Reply to Some facts about Holistic Admissions Criteria from Stanford Daily

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Some facts about Holistic Admissions Criteria from Stanford Daily"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I should add that while I recognize how arbitrary elite college admissions are, the other pieces of the puzzle for me are that (a) there are lots of colleges in the U.S. where a smart and hard-working kid can get a great education (b) college is the new HS, in the sense that, for many jobs, where you go to grad school will have a much greater impact on your career than where you went to college and (c) [b]by the time grad school admissions rolls around, students have more meaningful/relevant credentials and it's easier to choose among them based on aptitude and preparation.  [/b][/quote]

:mrgreen: if you don't think grad schools don't practice holistic admissions (in non-stem), I have beachfront property to sell you in kansas.

[/quote]

Depends on the field.  Since I cited Grutter and noted that it was a law school case, obviously I know that professional schools practice holistic admissions.  OTOH, it's a different kind of whole and often a different kind of decionmaker, as well as a different sized pool.  I've done graduate admissions for a PhD program -- they were made by the faculty who would actually be teaching the students, extra curriculars were largely irrelevant, and we had a good sense of what kind of work incoming students could already do and were interested in pursuing in the future.  And we were looking at hundreds -- not tens of thousands -- of applications.  So skills and interests mattered a helluva lot more and marketing a helluva lot less than it does in undergrad admissions at highly selective schools.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics