So if it can all be faked, how should college admissions work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oxbridge / caltech model is the best.

German model is good as well.

There's multiple problems with the German model.

First, if you don't get into the right high school, you will NEVER go to college. You'll be sent to trade school as a teen. This obviously blocks teens with learning issues from getting into college. Some people mature later in life and could end being a brilliant academic in college, if just given the chance. I know many people who had terrible high school experiences and grades (usually due to a traumatic home life or school bullying), but then excelled once they got into college.

The 2nd big issue with the German system is that people would literally be in an undergrad program for 8 years before finishing. Once you got into the university, it was very difficult to get you out. The education was basically free, plus the German government gives you a monthly subsidy as a student to pay your living expenses. The professors in many German universities are very strict about failing 30-50% of the class, so you'd need to take a single class perhaps multiple times before passing. This kept Germans in their 20s in college for way too long. I think they've recently enacted a time limit to finish your bachelor degree (7 years?). That said, the German up-and-out method produces very smart individuals who have a mastery of the material. I've met many who come to the U.S. for grad school and find it to be way too easy compared to the German system.

Everything you’ve described sounds like a feature to me - not a bug.

[Anonymous]

I'm from the UK so that is the system I'm most familiar with, and I think that works to identify merit (though there are still the problems of how to create opportunities for people with disadvantaged backgrounds). But the reason it can be done is that there are standardized tests of all the subjects in every school (A Levels). Those are not tests like SATs, they are more like APs, but they are taken by everyone in the subjects of their choice. The offer you get from a university in the UK is typically conditional on your A level results (e.g. 3As). There is almost no consideration of extra curricular activities, sports is not a factor at all because there are no college sports in the same way as here, and although legacy might be a thing for a small number of people, it's very limited and is not a factor that concerns people. It's really just about your predicted, then actual, A Level results, and, to show your track record, your GCSE results (the standardized national exams everyone takes at 16 in about 10 subjects).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If I could wave a magic wand ...

1) Eliminate activities as a consideration. Do not even have it as an option on the Common or Coalition App -- no preferences for athletes, ballet stars, musical prodigies, marching band members, debaters etc.

Schools can offer these activities to anyone in the freshman class who tries out for them, like high school.

2) Blind admission files, with the exception of perhaps geography and gender (same as with an academic journal; no one knows who the author is).

No names on apps, no interviews with applicants. The record must stand on its own. Recommendations and calls only accepted from teachers or employers.

I like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lottery--seriously. A certain percentage of the incoming class is offered admission by lottery.

I actually really agree with this. Have an internal scoring criteria that puts the most weight on grades and test scores, secondary weighting on extracurriculars/work experience/volunteering, tertiary weighting on recommendations/URM. Any student that meets a minimum scoring threshold gets their name put in the lottery. The university randomly picks students via the lottery who would be capable of completing the work.

That said, I think even this would succumb to corruption. People are so invested in gaming the system. But a random lottery among those who meet the minimum qualifications would be "fairer" than the process today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lottery--seriously. A certain percentage of the incoming class is offered admission by lottery.

I actually really agree with this. Have an internal scoring criteria that puts the most weight on grades and test scores, secondary weighting on extracurriculars/work experience/volunteering, tertiary weighting on recommendations/URM. Any student that meets a minimum scoring threshold gets their name put in the lottery. The university randomly picks students via the lottery who would be capable of completing the work.

That said, I think even this would succumb to corruption. People are so invested in gaming the system. But a random lottery among those who meet the minimum qualifications would be "fairer" than the process today.

The lottery problem is that schools can’t guaruntee their desired racial balance - unless they did multiple lotteries of separate pools separated by race - which would open up a huge can of worms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oxbridge / caltech model is the best.

German model is good as well.

There's multiple problems with the German model.

First, if you don't get into the right high school, you will NEVER go to college. You'll be sent to trade school as a teen. This obviously blocks teens with learning issues from getting into college. Some people mature later in life and could end being a brilliant academic in college, if just given the chance. I know many people who had terrible high school experiences and grades (usually due to a traumatic home life or school bullying), but then excelled once they got into college.

