The admissions process inspires strange behavior among mothers and fathers of applicants. Or as Jennifer Delahunty describes it: “This whole last dance of parenting turns all of us—no matter how smart or experienced—into stumbling idiots.”
That’s a line from I’m Going to College—Not You, a new collection of essays edited by Ms. Delahunty, dean of admissions and financial aid at Kenyon College, in Ohio. The book includes contributions from prominent writers, including Anna Quindlen, Joe Queenan, and Neal Pollack. The latter describes how, just hours after his son’s birth, his mother started talking about how the child would one day attend Harvard, Yale, or Princeton. Really, is there anywhere else worth dreaming about?
In all seriousness, the roots of college angst go deep down into the parental psyche, which Ms. Delahunty explores in her introduction: “Acceptance of a son or daughter by a top college, as defined by the prestige mongers, has become the coin of the realm, the ultimate ‘good parenting’ seal of approval. The better the bumper sticker, the better the parent, right?”
Wrong, these essayists reveal. It’s a lesson some apparently learned the hard way. One author describes the impossible search for “Utopia U.” Another explains the difficulty of allowing a son to “individuate” when weighing his college options. In one essay, Ms. Delahunty and her oldest daughter, Emma Britz, describe the different ways they experienced the same events, such as campus tours (if you think teenagers want to hear about retention rates, well, you just might be an admissions dean).
On Wednesday, I caught up with Ms. Delahunty and asked her about lessons learned from both sides of the admissions desk.
Q. What did you learn as the mother of two college applicants?
A. I saw how difficult it was not to interfere and not micromanage the process, to put it in their hands and wait to be asked certain questions. There’s a direct relationship between parental interaction and student stress. We’re the ones adding to that stress, and that’s what does them in.
Q. And how did those lessons shape you as an admissions dean?
A. I became very empathetic with the parents with furrowed brows walking by my office. There’s no script for this process. Today’s parents didn’t do this with their parents, so there’s a lack of modeling behavior there. There’s a culture of overparenting in this culture, and this doesn’t serve the process of the college-choice journey very well.
Q. So what can colleges do about that?
A. I send parents 10 tips for the college-search process. It’s been well received, and I think I’ve hit a bit of a vein there. I suggest that they talk to their son or daughter about something other than the college-search process during their senior year. And don’t use your pen on their application essays—this is their first attempt at self-definition, and you should support it. Ask them to participate in organizing the tour is good, so they feel like this is not something done to them, but something they share in. And avoid public displays of prestige, the cocktail-party bragging stuff, because your children are listening, and they’ll think those are the only things important to you.
Q. Parents are the focus here, but what about the things colleges do that contribute to the confusion and anxiety you describe? How much are institutions responsible for this?
A. We are culpable. We have upped the ante with this whole arc of marketing. We’ve had 20 years of this amped-up competition, and it’s kind of like a gyroscope—it’s got its own momentum. We have an obligation to serve the institution at the same time we’re serving the student, and sometimes it’s impossible to do both. So we have to acknowledge our responsibility in this. We have to take a chill pill ourselves while telling parents to do the same thing.
Q. You describe the importance of being supportive but not overbearing, of being “booster rocket” but not a “helicopter parent.” I wondered about students who have what one could call “satellite parents”—you know, who are distant and removed?
A. I realize we’re just talking about the top layer of parenting here—it’s a very limited audience. The majority of the kids in this country don’t have enough parental support, and that’s a problem. We know from research that parental support is one of the key indicators of success in college. So I see this tension between too much and too little parenting. I couldn’t get an author of a first-generation student to write about this process. I tried and tried, but couldn’t find anybody. Those are the kids who really need a book, about how to parent themselves through this process. Maybe that’s a sequel.
