specific majors at those very specific universities makes it difficult to differentiate among the top applicants. Even then the very first passthrough is grades and it tends to be a very high cut off.

Waterloo Engineering and CS are interesting and while they do practice a holistic admissions process somewhat akin to those used by top selective US privates, the net result is very very different. While the purpose is to eliminate the supposed “bots” i.e. one dimensional students, it’s certainly not to craft a class for the purposes of enhancing campus culture. Waterloo’s mandatory co-op program in those majors actually precludes students from getting overly involved on campus which is kind of ironic since the holistic criteria they use actively encourages the same level of “applicant crafting” and EC arms race that many decry of the US system. It also produces a very unique culture that is a turn off to many students who would otherwise apply to the school for different non-impacted majors. S#1 did apply and despite the fact that a number of his friends did choose it (including his girlfriend of the time) ultimately decided that the campus culture was not for him.

[Rivet2000]

I actually think that by not using standardized tests (SAT/ACT), subject matter tests (SAT subject tests), and even essays (in some cases) the stress levels on students is even higher - they have no way to know where they stand at all.

When our S sent is his applications to 12 colleges in 2016, he had SAT (2,400), 3 SAT subject tests (800, 800, 800) and some well thought out essays to go along with 4.0 uGPA and some relatively minor ECs. His thought at the time was - “I’ve done all that I can do. Let’s see what happens”. So, no real stressors just lots of excitement.

For today’s students there is no such possibility.

[gwnorth]

Well that’s one of the advantages of having a more standardized curriculum though grade inflation is as much of a problem here in Canada as it seems to be in the US. Waterloo Engineering and CS were forced a number of years back to reveal that they employ a process of adjusting the grades of applicants based on the historical performance of admitted students from their respective high schools, basically acknowledging that there are differences in rigour. It is quite possible that while not publicly known, that other universities do the same. I think that in that case having standardized tests would actually be better as it would be more transparent and fair. There have been frequent calls recently for the re-institution of a standardized test for high school exit though given the power of the teachers’ unions and their very anti-standardized test stance, that’s unlikely to ever happen.

[Alqbamine32]

@gwnorth

No, it’s that some anonymous person who’s never met them and knows nothing about them is going to pass judgement as to the quality of their character, personality, or institutional fit, on the basis of said essay, and then and use that as a criteria as to whether or not they are “worthy” of admission.

It’s almost as bad as requiring LORs from individuals who are frequently equally clueless as to the applicant’s character.

Are teachers clueless about a students’ character? Most letter of recommendation writers have spent anywhere from a semester to multiple years interacting with the applicant 3-5 times per week in a classroom. I think getting to know a student well can be easier or harder depending on the class size. However, even with classes that are 30 students large, I’m guessing that teachers can speak to the student’s behavior and demeanor in their classes even if they couldn’t/wouldn’t rate them on the Myers-Briggs personality types. Certainly my kids’ teachers know them well (but they do go to cushy schools).

To me you are touching on a more important question. Many people object to the idea that a student’s character, personality, and institutional fit play much of a role (any role?) in college admissions at all. While I don’t agree, I think that is the crux of the concern. If that is the concern, do they have any role in admissions? What if a high stats student has frequently been a bully or a bystander in their school? Should that student have an edge in admissions over a student with slightly lower stats who often stands up for bullied kids? What if a student is a terrible collaborator in the classroom but does well enough on assignments to slightly edge out the GPA of another kid from the sane school? What if one kid has the highest stats in their school but ends up in detention multiples times per week because they play truant? Not enough to be suspended but enough for the teacher to have concerns. Or a kid who never gets involved in their community vs. one who stays after school in order to participate in sports, clubs, or community-bonding activities?

I know there are a wide range of opinions on whether colleges should consider personality, character, or fit. But I am genuinely curious about potential reforms if we assume selective colleges are going to continue to care about those qualities and are going to continue to want to consider students holistically, I would love ideas of how they can do so in a way that seems less “broken,” which I am gathering means more transparent and perceived to be more fair. I really don’t think that holistic admissions is going anywhere so railing against them is fine. More interesting (to me at least) is considering reforms that might make the process a better (easier? less confusing?) one for all families.

[ucbalumnus]

@gwnorth

I think that in that case having standardized tests would actually better as it would be more transparent and fair.

Isn’t it common (at the provincial level in Canada) for high school grades to be partially (not entirely) based on standardized subject matter tests, providing more of a basis for the standardization of high school subjects and grades in Canada than in the US? That would also mean that additional external standardized tests would not be needed, since standardized testing is embedded in high school grades.

Of course, if the rigor and grade inflation in other parts of the grading varies, that can still be an issue that reduces the standardization of high school subjects and grades.

[ucbalumnus]

@Alqbamine32

Are teacher’s clueless about a students’ character? Most letter of recommendation writers have spent anywhere from a semester to multiple years interacting with the applicant 3-5 times per week in a classroom. I think getting to know a student well can be easier or harder depending on the class size. However, even with classes that are 30 students large, I’m guessing that teachers can speak to the student’s behavior and demeanor in their classes even if they couldn’t/wouldn’t rate them on the Myers-Briggs personality types. Certainly my kids’ teachers know them well (but they do go to cushy schools).

LoRs do have other issues, such as LoR rationing and that the quality of LoR writing between various teachers can be like a random variable added to the student’s application.

[roycroftmom]

Since many Ivies have admitted serial killers, I don’t take that " character" evaluation factor too seriously

[Alqbamine32]

@ucbalumnus

LoRs do have other issues, such as LoR rationing and that the quality of LoR writing between various teachers can be like a random variable added to the student’s application.

I am aware of the other concerns, but I was responding to the statement that LORs are “from individuals who are frequently equally clueless as to the applicant’s character.” Still, if LORs are broken, what would be a better way of learning about an applicant’s character --assuming that college admissions offices are not going to give up on the goal of considering “personality, character, and institutional fit.” Here I am also quoting an earlier post.

[ucbalumnus]

@Alqbamine32

I was responding to the statement that LORs are “from individuals who are frequently equally clueless as to the applicant’s character.”

That claim may be more applicable to the counselor’s LoR, in situations where the counselor has a caseload of hundreds of students on all topics (not just college-prep related topics). Some college-bound students may see the counselor once a year or semester for a few minutes to sign off on the next year or semester schedule.

[Alqbamine32]

deleted.

[gwnorth]

What if a high stats student has frequently been a bully or a bystander in their school? Should that student have an edge in admissions over a student with slightly lower stats who often stands up for bullied kids? What if a student is a terrible collaborator in the classroom but does well enough on assignments to slightly edge out the GPA of another kid from the sane school? What if one kid has the highest stats in their school but ends up in detention multiples times per week because they play truant? Not enough to be suspended but enough for the teacher to have concerns. Or a kid who never gets involved in their community vs. one who stays after school in order to participate in sports, clubs, or community-bonding activities?

To me that just puts too much pressure on kids to have fully developed characters and interests by the time they’re 14 years old which they pretty much have to have in order to be able to demonstrate those characteristics when applying at age 17. Plus to to reiterate @Blossom’s position:

@blossom

If you have a kid who had challenges- it’s actually nice living in the land of second chances.

Plus it’s not so clear as evidenced by the Harvard case of all those students who had their admissions rescinded due to comments in a group chat, that AOs are all that competent in really evaluating character to begin with. It also introduces a very subjective criteria that is highly open to bias.

It’s kind of ironic to me that schools that employ holistic criteria to try and create a more diverse class then turn around and use a restrictive criteria like a subjective evaluation of character to then reduce diversity.

[gwnorth]

@ucbalumnus

Isn’t it common (at the provincial level in Canada) for high school grades to be partially (not entirely) based on standardized subject matter tests, providing more of a basis for the standardization of high school subjects and grades in Canada than in the US? That would also mean that additional external standardized tests would not be needed, since standardized testing is embedded in high school grades.

To my knowledge only Alberta retains such a standardized examination system. In Ontario students are required to pass 2 subject tests, one to asses numeracy administered in grade 9, and one to asses literacy administered in grade 10. They’re required for graduation, but they may or may not be used as part of formal grades assessment. In any event university and college admission are predominantly based on grade 12 grades.

[Alqbamine32]

@gwnorth

Plus it’s not so clear as evidenced by the Harvard case of all those students who had their admissions rescinded due to comments in a group chat, that AOs are all that competent in really evaluating character to begin with. It also introduces a very subjective criteria that is highly open to bias.

To be honest, I think in that particular case, it is a good indication that many teachers and schools don’t share information that they believe might damage applicants. Many educators would rather give the young people the benefit of the doubt in writing LORs than talk about traits that might hurt the academic superstars of their schools. I bet some were not shocked at the students’ words/behavior. Whether or not they thought the students’ admission should have been rescinded is another story --my guess is that some thought the consequence was warranted and others did not.

[iirabi]

Yes. The importance of subjective factors such as ECs ( sports, music, community service etc.) has really made the admission process a nightmare for students. But it has also given rise to a cottage industry of sports clubs, music groups/orchestras, all sorts of bogus community service organizations.

[iirabi]

@Rivet2000

When our S sent is his applications to 12 colleges in 2016, he had SAT (2,400), 3 SAT subject tests (800, 800, 800) and some well thought out essays to go along with 4.0 uGPA and some relatively minor ECs. His thought at the time was - “I’ve done all that I can do. Let’s see what happens”. So, no real stressors just lots of excitement.

those were good times for students. in the environment today, at least when it comes to UCs, you have to say how you overcame challenges and describe your passion for your ECs, because the only semi objective metric is GPA. i am sure a lot of stories about overcoming challenges and passion for ECs are bogus, and a good writer and admission consultant would make them seem credible.

