You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
Should a student be admitted to college without ever applying to college? Until recently that question would have seemed absurd, perhaps even a joke. But the idea of having to apply for admission has become the newest front in the debate about whether we need a new college admissions paradigm.
Back in the summer I wrote a column suggesting that it may be time to rethink some of the conventions of the admissions process, many of which date back nearly a century. There has already been considerable debate about the role of standardized admission tests, with the pandemic strengthening and emboldening the test-optional movement and some colleges, such as the University of California system, abandoning the consideration of test scores altogether. It seems unlikely that college admission offices will ever worship at the altar of standardized testing the way they once did.
While testing has received the most attention, it is not the only piece in the admissions process that is receiving scrutiny. The legality of race-based admission preferences to achieve diversity will be determined by the Supreme Court. Last spring there were several voices arguing that reliance on letters of recommendation needs to be rethought, as they advantage students who are already advantaged by attending schools with low student-counselor ratios and cultures where college advising is the primary responsibility for counselors, rather than an afterthought. I have to admit that during the month of October I find the idea of getting rid of recommendation letters particularly appealing. More recently, a report argued that colleges should give less credence to calculus as an expectation for applicants.
Is the next big thing making “applicants” an outdated term? Probably not, but there is a movement afoot to change the relationship, and maybe even the power dynamics, between colleges and prospective students.
Several weeks ago, during the National Association for College Admission Counseling conference in Houston, the marketing and enrollment services vendor EAB announced that it had acquired Concourse. Concourse is one of several players trying to develop a direct admissions process, where students wouldn’t apply to college but would rather post academic and personal profiles that would be reviewed by admission officers at partner colleges, resulting in admission and financial aid offers. Concourse aims to be “flipping the script on traditional admissions.” EAB’s purchase of Concourse suggests that direct admission is not a whim and that there is money to be made.
In 2021, EAB and Concourse worked together on a pilot program, Greenlight Match, where first-generation and low-income students in the Chicago area created free profiles on the Concourse platform, generating offers of admission and aid from eight partner colleges. An EAB press release about the acquisition of Concourse reported that more than 650 students received nearly 2,000 admission offers and more than $135 million in scholarships and financial aid. The plan is to expand Greenlight Match to benefit 13,000 students next year by adding six other cities—Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Minneapolis/St. Paul, New York and Philadelphia. Concourse has also had a similar arrangement for international students.
Is this the future of college admission? It’s hard to imagine that elite, selective colleges will abandon requiring students to complete applications for admission. But direct admission is an interesting idea that may work for students lacking access to savvy college counseling and colleges struggling to expand their outreach.
But is it a good idea? Answering that question requires determining what the college admissions process should represent.
I have always believed that the college search and application processes should be part of a larger journey of self-understanding and discernment, where a student has the opportunity and obligation to determine who they are and what they want from life. The students are going to live with the consequences of their college choice, so they should be the ones taking ownership of the decision.
I recognize that may be aspirational, and perhaps even delusional. Several loyal “ECA” readers have argued that it is ridiculous to expect teenagers to determine the right college fit, that they lack the maturity, self-knowledge and experience to do so. I don’t want to believe that, but will also be the first to admit that I may be either a Pollyanna or a dinosaur. I also recognize that I have worked mostly with students from privileged backgrounds and that a different kind of admissions process may better serve students from families where going to college is not easy or even expected.
Is this truly a radical change, or is it an instance of college admission catching up with changes in technology? I remember when we moved in a very short period of time from paper to online applications and how strange that felt. Now I wouldn’t know how to deal with a paper application. We now have apps that have changed how dating and job hunting take place. Should admission be any different?
Is dating an appropriate metaphor for the college admissions process? We can certainly argue that applying for college is similar to dating. Curated applications resemble dating profiles designed to create an image that may be an idealized portrayal of reality to impress colleges with more suitors than spaces on their dance card. The vast majority of colleges that are not highly rejective spend millions of dollars on marketing and tuition discounts to get students to swipe right. Will platforms like Concourse make that mating dance simpler and less costly for all involved?
I will be interested in seeing how well Concourse and its competitors work as they move beyond pilot programs. The promise is that direct admission is also more equitable admission, but it is too early to tell whether tuition-driven colleges struggling for survival will seek out students from economically deprived backgrounds or make direct admission offers primarily to students who help them meet their revenue objectives. I hope the latter is not the case. If platforms like Concourse can connect students with colleges more effectively and equitably than the current admissions process, that would be a welcome change, or at least addition.
Is it time to flip the admissions script? I have always believed that applying to college and college admission should be Goldilocks processes, neither too hard nor too easy. The current application process seems too hard and unwieldy, but direct admission seems too easy. Can we devise an application process that’s just right?
