by Patrick O'Connor, Ph.D.
I started my college education as a music major, but two things dissuaded me from pursuing this career path. First, five minutes at a college music program showed me I wasn’t in Kansas anymore—there were lots of folks better than me, and that gave me pause. Second, a summer camp job led me to consider education as a career, especially since I heard it came with a starting salary of — wait for it — $10,000, money most musicians never saw at that time.
My interest in music came to mind the other day when the latest round of admission data was posted. A record number of applications led to a record low in admit rates at many colleges; we’ll never know if that happened at some colleges, which decided this year not to release their admit rates at all. That’s really not much of a loss, since their admit rates last year were less than 5 percent. Once you get to that level, you already have the data you need to tell students admission to that college isn’t a sure thing.
As always, the low admit rates have led to discussions about just what colleges are looking for in a candidate. One counselor lamented that colleges with single digit admit rates aren’t admitting students; they’re admitting eighteen-year-olds who have demonstrated adult propensities.
That’s where my music background kicked in. In my music major days, symphonies had an interesting way of auditioning for open seats. The applicants would assemble backstage, where they were randomly assigned a number. Then, in order, each would walk to the center of the stage and play—except that the stage curtain was closed. Those in the audience listening to the audition couldn’t possibly know who was playing—so they had no idea if it was a friend, someone they’d played with before, what they looked like, or if they hopped on one foot while playing. All they were judged on was their ability to play.
I say this because many involved in college admissions are looking for a similar method to use when reviewing students. Admissions officers freely admit the current system is far from equitable, with every part of a college application offering an advantage to the wealthy. What’s been lacking from these “tear down the system” discussions are proposals to review applicants that are more equitable. If only it would be possible to put each applicant behind a metaphorical curtain of some kind, and ask them to do something that measured their ability to succeed in college, we’d just be all set.
The problem is that we don’t know what that is. Students with sterling high school records come home from college in less than a year, either lacking the emotional stamina to endure life outside the classroom, or unable to endure not being top banana at a college full of top bananas. Conversely, students whose high school careers were less than stellar end up in leadership positions because college makes sense to them in a way high school didn’t — that, or they simply grew up.
Some argue a new series of requirements are required in the admissions process that would even the admissions field, but as I’ve pointed out before, there is no skill out there that money can’t improve. If a college decides to let students in based on their cake-baking skills, summer culinary programs will pop up, and will only be attended by those who can afford them. It’s interesting to talk about finding the right curtain test for college admissions, but developing it is quite a different song.
My interest in music came to mind the other day when the latest round of admission data was posted. A record number of applications led to a record low in admit rates at many colleges; we’ll never know if that happened at some colleges, which decided this year not to release their admit rates at all. That’s really not much of a loss, since their admit rates last year were less than 5 percent. Once you get to that level, you already have the data you need to tell students admission to that college isn’t a sure thing.
As always, the low admit rates have led to discussions about just what colleges are looking for in a candidate. One counselor lamented that colleges with single digit admit rates aren’t admitting students; they’re admitting eighteen-year-olds who have demonstrated adult propensities.
That’s where my music background kicked in. In my music major days, symphonies had an interesting way of auditioning for open seats. The applicants would assemble backstage, where they were randomly assigned a number. Then, in order, each would walk to the center of the stage and play—except that the stage curtain was closed. Those in the audience listening to the audition couldn’t possibly know who was playing—so they had no idea if it was a friend, someone they’d played with before, what they looked like, or if they hopped on one foot while playing. All they were judged on was their ability to play.
I say this because many involved in college admissions are looking for a similar method to use when reviewing students. Admissions officers freely admit the current system is far from equitable, with every part of a college application offering an advantage to the wealthy. What’s been lacking from these “tear down the system” discussions are proposals to review applicants that are more equitable. If only it would be possible to put each applicant behind a metaphorical curtain of some kind, and ask them to do something that measured their ability to succeed in college, we’d just be all set.
The problem is that we don’t know what that is. Students with sterling high school records come home from college in less than a year, either lacking the emotional stamina to endure life outside the classroom, or unable to endure not being top banana at a college full of top bananas. Conversely, students whose high school careers were less than stellar end up in leadership positions because college makes sense to them in a way high school didn’t — that, or they simply grew up.
Some argue a new series of requirements are required in the admissions process that would even the admissions field, but as I’ve pointed out before, there is no skill out there that money can’t improve. If a college decides to let students in based on their cake-baking skills, summer culinary programs will pop up, and will only be attended by those who can afford them. It’s interesting to talk about finding the right curtain test for college admissions, but developing it is quite a different song.
No comments:
Post a Comment