News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Sept. 24, 2007
“I wanted to take a Shakespeare course my sophomore year but instead had to take a required PSAT prep course. I hated that.”
That quote, from a high school student, sums up themes of research being released today by the Education Conservancy, which is promoting the reform of the college admissions process. Eight focus groups of high school seniors conducted in February found that the admissions process appears to leave students cynical, baffled and frustrated. They believe that they and colleges are trying to sell themselves (in many cases by being less than truthful), that the admissions process favors the wealthy and the savvy and may punish the intellectually curious, and that they are forced to make undesirable choices in high school in the hopes of impressing a college admissions officer.
Those findings come from focus groups — each one with 12 high school seniors involved in the competitive admissions process. Students were selected from public and private high schools in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago and San Francisco, with a focus on producing focus groups with gender and socioeconomic diversity.
Lloyd Thacker, founder of the Education Conservancy, acknowledged that focus groups are imperfect research tools, and said that his hope is to use these findings to build a larger research project. Thacker’s group — which has been in the forefront of the push against U.S. News & World Report rankings, standardized tests, and other practices — is also trying to build a research arm, of which the focus group reports are the first major effort.
Even within the limitations of focus groups, Thacker said that there were numerous instances of themes coming up again and again, even though students were generally asked open-ended, non-specific questions. He noted, for example, that the questions didn’t even refer to standardized tests, yet they were a constant subject of discussion.
Among the findings from the focus groups:
The focus groups also revealed that students do care about the prestige of the college they will attend, and view it as having a significant impact on their ability to get a better job and to have more success in life. And despite all the cynicism uncovered in the students’ perception of the admissions system the focus groups also found that students reported that the application process helped them become better at planning and time management, and helped students learn about themselves on their goals.
The study found that “for some,” the admissions process also “was a lesson in humility, learning that they were not as unique as they had thought they were.”
While Thacker said that his initial goal in releasing the research findings is to attract interest for a larger study, he thinks that there are clear conclusions from the findings. “I think colleges need to look at their applications and evaluate whether the signals they are sending are contributing to behaviors that are not educationally desirable,” Thacker said.
For example, are they asking about extracurricular activities in ways that encourage lists as opposed to genuine engagement? Are they describing grades in ways that make anyone fear applying without a 4.0? Are they stating that just about everyone has a chance of getting in, when they in fact never admit anyone without certain qualifications? Are they placing so much emphasis on the SAT that more students are likely to abandon courses are activities they love for SAT-prep?
If colleges did ask those questions, he said, they would find the need for “significant change,” although the nature of change might vary from campus to campus.
The best thing colleges could do, he said, was to think for themselves and be honest. “They are paying consultants thousands and thousands of dollars,” he said, adding that the research suggests that all the commercial strategies offered by the consultants aren’t fooling anyone, and that colleges would do better to “believe in themselves, and think about whether what they are doing is consistent with what you should be doing.”
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
Wow. Thanks a lot, Gen. (Ret.) Knowledge.
Maybe next month they can do a study on what professors think of the tenure process.
Larry, at 9:20 am EDT on September 24, 2007
Ad hominem attacks are the refuge of those who have nothing of substance to contribute. Does anyone really think Mr. Thacker is doing this for the (non-existent) money??
Mommy, at 9:25 am EDT on September 24, 2007
Who forced or even encouraged the student to forego the HS Shakespeare course in order to take a PSAT prep course? That’s outright bad, inappropriate counsel.
Who prompted the student to apply to a college to which he/she was unlikely to be admitted? That’s wrong — and easily solved. Don’t follow bad advice.
The SAT has long been considered misleading by informed analysts. Note how for decades it was called the “Scholastic Aptitude Test” — when, in fact, it is more accurately described as the “Scholastic Achievement Test.” Contrary to CEEB and SAT disclaimers over many years, prepping for the SAT tends to help.
The pains and crises in selective college admissions may be inflated by students as aggressive consumers — they wish to apply to many colleges, they wish to have an optimal number of choices (esp when they get numerous offers of admission) — so, they in part contribute to their own malaise.
Some of this stress will be shifted to the college admissions office — who ultimately must face the fact that they may not be a first or second choice among many academically strong applicants. If you do not believe me, ask a college to reveal how it fared among rival colleges for number-ratio of decisions to enroll among those who were cross applicants to both institutions. I doubt they will tell you — it can be awkward to their institutional image.
It’s underestandable that each generation of college applicants sees itself as special, and subjected to unprecedented selectivity. But, check out the accounts and admissions-applications data, circa 1957-1966 and one might reconsider this myopia of the present.
John Thelin, Professor at University of Kentucky, at 10:35 am EDT on September 24, 2007
These revelations shouldn’t surprise us. The transformation of the college-going process from one that is student oriented to one that is driven by an obsession with destinations has been taking place for some time. That kids recognize the difference between the rhetoric and the reality of the process, yet feel compelled to “fall in line,” is sad.
It’s easy to decry the seemingly mindless obsession with packaging kids for college that is alluded to in the article. On the other hand, as educators, we have the opportunity if not the responsibility to help them feel comfortable in their own skin. We can begin by reminding them that the pathway to happiness and success does not have to lead through the campuses of a select few institutions.
Regrettably, the whole of higher education is becoming tainted by the lack of transparency in the recruitment and selection processes. Much like other service providers in this space that are considered boorish and insensitive in their relationships with consumers, the institutions of higher ed are on the brink of losing their exulted status as educational icons.
