What America’s elite colleges are getting wrong and what they’re doing to change
Sixty colleges and universities, including the big names like Harvard, Stanford, Yale, MIT and smaller institutions like Smith, Swarthmore, and Amherst, have just endorsed a report, “Turning the Tide,” declaring that their admissions processes are seriously flawed. The set of recommendations included in the report could have a huge positive impact on today’s injurious pressure on teenagers to organize their lives based on impressing the admissions offices of elite colleges.
A Shift From Self to Community
One of the wrongs that the report hopes to “right” is the myth that attending an “elite college” is the only path to success in the first place. Working adults generally figure this out — that how smart, creative and successful our co-workers are does not seem closely related to the “eliteness” of their undergraduate alma maters. But the lure of these revered institutions continues to govern the priorities of many teens and their parents.
My summary of the rest of the recommendations is as follows:
- De-emphasize test scores, AP classes, name brand charitable organizations, and other current dimensions of college applications that tend to be more correlated with parent education and income levels than with inherent qualities of the student.
- Focus on passion and depth — is this a student that has found his or her passion/s and has shown a sustained energy and commitment toward those passions?
- Focus on contributions to the community — has this student made a significant contribution to his or her community whether that be improvements in the local school or helping to support his or her family through work or raising younger siblings?
The report declares that, “Too often, today’s culture sends young people messages that emphasize personal success rather than investment in others or our collective future.” The above recommendations are intended to shift the balance so that individual achievements are no longer the primary focus and work toward causes that benefit others rises in significance.
I especially appreciate the report’s recognition that contributions to the community, including the responsibilities borne by many children from disadvantaged families to work or to help raise younger siblings, are valuable experiences. And, that these activities should be recognized equally to something like spending the summer in Africa teaching children in an African village. While potentially a valuable, life-changing experience, the latter is expensive, perhaps encouraged by parents to build a college resume, and probably not accessible to anyone but the most privileged teens. The former is not only a necessity, but a valuable lesson in responsibility, compassion and the importance of purpose. (More on the value of purpose and how to inspire purpose in our children in a later blog.)
Benefits for Kids — Less Stress and a More Level Playing Field
Not only are colleges and universities attempting to improve their admissions processes, but also they are taking responsibility for their part in creating the current stressful and arguably both pointless and harmful culture in which high school students find themselves. Taking 20 AP classes, briefly volunteering for name brand organizations as an application builder, and spending countless hours on SAT prep and retakes are clearly creating anxiety for many students. But, perhaps just as problematic, time spent on these activities crowds out the opportunity for students to really develop a passion that can help define them as a person and enable them to build more meaningful skills and attributes like collaboration, selflessness, commitment and responsibility.
Another significant benefit of the proposed changes is that they level the playing field across all socioeconomic levels. By reducing the importance of factors that are closely correlated with family income (SAT scores, name brand volunteer activities) and recognizing the value of working to support the financial needs of the family, applicants from lower income households will be much more competitive than under the old system .
The Challenge of Making the Shift a Reality
The recommendations are a positive step in the right direction, but at first glance look difficult to implement. How will colleges develop an efficient and accurate way to assess applications under this new light? The report’s examples of actual changes to the application process are lacking. They include adding or changing application essay questions and providing different guidance for letters of recommendation. But these changes will not solve the problem. Students will continue let the application drive their activities and will get advice on how to tell colleges what they want to hear. But my experience five years ago as an alumni interviewer for prospective Stanford students gives me hope that change is possible.
In this “experiment” I was asked to interview four Stanford applications and to discover, through a one-hour conversation with each, the essence of who these kids were….What are their passions and how aggressively and successfully do they pursue them? What are their personality traits that aren’t visible on paper? What kind of impact would each prospective freshman have on Stanford’s student body? (To Stanford’s credit, it seemed that even back then, they were trying to look for the qualities highlighted in “Turning the Tide.”) The only information interviewers were given were the students’ names. We were not given information on test scores, GPAs or other academic pursuits, although it can probably be assumed these kids were all excellent students or they wouldn’t take the time to fill out the application. Our comments and ratings would not necessarily have an impact on the admissions decision, but we would be notified of whether they were accepted or not.
First, I discovered that today’s youth are incredibly impressive — innovative, independent and resourceful. I was amazed at how effectively an interview could illuminate these intangible qualities. I also discovered that Stanford’s paper-based admissions process was very poor when it came to identifying these exceptional students. I’ll explain below. (The following names have been changed.)
Meet John, the quintessential entrepreneur. John was academically talented and throughout middle school, would help his friends with their schoolwork. When he reached high school, he expanded this interest first into a paying job, tutoring younger students in math, science and other subjects, and then further developing this endeavor into a relatively large tutoring business — providing jobs for many of his high school friends and useful academic help for the community. He was also passionate about video production and produced the school’s marketing videos, documented school events and entered national video production contests. Furthermore, he was fun-loving and had a great sense of humor. This guy would be an awesome addition to Stanford! 5 out of 5! REJECTED
Meet Hannah, scientist and technologist. Hannah went to a public magnet school that consistently receives the award for best public school in the country. She LOVED rockets! She was the first female president of the rocket club. A regional rocket contest was approaching and she was so excited about their club’s entry. She was also working on a fascinating science project that had the potential for making a breakthrough discovery. Her enthusiasm for how this could help society was palpable. Stanford would be lucky to have her. 5 out of 5! REJECTED
Meet Larry. Eagle scout without anything interesting to say about it. Band member. Could rattle off a resume of things he had done, none of which he seemed passionate about. Stanford wouldn’t be missing out. 3 out of 5. WAITLISTED
Meet Joy. After an hour, I wasn’t able to elicit a twinkle in her eye about anything. She didn’t seem shy, just didn’t seem interested. She chose her main extra-curricular pursuit because her sister was doing the same thing. 2 out of 5. ACCEPTED!
What???
How could Stanford’s interpretation of the paper application be so different from my experience as an interviewer. Did Joy take 20 AP classes? Did she ace the SAT? If so, it was clear to me that the paper-based application gave little indication of the deeper qualities of these kids. It was also clear that alumni could be a valuable asset in expanding the capabilities of colleges to “get it right.”
A New Era Requires Creative Solutions
Hopefully, we are entering a new era. One where a teenager’s integrity, commitment, passion and sense of purpose are both valued by the college admissions process and encouraged and developed by parents, teachers and our education system. In my first blog post about the purpose of education, I asked parents what they want their children to get out of their education. They did not say entrance into an elite college, or ability to score well on tests, or advanced math skills. Parents want their children to find their passion, have a positive impact on the world, embrace challenge. Hopefully “Turning the Tide,” will kick off a systemic shift, so that our education system and parents’ hopes for their children are more closely aligned. But colleges and universities are going to have to get creative to actually make this shift a reality.
