The Mindful College Applicant by Belinda H. Y. Chiu

Author:Belinda H. Y. Chiu
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: undefined
Publisher: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers
Published: 2012-08-15T00:00:00+00:00

Human phenomenon #3:

Admissions officers are trained to find evidence to support their decisions and to

reduce mental shortcuts

Many admissions offices train their readers to raise awareness of biases and the dangers of “fast thinking,” as well as the institutional and systemic structures that may perpetuate inequities. Such training may include readings on the history and state of higher education, and tips on how to identify energy patterns for the most productive work. This is not to say that all admissions offices do this perfectly. Some institutions are extremely mindful and spend days on this topic; others have a more surface-level, one-hour show of it. Regardless, the role of bias and human subjectivity is very much on the minds of admissions officers at top-tier institutions. It is not a fair process, but it is a process taken seriously. After all, one does not go into admissions to retire early and buy a vacation home in the Maldives. Most, even those with years of experience, make less than you will your first year out of college. Most do this work because they want to give you an opportunity at higher education.

To do so, all admissions offices train their teams to review applications not just with a “gut check” but by incorporating a detailed analysis to build evidence in support of a decision. Think about your research projects where you have to find pieces of evidence that back up your hypothesis. The admissions process is similar, in what is often described as “an art and a science.”

The science bit is analytical and more objective (think back to our discussion on enrollment management). While different offices use different metrics, some sort of rubric is generally used to maintain consistency among different officers and to help balance human subjectivity. For example, one school may use a four-point scale to evaluate a transcript. Students in the top 5 percent of their class might get the coveted 1. However, that doesn’t mean everyone with a 1 gets accepted. Think about that senior from last year with a perfect 5.0 GPA who you swore would get in everywhere but didn’t. You were shocked. It doesn’t mean the system was rigged or that the student didn’t get in because of [fill-in-the-blank]. The reality is most of these universities you’re looking at have thousands who fit that profile and would earn a 1 on a transcript metric. But the reality is also that you—or your counselor, paid or not—will never know what the admissions officer is looking for at the very moment they are reading your file. That is where the “art” bit comes in. Admissions officers are looking at more than just an objective rating.

The human component means that admissions officer may find evidence in other parts of your file to build a case. For example, you might be in the top 15 percent of your class, so you might not earn that coveted 1. You might receive a 2 instead. However, that admissions officer might draw out from parts of your application how you achieved this rank with limited resources and major personal obstacles.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.