The 2nd big issue with the German system is that people would literally be in an undergrad program for 8 years before finishing. Once you got into the university, it was very difficult to get you out. The education was basically free, plus the German government gives you a monthly subsidy as a student to pay your living expenses. The professors in many German universities are very strict about failing 30-50% of the class, so you'd need to take a single class perhaps multiple times before passing. This kept Germans in their 20s in college for way too long. I think they've recently enacted a time limit to finish your bachelor degree (7 years?). That said, the German up-and-out method produces very smart individuals who have a mastery of the material. I've met many who come to the U.S. for grad school and find it to be way too easy compared to the German system.

Everything you’ve described sounds like a feature to me - not a bug.

Really? A system that ensures that, say, dyselxic kids won't become engineers, doctors, etc. is a feature, not a bug? Or a kid who is abused and traumatized during childhood and so doesn't do well until they have matured more is a feature, not a bug? I'm not saying we should be nice to dyslexics and abused kids for moral reasons (though there is that), but that our country would lose out on the originality of dyslexic thinking, and we'd be poorer for it.

[Anonymous]

1. Increase the security around proctors and test sites for SAT and ACT. I think over the years people have been complaining about it getting too strict or creating too many "barriers" but I think this scandal should shut that down.

2. Increase the scrutiny around getting extended time waivers on testing. If I were a parent of a child that actually needed this accommodation, I would be LIVID that people have been using this, and thereby making it that much more difficult for my child to be given appropriate accommodations. If a person is going to be granted this, they have to have an already demonstrated record of a 504, IEP, etc. that can't suddenly develop this need in their Junior year, unless it can be clearly documented why the new need. (I think in another thread someone mentioned a child receiving a concussion, and I could see that being a reason for a new need for accommodation. Even with those accommodations, see my first point--the sites where these test are done and the proctors doing them must be held to a highly secure standard.

3. For the coaching/recruit side of this. It must be a required part of the work of coaches that they:
a. Are responsible for demonstrating they have confirmed the validity of the student athlete they are designating as a recruit. This is super easy to do. Verifiable scores/rankings, etc. can be obtained from independent sources.
b. They must submit reports each year documenting the participation of students that they identified as recruits in previous years. We all know that sometimes there are instances that a student might be recruited but ultimately not play, but there needs to be transparency about it. If student didn't participate for legitimate reasons, there's no reason to hide that information.

4. I think this one might be harder, but...
I would like to see legislation that puts some kind of prohibition against colleges or universities accepting donations from anyone with a child ages 12-20. Like I said, probably really hard to make illegal, so instead perhaps it's about reporting, transparency, spotlight, shaming.
-Make donation information easy to access and reported annually in a consistent format across all institutions (similar to the Common Data Set.)
-Require reporting that shows the names of currently enrolled students who's families have made donations to the schools.
Hopefully, this will discourage schools from accepting these "pay-for-play" students because it will be damaging to their reputation.

Anyway, that's a start....

[Anonymous]

This is really a small problem; very few students involved over a very long period of time.

[Anonymous]

Here’s a better system:

Take sports out of the admissions process. All the college teams can become clubs (much like the European soccer clubs) that are affiliated with the university. Athletes can be paid and they get to take classes part time at the college.

In addition to removing sports from the college application, remove extracurriculars as well. Admission should be granted based upon SAT scores, GPA and AP exam grades. College as an academic experience should be based on academic performance. All students should be given AP tests for free - much like the English A-level exams. I understand that whatever system exists will be games but grades from 3 separate unconnected institutions (SAT, GPA, AP) seems like the best approach. Things like “fit” and extracurriculars make it way too easy for the wealthy to game the system.

[Anonymous]

What I find interesting about this whole scandal is the number of people who are doubling down on using test scores when this is an example of how easily and frequently they are fraudulent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a better system:

Take sports out of the admissions process. All the college teams can become clubs (much like the European soccer clubs) that are affiliated with the university. Athletes can be paid and they get to take classes part time at the college.

In addition to removing sports from the college application, remove extracurriculars as well. Admission should be granted based upon SAT scores, GPA and AP exam grades. College as an academic experience should be based on academic performance. All students should be given AP tests for free - much like the English A-level exams. I understand that whatever system exists will be games but grades from 3 separate unconnected institutions (SAT, GPA, AP) seems like the best approach. Things like “fit” and extracurriculars make it way too easy for the wealthy to game the system.