30 Responses to The ‘Stumbling Idiots’ of College Admissions
11147066 - August 26, 2010 at 8:43 am
There is only one true statement in this self-serving piece: “We are culpable.” College admissions/marketing is a business in which admissions officers will resort to any aggressive practice, including outright deception, to attract “customers.” Of course, this is a phenomenon of the upper middle class. Most students do not even apply to “selective” colleges. If admissions offices wanted to start with a clean slate they could end: misleading letters encouraging students to apply in order to lower the college’s acceptance rate, early admissions, subjective interviews with unqualified alumni, and waitlists with thousands of students. They could publish clear and transparent data about their school and their admissions statistics. They could require students to submit their personal essays from a testing center, avoiding the inevitable parental involvement. They could stop claiming to use “holistic” criteria for selecting students since this is a cover for inscrutable and obscure methods of obtaining (“crafting”)a balanced class. They could be truly need blind by not asking up front if a student requires aid. Finally, colleges could list the names and credentials of their admissions officers and regional representatives on their websites. Many parents fail to realize that, while the dean or director of admissions usually has an educational background, most of the employees actually reading students’ applications have fewer academic and professional qualifications than the average high school teacher or guidance counselor. The complete lack of professionalism in this field would be an excellent subject of an article by the CHE.Emily
drewkam - August 26, 2010 at 9:13 am
Wow. Bitter much, Emily?
11147066 - August 26, 2010 at 9:40 am
In response to drewkam’s question, which I suppose he/she believes to be clever: are you a parent and what is your profession? I am a parent and a high school teacher. I see every day the effect that the unbalanced college admissions process has on students. The worst result is engendering a premature cynicism. Of course students realize that competition in any field is not necessarily fair. But they also are aware of the hypocrisy of the admissions game. They are repeatedly told to “be yourself.” Choose activities that interest you, not those that appear impressive. Write your own essay. They then see the reality, as colleges ignore their own directives while maintaining that the system is essentially balanced. The reforms that could be put into place to improve the application and selection process are simple. The fact is that the current system benefits the colleges, or at least they believe that it does, if only in the short term. The rest of us, including educational professionals, play along because demands for change would have to be consistent and unified. Undoubtedly many other professionals in other fields also see similar opportunities for change that are ignored. It is always worse when kids are involved. Rather than making a snide and personal suggestion, perhaps drewkam might think why one would defend the status quo. Don’t the hundreds of articles and books that appear about its shortcomings imply that we could make things better for our young adults? He might not agree with my specific suggestions but other educators and parents have offered similar solutions.Emily
goxewu - August 26, 2010 at 9:50 am
Emily cites 14 specific examples of admissions malfeasances (misleading letters soliciting applications, early admissions, subjective interviews conducted by unqualified alums, large waitlists, lack of published data about admission stats and practices, probably-parent-helped admissions essays, hiding behind “holistic” criteria and “crafting” classes, not proceeding initially need-blind, and not publishing the names and credentials of their admissions officers), and she’s dismissed as “bitter.”Wow. Blame the messenger much, drewkam?
drewkam - August 26, 2010 at 10:23 am
Nah, just sounds like Emily’s child couldn’t get into Colby or something.
honore - August 26, 2010 at 10:34 am
Emily, you have put many well-deserved nails into that stinking coffin, but having worked extensively in and with Ivy, R-1, Big 10 and California wannabe “admissions” offices (those embedded in a specific college or a centralized university-wide offic), I would add a couple of additional nails that are more than overdue and well-deserved.1. stop the “we-value-diversity-at-all-costs” bullshit. trolling ghettoes so that the school can brag about its “diversity” applicant pool is grossly dishonest, especially, when:a)you don’t admit themb)the ones you admit without any recognition of college-preparedness, flunk-out after 1 semester.2. do not allow these Type-A wannabe admissions drones to have any contact with prospective students or their families. Without exception they are more of a turn-off with their constantly bubbling (and FAKE) school spirit. Assign them to filing and photo-copy tasks, but NOT to actually meeting prospective students. Employ students who actually work hard to stay at school and would be better sources of information for students/families.3. fire all the current admissions “advocates” who use their position to enforce their own specific brand of racist, “gonna-get-duh-man” world views. I’ve seen and heard these parrots in action and it is indefensible that they are allowed to wield the power they do in crucial admissions decisions. their typically majority status supervisors turn a blind eye, so that they don’t have to risk being accused of the “R” word4. TRAIN these admissions drones to actually HELP students and their families connect with the appropriate FINANCIAL AID officers so that the student/parents can actually find all the financial resources to ACTUALLY enroll. A pretty admissions letter isn’t worth more than birdcage liner if the student’s financial aid package never happens.5. Hold Admissions directors/deans accountable for the decisions that their underlings make.6.Get rid of all the misleading websites and photos that make campus X look like a United Nations “diversity-gone-wild” orgy, when the REALITY on campus is quite another one. Refer to UW-Madison a few years ago for that disgraceful abuse of misrepresenting the racial reality of the campus and misleading the unsuspecting prospective applicant.And, Emily, DO ignore the detractors here who would rather that the academy stay just as it is. You are NOT bitter because you point out the worts and scabs. They are very limited in their grasp of the overall situation and have far too much time to waste on their lap-tops. Good work!!!
