Reply to What would a meritocracy in higher ed look like?

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "What would a meritocracy in higher ed look like? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The main issue is we do not know if AO's are doing their job or not. They could pick students by throwing darts after screening with a minimal set of criteria and schools would not be able to tell the difference between a cohort picked by AO's vs darts.

The arrogance is the assumption that AO's really know how to pick students based on things that can be easily manipulated like essays. Or "volunteering". Majority of the charities/volunteering are not done by students. Pay more attention to maybe recommendation letters from classroom teachers - maybe ask for 3 LOR's. [/quote]

Disagree.  Just because it may be partly subjective (like most human endeavors, such as face to face job interviews) doesn't mean admissions is random as throwing darts.

The parallel to hiring is actually pretty good.  A lot of the screens in US hiring are pretty vibes-based.  Especially for jobs where it's more difficult to ask for technical demos of skill.  I have heard that getting a white collar job in Europe can involve more of a process beyond just talking to a few people once or twice.

I think the problem in the US is too many similar candidates fighting for too few seats.  In that sense, the outcomes seem random but it's maybe just small things that give a candidate an edge over another.  Kind of like in resume reviews. 1 year more experience or speaks a foreign language might get someone on the short list.

I trust admissions officers to have some intuition about students and their fit to an institution.

They do have a bias towards interesting candidates.  That is kind of a natural human tendency.  And it's hard to be a "generic candidate" trying to get out of that box.  High-quality writing, maturity, authenticity, and humor are a differentiator for kids that have somewhat generic profiles.  But that's also kind of realistic.  Those skills are indicative of maturity, communication skills, etc.  Things that get kids and job seekers ahead in real life.  It's just unfortunately really agonizing to go through these processes.  It feels like a referendum on your personal worth.

More LORs will disadvantage lower income kids.  I'm a parent with a kid at a better than average public high school in a flyover state.  I read LORs as part of a PTA scholarship committee.  There are only 2 teachers in the high school who could sell a kid they loved into an Ivy.  The rest of them write very generic, uninspired prose cribbed mainly from the brag sheets.  Most of them are "Thank U, Next" material.  Every once in a while I get an employer letter that's highly credible.  Other than that, only the AP English teachers write recs worth reading.  It helps me to understand why public school kids might have a lesser shot at top schools.  Unless they are "once in a career" type kids.[/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