[worriedmomucb]

@iirabi

The importance of subjective factors such as ECs ( sports, music, community service etc.) has really made the admission process a nightmare for students.

Why a nightmare? I think there is an upside to the increased importance of ECs - this is precisely how many students really find themselves, challenge themselves, discover their passions, learn real leadership skills, and find meaning in serving others. For some students, this is where the real personal growth and maturity happens. Sure, they could do these things if there were not at all a part of college admissions, but admissions can give that initial push some need to get involved.

@iirabi

But it has also given rise to a cottage industry of sports clubs, music groups/orchestras, all sorts of bogus community service organizations.

Are the majority bogus, though? Sure, there are pay to play schemes (although even those are arguably not totally bogus if the student receives a meaningful experience of some sort in return for their moneey). I am actually hard pressed to think of a truly bogus service organization. Maybe voluntourism type organizations? Again, pay to play that AOs are on to, but traveling can still be a valuable experience if you can afford it, so I wouldn’t say totally bogus, maybe partially bogus, and again, AOs are onto that and not impressed. I think those are likely the minority examples, though. Most service orgs I know - at least those based in the local community - are legit. But I am sure experiences vary.

As for sports clubs and orchestras - I think that’s great to have those available, the more the better, if there are enough students to support them. Sports and music are excellent activities that provide opportunities for creativity, good health, leadership, teamwork, responsibility, discipline for practice…These are fantastic skills for kids to develop - and if they initially get involved because they’re thinking about college, so what? As long as they do find something they truly enjoy in the process, that’s what matters. And many do.

@iirabi

at least when it comes to UCs, you have to say how you overcame challenges and describe your passion for your ECs

You do NOT have to say that you overcame challenges. That is totally false. But, sure, they want to see that you actually care about people and things. Is that unfair to students who do not care at all about anything or anyone other than themselves? Maybe. But that’s also not the type of student who is likely to contribute to the campus community, which is something that AOs often like to see. Maybe it’s unfair. But their job is, in part, to build a community of students and later a community of engaged alumni. Someone with no concern for others and no community interests will be unlikely to contribute to that.

[iirabi]

Sports: playing sports for fun is great. but that is not what is happening here - clubs, travel teams, anything to earn some extra EC points. it is counterproductive. Are college graduates today healthier (mentally and physically) than they were 40 years ago when these ECs mattered very little in college admissions. Michael Lewis wrote about it. He has personal experience with it: https://www.amazon.com/Playing-to-Win/dp/B08DL7ZJDX

Community Service - Are we really creating a student body that is more concerned about greater good than they were 40 years ago? ivy leagues had holistic admissions that included ECs for a very long time. are you saying that ivys have created more socially oriented students as a % of their student body as a result of their admission criteria. as far as i can see, a very high number of successful students from these places want to work for private equities, wall street, hedge funds, management consulting. those places are known for very good money but not for social good. are we really creating a better society by this ECs based admission process? based on what I have seen, the answer is no.

[Alqbamine32]

@worriedmomucb

You do NOT have to say that you overcame challenges. That is totally false

I agree that this is a false idea that gets thrown around. I am always baffled by the suggestion that it is necessary to tell dramatic tall tales in your essays, and it was definitely not how my kids have approached applications. Sure there are prompts that ask about how one has dealt with an obstacle or a challenge, but no one need answer those prompts with a tale of woe or adversity. My son wrote a very funny challenge essay as part of a summer program application. His story was about trying to teach himself to knit a hat for one of his sisters (and failing multiple times before he finally “succeeded” at making a misshapen but much appreciated garment). My D24 wrote a college supplement about the challenge of resuming in person school after going to school remotely in 9th grade. Probably half the country had that challenge and could have written about that topic. If that is not enough adversity and the college chooses to disqualify her for not suffering enough so be it.

[roycroftmom]

I am seen many, many bogus ECs in our high school; children in 4th grade have set up nonprofits to pusue their passion, per their parents. Look at how many kids start threads on here about what they can do to begin or grow helpful ECs. In this affluent town, it causes unending stress starting in elementary school.

My kids have said they will send their own children abroad to a saner environment for education. I support that. It was crazy when they applied; now it is absurd

[iirabi]

@roycroftmom

I am seen many, many bogus ECs in our high school; children in 4th grade have set up nonprofits to pusue their passion, per their parents. Look at how many kids start threads on here about what they can do to begin or grow helpful ECs. In this affluent town, it causes unending stress starting in elementary school.

actually the whole process creates students who spend their energy and creativity on how to game the system. and yes, the students who game the system do gain an advantage in the admission. it is very counterproductive.