garciad - August 26, 2010 at 10:37 am
The “admissions malfeasances” being cited (OK, we are getting away from the content of the article, I suppose…) have an association, for me, with private institutions. Whether you see these as good or bad practices, as an administrator at a public institution I’d prefer some distinctions here.
david13 - August 26, 2010 at 11:06 am
Emily and goxewu: As a professional in this area, I would also ask that you try not to lump ever college admissions office together. In regards to the issues you complain about, only two apply to my university (wait-list situation and personal essays straight from students), while the rest do not. The wait-list is there to help the students, as many colleges do not know how many enrollees they will have, and might have space availability they did not know about. As for the essay suggestion, this is a financial and processing nightmare that is not possible at this time unless you go with the SAT essays, as the ACT information is given in such a horrible delivery method.As for honore, any person that refers to a group of people as “drones”, as well as using offensive terms such as “trolling ghettos” and “gonna-get-duh-man world views” really cannot be taken seriously in this discussion. It sounds like you have a great deal of bitterness about specific issues you have dealt with, but please do not push these onto all admission offices.
11147066 - August 26, 2010 at 11:55 am
I would like to clarify the fact that in no way was I referring to racial diversity in college admissions. I would be appalled if any reader believed that! The references I made to “crafting” a class apply to much more specific and arcane qualities that a university may be seeking, anything from athletics to “leadership” to niche activities for which each school expects a specific number from each geographic area. Early decision, which I criticized, is even more unfavorable to minority and less affluent students. The deceptive direct mailings I dislike are sent to kids from all racial groups. Again, I believe these practices, designed specifically to lower admissions rates and increase yield (early admissions, waitilisting highly qualified applicants) are unfair to everyone.I do not question that waitlists are necessary. They do not need to include more students than the entire freshman class, colleges do not need to maintain the waitlist for three months or more.It is certainly true that public colleges are much less guilty of these practices than private ones. I should have stated that.Emily
bekka_alice - August 26, 2010 at 3:37 pm
Thanks, David13, because I was about to add 7. Stop demeaning everyone in the process – maybe if you actually spoke to and worked with “admissions drones” you’d have a little more respect for the demands of and their response to the demands of their positions. Helping them instead of berating them would be a more effective approach, and tarring them all with such a collectively generic brush does more to indicate that you have zero awareness of their individual qualifications than to say that those qualifications are inadequate.
goxewu - August 26, 2010 at 4:05 pm
Re #8:It never fails: Somebody makes a cogent criticism (well expressed, with specifics) of a pervasively flawed system, and a defender rises up to say “Don’t lump every [X] in that system together,” and claims his/her school to be an exception. Good for the exception, but the admissions system is still a) too opaque (especially the unavailability of admissions officials’ names and credentials*), b) too subjective (“holistic,” “crafting,” etc.), c) too open to ghostwriting, and d) exploitative (mailers, waiting lists).It’s the size of the waiting lists, not the mere presence of them. And the surest way to solve the ghostwritten personal essay problem is to do away with them. (Of course, if a school does away with the SAT and/or ACT–which I think is a bad idea–they won’t have any essays to judge.) So far, nobody’s refuted or defended the anonymity of admissions officials passing judgment. * I wouldn’t call them names such as “drones,” though; admissions people are just hard workers in a bad system.And, re #5:Wow. Play Dr. Laura on blog threads much, drewkam?
ikant - August 26, 2010 at 6:26 pm
Why don’t we all worry less about where, or if, our children go to college, and more about helping them develop into moral, critical thinking humans? This whole thing seems to be the product of some very screwed-up priorities.
