In general I think diving deeper to find a fit between colleges and an applicant is all good but I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on a few sentences written on a website as the holy grail to unlocking the key to admissions. I think they bring in kids that fit all different profiles. I do think self-awareness and presenting an interesting and connected presentation of the best “you” is helpful given most applications are viewed for a very short time and the reader is looking at hundreds and even thousands of other apps. Connect the dots for the reader so they can get an idea of who you are. Bonus points for being memorable in some way.
Aaargh. I’m with @doschicos – those general statements may be helpful for discerning overall fit before one applies… but the whole point is that the applicant should not be trying to fit themselves into a mold of what they think the college wants … but rather be focusing on showing, not telling, and presenting themselves in a genuine way.
My example of my daughter’s contrapuntal Chicago essay was not meant an example of a deliberate “risk” essay – I think she was just having fun with her app. But it showed off her personality; it gave the school a sense of who she was-- and made it very obvious that she did not at all fit the image Chicago was portraying through its marketing. And that was ok, because when it came down to it my daughter was probably uncertain of whether Chicago was the right fit for her, so her essays functioned as way of testing the waters. If it had yielded a rejection, that would have been fine – the question would have been answered. (Not a fit). Instead, apparently Chicago liked her, though in the end my daughter turned down the spot. And maybe they liked her in spite of rather than because of her essays… because of that whole thing of needing live bodies in their Russian classes at the time.
So the point is: her college applications said “this is me!” And they did a very good job of getting across a picture. Barnard hadn’t yet started asking its applicants what it means to major in “unafraid” … but my daughter’s Barnard app had “unafraid” stamped all over it.
It seems to me that a lot of posts are advocating an application strategy of essays that say, “I can be whatever you want me to be” – and I just don’t think it works. The history is already laid --and if the applicant tries to contort into whatever it seems tha the college is looking for, it’s unlikely that the essays are going to match the LOR’s. And despite all of our proud parental remembrances of whatever delightful things our kids put into their essays - I think specific facts and details shared in the LOR’s count, a lot.
Calmom brings up some key points:
- The LOR may not match the essays if you try to change who you really are to the AO;
- Maybe colleges admit or deny IN SPITE OF the essay, not necessarily because of the essay.
It’s not ‘how we review you’ or a few phrases (as Dischicos notes.) To me, it’s a picture that can (should) form and how. . And I think you still need to be discerning. E.g., Haverford 's “independent learner” doesn’t mean you took an independent study class or self studied some APs.
And remember, it helps when the dots you connect make sense to your adcoms. “…should not be trying to fit themselves into a mold of what they think the college wants…” Then maybe reconsider that college. If they want kids interested in X and you aren’t, where’s the match?
Btw, lol, memorable can wkrk both ways. It might be wretched.
I’m not sure if my remarks were considered among those which were construed as trying to squeeze a kid into a school’s self-conception, but if so, let me refine what I meant.
In building a list, think about what a school identifies it values and is looking for, as part of the process of identifying “fit.” If you have a a “doer” who enjoys ideas but is not, at heart, turned on purely by the love of learning (like I did) then know, Kenyon may not be a great fit, but other schools might be. If a list reflects likely, match, reach within a similar type of school, with similar vibe, then be intentional about how, and what, the student says about themselves in the application.
Yes, some of understand perfectly what you are saying. Some kids will be patently unhappy at a life of mind college where discourse occurs 24/7, some kids will be patently unhappy at a college full of social justice warriors, some kids will be unhappy at a college where fun is whatever team is in season. Just be smart about where you apply. Adcoms know their college and they want kids who will be happy, graduate and donate as alumni. It should go without saying but I have seen lists here that make me scratch my head. That said there may very well be kids who are happy anywhere as long as the price is right, but my guess those types are rare.
My youngest was heck bent on the highest rated college on his list and ran with a crowd in high school that made that important and I had severe misgivings because it just didn’t appear to me to be a good fit plus he waited a long, long time for his acceptance almost giving up. He ended up transferring to our smaller tech college as a junior where he had initially been accepted during high school and could have been one and done but his well-being was night and day after the transfer cause he found his herd. Cost me some bucks so lesson learned. A bad application list can also cost parents money over the long haul.
What this exercise has done for me is not mainly describe how to write applications, although I think there is some of that, but it has illustrated that fact that schools really are different. I know that sounds incredibly obvious, but sometimes you start to wonder if it isn’t all just marketing hype - that really all the schools are interchangeable and the slogans are meaningless. But after looking more closely at what the schools are writing and comparing it with impressions from our visits, I truly believe that the schools are indeed different and are probably trying to do a decent job of letting us know who they are and what kind of student will thrive if admitted.
