This is a follow up to my previous college admissions post, which you can read here! There’s no question that there’s numerous aspects that could be better about the college admissions process, and as I now finished applying to college, I wanted to use this post to provide insight on what could be improved. So… let’s get started. 

A key factor in college admissions is definitely “fit”, or how well an applicant aligns to the school’s values, programs, and beliefs, as well as how the applicant will make use of the school’s resources to innovate, pursue bold ideas, and better the world (colleges love when their alumni do this).  This is often measured through the infamous “Why us” questions on college applications, where colleges tend to use fluffy language to ask students – what do they want to do at the school, and what led them to apply? 

These questions tend to be pretty broad and generic, and as an applicant I struggled to answer them; a lot of the times, I struggled to fit all my ideas in the word count, and thus wasn’t sure how many aspects I should touch upon. Moreover, how can I convey my ideas in a thoughtful, engaging way and not simply list my aspirations so that the admissions officer (who’s evaluating thousands of other applications) will continue reading? 

Instead of using these typical “Why us” questions to assess a student’s potential at a school, we should be using questions to put students in hypothetical situations relating to the university. For example: “Here is a list of clubs and information about them. Because of your schedule, you can only join two. Which would you choose and why?” By seeing what personal decisions students would make and how they would defend those decisions, we can assess their potential to excel at a university. 

Not only do we need a better way of understanding the student’s potential at a school, we also need a better way of understanding a student’s potential to make an impact on the world (of course, selective institutions appreciate when their students go out to “change the world” or “pursue work in the service of humanity” – they say it so clearly in acceptance letters). Yet, I wonder, how many students at prestigious institutions (like Harvard) embody these values? Using Harvard as an example, here are some statistics on what the graduating class of 2020 pursued after their undergraduate degree: 

• 61% entered the workforce, 14% pursued graduate school or further education, and 7% pursued fellowships (a record 18% were undecided, but this was likely due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 
• Of those entering the workforce, 63% indicated that they would go into consulting, finance or technology, while only 4% indicated they would work in public service or non-profits. Doing some quick math here, approximately 38% of Harvard graduates from 2020 (0.63×0.61) pursued consulting, finance or technology and only about 2% (0.04×0.61) went into public service/non profits. The below image describes the careers pursued in more detail:

A similar trend can be seen at other Ivy League universities, as well. Now, investment banking is not a bad thing and one can certainly have a meaningful impact on the world around them while working in consulting, finance and related fields. However, these jobs are considered to be the most prestigious and lucrative. And, if a student (on their Harvard application) mentioned they wanted to work in a 9-5 investment banking job as their future career, would it sound as appealing as someone who discussed pursuing healthcare entrepreneurship and implementing policies to make healthcare more equitable (in other words: someone who discussed how they would change the world)? It wouldn’t, because admissions officers want to see students who take initiative, not those who go along with the status quo – and investment banking is a really prestigious way of falling in line with the status quo. 

Again, situational and ethical questions could be used to understand applicants’ potential for having a genuine impact on those around them. For example: “You’re offered a prestigious summer internship at a global consulting firm with an acceptance rate below 5% as well as a summer job teaching scientific concepts to middle school students. Which would you choose and why?” Although it’s written in a simple, straightforward way, the student’s answer would reveal a lot about their aspirations, goals, and motivations.

I’ve seen some universities, such as the University of Chicago, ask interesting application questions. (This year’s questions are viewable here). Personally, one of my favorites is: “Ah, but I was so much older then / I’m younger than that now” – Bob Dylan. In what ways do we become younger as we get older? The university provides students with the opportunity to create their own intriguing question (which provides another opportunity to demonstrate creativity and personality). These questions are a step in the right direction when it comes to truly assessing how a student thinks; there’s no “right” or “marketable” way to answer them, and that’s the beauty of it. 

Just to clarify, a lot of these viewpoints apply to the supplemental essays colleges require. The Common App Essay (which is submitted to all colleges) already provides a great opportunity for students to make their values clear. 

Assessing the potential to excel in life is more challenging than assessing the potential to succeed in university; after all, how can we make predictions about the future? Yet, posing questions that directly probe into an applicant’s values could allow us to gain a deeper understanding into who they are. 

This was something I started touching upon in my previous post on college admissions. Universities vow to assess the rigor of students’ coursework in the “context of what their high school has to offer.” And, the same should be done for extracurriculars (which are a huge part of college applications, and key to understanding what makes students unique). Yes, there’s the extra information section on the Common Application where students can describe any other achievements, information,  and circumstances that impacted their high school experience (whether that’s related to health, family, opportunities, etc). 

However, there needs to be a way to differentiate students who took initiative to find their own opportunities from those who were handed opportunities by their family, schools, and communities. For instance, let’s say that a student goes to a high school without a robotics team (but tries to start one and it doesn’t go anywhere as their school doesn’t have enough money to establish one). Yet, they begin teaching themselves how to work with microcontrollers, create electronic projects, and share their experiences on YouTube (they don’t get a lot of subscribers, but they work extremely hard and build a lot of skills that shaped their desire to pursue a degree in mechanical engineering). Then there’s another student who attends a high school in a wealthy suburb, which has a well-established robotics team. This student also works very hard and becomes team captain, leading them to win the world championships, receiving significant news coverage and awards. Both students were very dedicated, but the results of their diligence differed greatly, and colleges should find a way to properly contextualize these results. Thus, on the Common Application, where students have to describe their extracurriculars in a certain number of characters, there should be a section asking students, “Describe how you found out about or got involved in the activity.” While this would mean that there’s more information to be read, it would also ensure that the context – and not the final result – of the activity also mattered.

In addition, there’s already questions built in to help understand the student’s (and their family’s) circumstances, which is important, so that colleges could understand the student and their work alongside the situations they were facing outside the classroom. Though, there’s not a section for students to describe the circumstances of their school (besides the school report a counselor would send outlining the advanced courses offered). Colleges should be aware of the extracurriculars offered at the school, as well as how the student pursued them; not every high school has the ability to fund specialized programs and activities, but these are often where genuine learning and growth occurs. Having students prepare a written statement reflecting the opportunities available to them (and having a counselor sign off of it, ensuring factual accuracy) allows them to demonstrate self-awareness while explaining how they took initiative to pursue their interests.  

Right now, college applications consist of written questions, and students must find the best way to market themselves and convey authenticity. There are other ways of conveying authenticity and potential, and some universities have already embraced that, by requiring students to submit a video portfolio or giving students the option to submit a portfolio of projects they’ve worked on (though in most cases these are optional and may not actually be reviewed by the admissions officer). 

However, replacing some essay questions with a project-based component (examples creating a video, presenting a solution to a problem, building a contraption) could allow admissions officers to glean insight into applicants’ thinking. These are all vague ideas, but considering how applications could be more well rounded would definitely make the process holistic. 

For the longest time in America, higher education was a privilege restricted to the wealthy (specifically wealthy white individuals). While there has been significant work to dismantle this inequality – especially with programs supporting first generation, low-income students – there’s still a lot of work left to be done. This, combined with the idea that understanding students’ potential is of value in the process, can drive practices that make college admissions more fair.