Peter Van Buskirk, Author, Winning the College Admission Game, at 10:35 am EDT on September 24, 2007
No, focus group research is not definitive and, yes, the bulk of these findings reaffirm the obvious == that is one measure of the validity of this sort of qualitative research. But if the students were properly recruited and the discussions effectively organized and moderated, the transcripts could hint at alternatives to this two-sided rat race that merit further investigation. In my experience analyzing data from dozens of focus groups of college applicants, the candid and spontaneous observations of participants have yielded much telling and useful information.
Edward Hershey, principal at Edward Hershey & Associates, at 11:05 am EDT on September 24, 2007
As a past (though recent) participant in the process, I have to say that I agree with quite a few of the conclusions. It’s hard to come away from the admissions process not believing that it’s really designed to feed the rankings game. And having also worked as a GA in an admissions office, I can tell you that many students would be stunned to know how little of the material they prepare is actually used. So much of the application package for institution X is necessary only because institution Y thinks it’s necessary. One college doesn’t want to appear less selective to applicants than another college simply because it has an easier application!
There’s so much gamesmanship involved. Somebody try to convince me that the University of Chicago is less selective than Georgetown University simply because it admits a larger percentage of applicants. Then again, don’t try, because you can’t.
Jon L. Albee, Graduate Student at Rice University, at 11:20 am EDT on September 24, 2007
Mommy, Mr. Koopmann has a point that you need to address. There exists a fairly large industry of freelance writers and consultants who conduct studies not the sake of broadening academic discourse, but because they want to make money. Don’t get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with making money. I like money. However, part of the nature of their industry is staying in the public eye. To do this, they need to appeal to the people they think are their audience, and they often need to do it a lot.
Now, I don’t think about Mr. Thacker too much (and, as much as he might not like it, he is virtually unknown to me), but an analogous figure would be Ann Coulter. Intellectually she is definitely capable of understanding difficult and complex issue or even of doing research. (She is a lawyer.) However, if she were to expose her “audience” to the gray areas of life or the law they would get bored and stop paying attention to her. If they stop paying attention to her, she doesn’t sell books. If she doesn’t sell books, she doesn’t eat. There are certain similar dynamics in academe and the law (where staying visible is more important than doing things right), but it is much more muted.
A few dynamics arise from this situation. First of all, one needs to find a market that is not saturated. Second, few people really want to buy books written by people that vehemently disagree with their worldview. Instead, one needs to find a untapped market of public angst and tap it. That is what Mr. Thacker is doing. There is just about as angst over college admissions as there is over, say, cancer. By making himself into an “authority” on the issue, people might buy whatever he is selling so he won’t starve.
LArry, at 12:15 pm EDT on September 24, 2007
I have long thought that the most selective colleges — and perhaps any college with more admissible applicants than spaces available — should use a lottery system, rather than try to read the tea leaves of the essays, letters of rec. etc. People do understand lotteries, and it might be considered more fair.
elisabeth, at 12:30 pm EDT on September 24, 2007
Thanks for reprinting the news release from the Education Conservancy!
Oh, wait. You meant that to be a news story, an actual analysis of what is happening in the world! My mistake.
Hint: News stories, as opposed to news releases, quote people from both sides of an issue. Why not quote a Thacker critic?
David Kane, at 2:20 pm EDT on September 24, 2007
About the obsession with “elite colleges": I recall a study a few years ago that concluded that students accepted to “elite colleges” who choose to go elsewhere succeed as well after graduation as do those who go to those colleges. Smart does as smart is. I went to Harvard, where I got a mediocre education, but my son wisely is going to a small liberal arts college where education (not publication) is the highest priority for faculty. Of course, he won’t have a Harvard sweatshirt.
DE, professor at USC, at 8:10 pm EDT on September 24, 2007
Thanks, ‘DE’. The post reminds me of the conclusion of Pascarella & Terenzini in their 1991 book on the impact of college on students, finding (pg 509) that the net effect of college quality (college prestige) upon their graduates’ earnings was in the range of 1 to 1.5 percent (as estimated in the multiple regression models of various studies). Yes, one can get a mediocre education at an Ivy, or a truly great education at an ‘average’ college.
Tom Flint, Director of Accreditation at Kaplan University, at 11:20 am EDT on September 25, 2007
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
Roger Williams University is one of the top ranked liberal arts universities in the Northeast and is an Equal Opportunity ... see job
Today, NLU serves more than 12,000 students from five Chicago area campuses, in addition to campuses in three states and ... see job
Enrollment ... see job
Columbus State Community College invests in employee development by providing numerous resources, partnerships, training and ... see job
Everest Institute, a respected member of the Corinthian Colleges’ network of schools, is dedicated to helping students ... see job
SUNYIT is seeking an Admissions Counselor to participate in general work of the Admissions Office including all phases of ... see job
The Assistant Dean for Admissions and Student Affairs is the academic officer whose principal duties relate to the DDS ... see job
Everest College, a respected member of the Corinthian Colleges’ network of schools, is dedicated to helping students ... see job
As one of the largest degree-granting higher education systems in North America, DeVry University provides high-quality, ... see job
The Director of Admissions for the Women’s College at College of Notre Dame of Maryland provides leadership in the planning ... see job
Surprise!
Let’s grant that some kids are stressed out. No news here.
But why do we continue to give air time to organizations publishing “research” that advances their cause? It’s just more self-serving propaganda, in this instance from someone who has become famous for being famous.
There is money and reputation to be made by pandering to the paranoia of the masses, and Mr. Thacker does it as well as anyone.
Anton Koopmann, at 8:45 am EDT on September 24, 2007