STUDENT-CENTERED SOLUTIONS FOR COLLEGE PLANNING

In my last posting, I introduced Jean and her growing concern about her competitiveness at the colleges to which she had applied. She had applied Early Action to one of them and a subsequent deferral letter had shaken her confidence. This led to an examination of the factors or potential landmines that may have influenced the admission decision and could, if not corrected, prove to be problematic with her other applications as well.

In Jean’s case, when the admission officers asked, “If we admit her, what do we get,” nothing jumped out at them. They saw a good student with solid involvement outside of the classroom who didn’t present a compelling reason to be admitted into the class. She had failed to project herself as a potential contributor to the athletic program or make a convincing statement about the relevance of her leadership.

What’s worse, because she had not visited the school’s campus, admission officers could find no evidence of her interest in their school when they asked, “What is the likelihood that she will come?” Uncertain of her level of interest and likely contributions, it is reasonable to assume that the next question of Jean—should she demonstrate need as a financial aid candidate—would be, “Is this someone in whom we are prepared to make a financial investment?”

By the way, I need to clarify a comment made in my last post. In assessing the manner in which Jean presented her application, I intimated that indicating an interest in financial aid on the application for admission could be prejudicial to the outcome of the application. Checking “Yes” to the question, “Do you intend to apply for financial aid?” should not hurt students in the admission process as that response alone is not an accurate indicator of the student’s financial need. If and when colleges discriminate on matters of family contribution and/or financial need, they do it at the back end of the process when they can compare the academic and financial credentials for all potentially admitted students.

It wasn’t long before Jean and her parents began to see the logic of the decision-making process at the selective schools to which she was applying. They could now rationalize the EA decision. More importantly, the despair that had hovered over the start of the conversation gave way to an excited sense of possibility as she began to develop a new “To Do” list. Even at this time of the year, Jean realized that it is not too late to get on the radar screens of the schools to which she had applied. Specifically, she saw the need to eliminate the perception that her interest in a given school is random while conveying a sense of the passion and talent within her that would set her apart from the rest of the competition.

Jean made immediate plans to visit the campuses of the “high priority” schools on her list and to attempt to introduce herself to the person(s) responsible for recruiting in her region. Moreover, she is making sure they have her most recent grades as well as documentation of a couple of honors that have come her way since she submitted her applications. She also took heart in the possibility that she could still contact the coaches at some of the smaller colleges on her list and make sure they got the DVDs of her athletic performance.

I admire Jean for her response to the situation. Rather than feeling that all is lost with regard to her college future, she is taking steps to affect the outcomes. Realizing that applying to college is a process and not an event, she is asserting herself. In doing so, she will eliminate the randomness that might otherwise be associated with her application.

Will this new-found self-advocacy assure Jean admission to her favorite schools? Not necessarily. It will, however, give her the chance to compete that she deserves. At the very least, the schools on her list now have reason to pause in considering her possible contributions to the communities they are building. Now, they will have a better idea of what they get should they admit Jean—and they’ll have more confidence that hers is a serious interest that could result in her enrollment if accepted. And, if they value her for what she has to offer, they will be more likely to invest in her with financial aid and/or scholarships.

Like Jean, you need to be honest with yourself about the nature of the competition as you apply for admission and take charge of the process. Don’t assume that because your credentials might match those on the academic profiles of the colleges to which you are applying that your admission is assured. Rather, reach out (appropriately) to decision-makers (admission officers) at the schools that are important to you and be sure to tell your story. Give the admission officers every reason to want to include you in the communities they are building as they admit their entering classes!

Two days ago I found myself talking with Jean and her parents about her college future. Jean had submitted six applications including one for Early Action consideration. Now, however, a deferral letter from the EA school had shaken her confidence. While she wasn’t hysterical, it was clear that Jean was questioning herself. Would she get in? Could she get in? And what about her chances of finding admission to the other, equally selective universities to which she had applied?

These were all good questions. While Jean possesses the academic credentials to be competitive for admission at any college or university in the country, the deferral letter had left her wondering what it would take to get in and had she done all she could do. I couldn’t find fault with the schools she had chosen nor the process she had followed in choosing them. On the surface, they all made sense for her—they were good fits. Digging deeper, however, I was able to uncover potential landmines or factors that might have influenced the outcome of her EA application. If not addressed, they would certainly have an impact on the outcomes of her other applications.

First, although Jean and her parents had been evaluating college options since her 9th grade year, she hadn’t visited any of the campuses in the last eighteen months. More specifically, she had never formally visited the school to which she applied EA. Despite her passion for the place, its admission officers had no way of knowing about her interest.

Second, she had not sufficiently established her “hook”—the credential that might set her apart from her peers in a tight competition. A student leader and two-sport athlete with aspirations for playing in college, Jean had not made contact with college athletic recruiters in her sports.

Finally, Jean had indicated on her application for admission that she would be a candidate for financial aid—a factor that could complicate things even at an institution that is reputedly “need blind” in the admission process.

As I talked with Jean, I wanted her to understand how the EA university might have reacted to her application. While she is a great candidate academically, admission officers at the schools she is considering can afford to look for more as she competes with thousands of others who look just like her. In making its decisions, the admission committee is rarely asking: “Is she good enough?” Rather it makes a series of value judgments: “Who among these great candidates do we value most? What does this candidate bring us as we attempt to build a new community?”

In my next posting, I will reveal the steps Jean took to make sure these questions were adequately addressed in her applications.