I had not read the Lafayette material until tonight, but we visited a few weeks ago. Its startling how well their self descriptions matches our impressions from our visit. If I had had to write the slogan myself, I might have written something like that. Looking over these colleges’ mission statements, I can see places where my daughter would thrive and places I would avoid. I don’t think the would do well at Princeton even if she could get in. On the other hand, she might love Kenyon.
With regard to crafting the application, once a match is found, I don’t think it hurts to keep in mind the what the college is looking for, especially in supplemental essays. Most kids’ experiences can be framed in different ways without twisting or distorting them into something they are not. In any case, this thread and these exercises have been very a positive experience for me. I have a much greater faith in the idea that there are colleges to fit each kid.
I remember reading somewhere that Tufts had been founded by a bunch of Unitarian abolitionists and thinking. Well that explains a lot. They really haven’t changed.
Call me a cynic, I found it kind of funny to judge one’s fit or unfit based on the school’s mission statement! Have seen too many grand organizations with lofty mission statements doing despicable things to make me trust a place solely based on words.
So what criteria would you use to judge it?
As always, this is just my guess, but some of this is simple (reading mission statements, examples of successful essays for that school) and some of this is very, very subtle. Some of it even goes into reading between the lines and also noticing what isn’t mentioned.
The college my son is going to be attending is tied with another uni in the USNWR rankings, but to me they appear to be very different places with very different goals and feel. For example the website of one is riddled with discussion of intellectual innovation and emphasizes changing the world through breakthroughs. The website of the other focuses on preservation (direct opposite of the first uni’s goals), scholarship, engagement (absent from the first uni’s discussion). Both are world leaders and want to produce world leaders, but in different ways and with a different emphasis. Both are highly selective and attract applicants with similar GPAs, SATs and overall brainpower. The differences will probably be felt mostly at the essay and EC level - by how those students express their talents, want to pursue their studies and their interests.
You can’t just read the mission statement. You want to get behind the veil, so to say. The mission statement is a public, polished bit. It’s often the blurb that goes with grant applications, media or ‘state of the college’ type reports. Get beyond that.
Just as we tell kids to show, not just tell, try to see what the college shows, not just the shiny PR. Just one example, but if you dig into Haverford, they discuss a lot more than curious, independent and collaborative.
With Grade inflation at high schools and colleges paying “less” attention to SAT/ACT tests sores, it instills false hope to many who think they may stand at chance to get admitted high reach schools.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/18/u-s-students-earn-drop-sat-scores/
With regard to learning about colleges: my daughter made the observation that she generally got her best admission results from colleges that asked for a “Why X College?” essay. This made her learn in depth about each college, fall in love harder with each, and of course communicate that feeling and knowledge in her essays.
@billycat Its an interesting article but I don’t know how meaningful the statistics are since they have recently radically redesigned the SAT.
@gallentjill true, but still the article came out last year so quite up to data on GPA’s especially. Hard to believe that 47% of kids are A range students. Even with this, wonder why there is a push to place less value on tests scores. It seems like it used to be that there was a disadvantage of test prep available to everyone but these days , with Khan’s academy and other on line resources as books in library, motivated students can work to improve scores.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/high-school-gpa-rising-but-sat-scores-down-study/
@billycat My problem with the tests as they are now formulated is that they test achievement in certain subjects rather than ability. The original SAT was designed to test a students potential, not which subjects they mastered. I understand that the tests never really achieved that goal, but as an idea it made sense. Now, but the ACT and SAT are testing mastery of particular subjects, espeically in math. This is a double disadvantage to kids from low functioning high schools. They don’t have access to paid instruction AND they didn’t get enough preparation in school. Honestly, I don’t know what the answer is. It may be impossible to design a standardized test to really test potential or intelligence. But I can understand why colleges could assume that, at least from certain districts, the standardized tests are poor markers for ability.
The articles don’t explain much, like how they surveyed. Or other details. Each wave of applicants competes in the context of what’s happening now. And so… Not back when JFK applied or when we parents did…or in some cases, when our mych older kids did.
@gallentjill – should colleges look for the most intelligent kids (potential or realized) or the most prepared (mastery)? I don’t know the answer but can see both sides. I think the top colleges want to admit the ones that are most prepared and, imho are “energizer bunny” types with lots of EC activity, because they have the best chance of succeeding in those colleges.
Do we really want to go back to a more IQ oriented test? I don’t think that’s the right solution at all. If you really aren’t prepared, you might really be best served by your local CC or directional state. I know more than one student who has graduated from small state U and ended up at a much more elite school for grad school. There’s more than one path to be an educated well functioning adult. There is no shame in going to a lower tier school despite the vibe on this board.
I actually think if anything the newer tests are more fair. They’re more straightforward and you can study and practice for them. There are free study materials available online. There are also more schools offering test optional admission paths. Even elite schools have eliminated mandatory SAT-2 requirements.