Test scores can be obviously and easily faked. Fraud is rampant. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oxbridge / caltech model is the best.

German model is good as well.

Can you elaborate as to why you think this is the best?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a better system:

Take sports out of the admissions process. All the college teams can become clubs (much like the European soccer clubs) that are affiliated with the university. Athletes can be paid and they get to take classes part time at the college.

In addition to removing sports from the college application, remove extracurriculars as well. Admission should be granted based upon SAT scores, GPA and AP exam grades. College as an academic experience should be based on academic performance. All students should be given AP tests for free - much like the English A-level exams. I understand that whatever system exists will be games but grades from 3 separate unconnected institutions (SAT, GPA, AP) seems like the best approach. Things like “fit” and extracurriculars make it way too easy for the wealthy to game the system.

David Leonhardt, NYT editorial board member, makes the same argument in his newsletter today, with a study to back it up.

The admissions scandal

Getting a peek inside the college-admissions process isn’t easy. But a team of academic researchers managed to do so several years ago. It helped, no doubt, that two of the researchers were former college presidents — William Bowen of Princeton and Eugene Tobin of Hamilton.

The researchers were given access to anonymous admissions records at 19 elite colleges and then analyzed how admissions offices treated different groups of students. Low-income students, for example, were no more likely to be admitted than otherwise similar students with virtually identical academic records. So-called legacy students — those whose parents attended the same schools — received substantial boosts. So did underrepresented minorities.

But the biggest boost went to recruited athletes: An athlete was about 30 percentage points more likely to be admitted than a nonathlete with the same academic record.

I thought of that study yesterday after the Justice Department announced it had indicted 50 people for trying to rig the admissions process. The alleged scam involved payments funneled from parents to college coaches, who in return would falsely identify applicants as athletic recruits to the admissions office. Just like that, the students then become virtual shoo-ins for acceptance.

If the accusations are true, they’re outrageous. But they also highlight a larger problem in the admissions process that has somehow become acceptable: A scam like this could exist only because competitive sports occupy a ridiculously large place in that process.

The situation is different for other extracurricular activities. Great musicians are more likely to be admitted to a college than similar students who don’t play an instrument — as is only fair, because musicians deserve credit for their accomplishments. But the musicians don’t generally receive a 30-percentage-point boost on their admissions chances. Stage managers for the high school theater don’t, either. Nor do student body presidents, debaters, yearbook editors or robotics competitors.

Athletes do. Their extracurricular activities are not treated merely as an important part of a college application but as a defining part. “Athletic recruiting is the biggest form of affirmative action in American higher education, even at schools such as ours,” as Philip Smith, a former dean of admissions at Williams College, has said. It’s a relic of the supposedly character-defining role that sports played in elite colleges a century ago.
And sports have retained their unique place in the admissions process even though most teams at elite colleges are not good enough to compete for national championships. To put it another way, the student athletes being recruited to these colleges are not among the very best in the country at what they do. They are extremely good, yes, and they work hard, yes — but that also tends to be true of high school musicians, student government leaders and so on.

I’m a sports fan and long-ago high school athlete. I have a lot of admiration for students who are talented enough and work hard enough to play sports in college. But they are not a different species. It’s time to end the extreme special treatment that colleges give to so many of them. College sports can still exist without it.

[Anonymous]

We should educate everybody.

Education should not be a culling process.

Get rid of SAT/ACT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a better system:

Take sports out of the admissions process. All the college teams can become clubs (much like the European soccer clubs) that are affiliated with the university. Athletes can be paid and they get to take classes part time at the college.

In addition to removing sports from the college application, remove extracurriculars as well. Admission should be granted based upon SAT scores, GPA and AP exam grades. College as an academic experience should be based on academic performance. All students should be given AP tests for free - much like the English A-level exams. I understand that whatever system exists will be games but grades from 3 separate unconnected institutions (SAT, GPA, AP) seems like the best approach. Things like “fit” and extracurriculars make it way too easy for the wealthy to game the system. [/quote

+1

Coaches need less discretion. I do not agree with paying athletes, as that tilts the system, yet again. Admission should be scrutinized by a third party, much like financial aid is scrutinized.