Many colleges, including the University, recently sent their acceptance letters, which means many prospective students who did not get into the University were left devastated with the words “We are sorry to inform you” pounding in their heads.
While some students might have predicted their rejections, many, including some I know, were confused and believed they were more than qualified for acceptance to the University.
Disappointment has become almost inevitable for most students who apply to college, and that is not something that will change anytime soon. But the unfair criteria used for selection can change.
The Wall Street Journal recently published a letter from high school senior Suzy Weiss about the college application process, titled “To (All) the Colleges that Rejected Me.” The letter mocks the “just be yourself” motto many colleges encourage their applicants to follow. Weiss writes: “Colleges tell you, ‘Just be yourself.’ That is great advice, as long as yourself has nine extracurriculars, six leadership positions, three varsity sports, killer SAT scores and two moms. Then by all means, be yourself!”
Weiss’ point is a good one. Colleges promote this “be yourself” idea, and Weiss is correct in saying that being yourself is sometimes not good enough. An inescapable part of the admissions process is that students must have some outstanding qualities in addition to academic rigor in order to be accepted to the best universities. But some of the methods colleges use to measure student achievement are unfair.
Certain attributes, specifically the “killer SAT scores” Weiss mentions, hold too much weight in the admissions process. Perfect standardized test scores are often valued above all other achievements for high school students. I experienced this firsthand. My twin brother and I were very similar academically and in terms of extra-curricular activities, but only one of us was accepted to a university to which we both applied. The outstanding difference was our test scores. One of which was competitive while the other was nearly perfect. The twin who was accepted had the better standardized test score, and that is not a coincidence. In a competitive admissions process, standardized test scores can be the reason a well-qualified student is rejected.
Also, while not the case with me and my brother, I have spoken with University students who did not believe they had good chances of being accepted because of their test scores but in fact were accepted, and they have found that they are doing better academically than some students who had outstanding standardized test scores.
Now I am not saying that people with great test scores don’t do well in college — just that students who are rejected due to their SAT scores may be likely able to perform as well or even better than students who score highly on the test. In addition, there are people who can afford to pay for tutors and those who cannot. The people who can afford tutors learn test-taking skills that will help them to do better, which can be an unfair advantage. People call standardized testing the great equalizer, but I find it to be a poor measure of the quality of a person’s cognitive ability.
Another part of the admission process that I hold contempt for is the stress of importance on charity work and community service. Colleges want us to be involved in many different activities, but we cannot truly commit ourselves to charities if we are part of many other organizations. In addition, charitable works become insincere and students begin to start, say, Relay For Life teams only to pad their resumes, not because they genuinely care for the cause. Weiss brought this distressing trend to attention by writing that “as long as you’re using someone else’s misfortunes to try to propel yourself into the Ivy League, you’re golden.” Her disdain for charitable acts and community service is justified, as such activities are often insincere when completed by ambitious high school students.
In addition, charitable acts such as mission trips to Africa and other global-development-type expeditions are impressive, but they are not available to everyone. This is when socioeconomic status comes into play and can hurt a student’s chances of getting into his or her desired college.
Those trips can be incredibly pricey, so instead of going to South Africa some students end up working at the local animal shelter or with more accessible organizations. On an application this inability to participate in mission trips and instead being forced to do something less impressive on a local scale might prevent you from standing out. Yes, the admission offices will tell us that writing about mission trips is cliché, but there are plenty of amazing essays out there that allude to mission trips, which make them all the more fascinating.
Can we make working at the local organization an interesting essay? Maybe. Will it ever be more interesting than spending the afternoon nursing baby lions with orphans? Probably not.
I sympathize with the admissions departments that have as many as 40 percent of the slots filled before new applicants even click the submit button on the Common App, and which then have to wade through thousands of applications to narrow their class sizes down to the small percentage of accepted students. But applying to college is not a true measure of our abilities anymore; it is a cutthroat process where students are judged unfairly based on one test score and where many students act altruistically for the wrong reasons and without sincerity.
Meredith Berger is an Opinion columnist for The Cavalier Daily. Her column appears Mondays.
Read More
LETTER: Medical students stand in support of transgender youth
By Rachel Rezabek , Russell Hawes , Ishaan Rischie , Elianna Dunster , Kaile Maske , Zain Ahmad and Zoe Ziff | 5 hours agoAs future physicians, we cannot remain silent, especially since U.Va. Health is one of the most comprehensive gender health centers in the country.
HUYNH: The Supreme Court must support civil rights litigation in Virginia and beyond
By Viet Huynh | 10 hours agoThe Supreme Court must prioritize protecting the litigating power of the people against potentially tyrannical laws by their government.
EDITORIAL: U.Va. Health lets fear trump its mission to do no harm
By Editorial Board | YesterdayIt is high time to resist these authoritative and dangerous actions before there are no federal avenues left for resistance.
