<ol>
<li>Does Duke super score ACTs?</li>
<li>I have completely submitted my application, but I have not received any information about alumni interviews. Should I have?</li>
<li>Does Duke weigh any part of the application more than others?</li>
</ol>
<p>Re #2: No, not yet; Duke’s AAAC (Alumni Admissions Advisory Committee), which is jointly operated by Undergraduate Admissions and Alumni Affairs, will provide its many regional teams the names and contact information for ED applicants in early/mid-November. This results from the teams’ need to balance interviewing responsibilities somewhat equally among AAAC alumni interviewers. Obviously, we can’t know the applicable numbers for each geographic area until after the 1 November deadline. </p>
<ol>
<li>Not sure, call admissions</li>
<li>Agree with @TopTier </li>
<li>For application sections and how things are weighted, see below</li>
</ol>
<p><a href=“http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/2010/03/29/application-increase-overwhelms-review-system”>http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/2010/03/29/application-increase-overwhelms-review-system</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Duke does not re-calculate the ACT composite score based on the best scores from individual sections across test dates, but does consider the best scores. That’s the official stance stated by Guttentag. What exactly that means, I’m not quite sure - but I think it’s to your advantage to submit two tests if you have higher scores on certain sections for each one even if your composite score didn’t change (or went down). As sgopal2 noted, test scores comprise 1/6 of your score which is used a guideline for admissions decisions (e.g. automatic reject, automatic accept, go to committee, etc.)</p>
<p>Hi @bluedog: I frequently learn from you – thank you – so I want verify your comment re “automatic accept.” It is my understanding that there are no “automatic admissions,” based entirely on “numbers.” Even the “perfect” candidate has to be approved by Duke’s Undergraduate Admissions Committee. Am I wrong? </p>
<p>I don’t think there’s a process for automatically admitting an applicant without human input in the final decision. However, from what I understand of the admissions process from explanations by Duke officials, there are categories of applications that receive cursory decisions for admit and reject. Those applications are are obviously very strong and highly rated by the readers probably gets a quick stamp of approval from the committee or even just Guttentag or a select portion of the committee. Those that are obviously not a good fit and recommended for rejection probably gets the same treatment. The whole committee then discusses those in the middle that have more wiggle room to go ether way. </p>
<p>@Toptier and @SBR: I’ve read somewhere where Guttantag states that up to 75% of the applicants are ‘qualified’ academically. I guess this means that there must be some sort of algorithmic first pass. What @bluedog writes above about having 3 piles makes perfect sense.</p>
<p>If there are 6 categories (each rated 1-5) the lowest possible score is 6 and the highest is 30. My guess is that the applicants who score in the lowest part of the scale are rejected without referral to committee. Same goes for the top portion of the pool (automatic admit without committee review). The actual thresholds that are used by admissions are unknown to me.</p>
<p>@sgopal2, @SBR, and @bluedog: I have been briefed by Christoph several times as a member of the Annual Fund’s and the Alumni Association’s Executive Committees. It is my understanding that:
- Until a few years ago, every application received at least one thorough – “eyeballs on every word” – review from an “admissions reader”
- However, now a few (I’m speculating <15 percent) are “mechanically” disqualified, based strictly on their “numbers” (GPA, SAT/ACT, etc.)
- The 75 percent fully qualified number may be correct, however, I’ve heard quantifications approximating 85 to 90 percent from several senior Duke leaders (and, it makes sense to me that as our undergraduate admissions continuously become more competitive, fewer individuals would be interested in a “flyer application” . . . although the Common Ap obviously makes that easier)
- Finally, I don’t believe there are “three piles” per se, because I am fairly certain that even a candidate with “perfect numbers” (and everything else, for that matter) will still have one or two comprehensive application reviews (by separate readers) and will still go before the Admissions Committee (although I wouldn’t doubt an “expedite - should accept” designation of some sort would be applied) </p>
<p>Warm regards to each of you. </p>
<p>What sgopal2 wrote above is exactly what I meant. I didn’t mean an “automatic” acceptance based on numbers (GPA/SAT), but rather, an applicant that is very highly rated in all the categories (including essays & teacher recommendations, which certainly require human evaluation by somebody on the admissions staff) doesn’t have to go to committee review. So, perhaps “automatic” was a bit of a misleading term as the application has been completely evaluated twice already (by an initial reader and the regional officer). After this, they get sent to either Guttentag or his associate dean with a recommended “auto-admit” rather than requiring further discussion/evaluation and they simply have to sign off. </p>
<p>Here’s an article from Duke Magazine discussing this process (from 2012; also note the College Confidential mention at the very beginning):
<a href=“Duke Mag”>Duke Mag;
<p>
</p>
<p>But it is very rate to get an auto-admit (but not so rare for an auto-deny): “Guttentag estimates that the top 5 percent and the bottom half of the applicant pool are handled this way.” So, that leaves about 45% of applicants to go to a committee review.</p>
<p>Also note that the ratings have been recently recalibrated as noted in the linked articles – a 1/3 of Duke students score 1500+ on the (two section) SAT which is probably the 98th percentile, so to achieve the top score of 5, you have to be very very high (likely 1550+) since they need to be able to differentiate people at the top.</p>
<p>@bluedog: We agree entirely (as usual). My “heartburn” really is with the “auto” term, since – at least to me – it suggests a computer-driven, numbers-only process where readers, officers and committee members take little or no part (and, for example, would be most unlikely to override an automated decision due to important and unusual circumstances). As you’ve indicated, we know that is highly inapplicable at Duke. I believe this is an important distinction, because at many undergraduate schools the computer actually determines the outcome for many/most candidates. </p>