ahoutman - August 26, 2010 at 9:01 pm
The comments, although somewhat tangential to the article, have been very interesting. The last question was my favorite of the interview. I have seen very little of this alleged “over-parenting” that is so railed about in the media, neither as a professor nor as the parent of a child heading for university this month. Certainly I could come up with a couple of amusing examples of “helicopter parenting”, and it’s not as amusing to talk about children with parents who just don’t care, but that doesn’t mean we are experiencing some kind of an epidemic.
student4life - August 27, 2010 at 12:48 pm
I think a valid point was brought up earlier. The fact that the ones making the decsion of addmittance may actually possess the same credentials as the one applying offers to a very flawed system. In reality, at best most admissions staff have a BA, the same degree those applying to school will have in four years. I realize we all have to start somewhere, but higher education can make a stance on the quality of student accepted, we first need to look at the quality of the one doing the accepting. Are all admission staffers in the wrong? That is highly doubtful, but there seem to be more than not.
david13 - August 27, 2010 at 2:19 pm
goxewu: Actually, the criticisms did not have specifics, only generalities, and what I gave was specifics to show the flaws in the argument. Of all the colleges out there, College Board states that just above 400 have either an EA or ED admission system (and the argument was just about ED), so this argument is about a limited group. Then go to wait-lists, and hardly any have wait-lists, and generally, these are small (with only a few going overboard), and with a response rate that probably is between 50-70%, it shrinks dramatically. I can go on with the criticism of the arguments, especially ones without any support such as the academic background of admission counselors, but I will pass.
11147066 - August 27, 2010 at 2:58 pm
In response to david13. If it is true that “only” 400 colleges have ED or EA, those are generally the more selective colleges.Many colleges accept a large majority or virtually all of their applicants, so the issue of giving preference to early applicants is moot. I don’t know where you are getting your waitlist statistics. Not only the most selective, but most so-called second, third and below tier schools have lengthy waitlists. Most of the students placed on them have almost no chance of being admitted. They are an insurance policy for a school that is afraid of a low yield, a way to maintain the intense desirability of the school, and a way to mollify certain categories of students. (The admissions directors, for example, of both UPenn and Duke stated this. In an article in the NYT Gutentag of Duke also casually stated that the waitlist included students whose applications his office did not have time to evaluate). As for the professional and academic credentials of admissions officers, you have not offered any evidence to refute my suggestion that many, certainly not all, have little or no training in an educational field. Emily
bdbailey - August 27, 2010 at 4:45 pm
As the parent of a high school senior, I believe I have identified the root cause of skyrocketing costs in higher education – postage.
goxewu - August 27, 2010 at 5:38 pm
Re #18:”…what I gave was specifics” [sic]Those numbers (400 schools with EA and ED, and 50-70 percent response rate to [albeit only a "probable" stat] waiting lists) weren’t in play before comment #18, so I’m a bit confused as to david13′s saying he “gave” them previously. Moreover, being specific doesn’t mean only offering statistics, and what Emily offered were specific flaws contributing to the overall bad state of the college admissions system.And david13 should, by all means, give us the argument in support of the academic backgrounds of admissions counselors (who apparently will still remain, as per Emily’s original criticism, anonymous). I mean, why hold back?
goxewu - August 27, 2010 at 5:41 pm
Sorry. Re #15. (I’m not THAT in love with my own sonorous words.)
david13 - August 27, 2010 at 11:18 pm
Emily and goxewu: Actually, it is fairly easy to do some limited research on wait-list, especially with the article you referenced that quoted Gutentag, and it gives some information on a very small number of colleges that have large wait-lists. As well, if you check out some colleges (U Florida for instance), they have gotten rid of the wait-list and admitted a group for spring. Again, do not use a small group of college admission offices (generally the most selective) to describe the whole. Yes, you will have a few absurd wait-list numbers, but that is the exception, not the norm.As for the academic credentials, I could say that you did not prove your case, as you gave no examples at all, as it is easy to make statements, but much harder to prove it. But what I can do is give you specific examples from 2 minutes of searching. Check out the U Alabama admissions website, where they give the backgrounds of their admission staff with academic credentials. How about U Delaware, where the give individual profiles of the admissions team with academic credentials. Go to the web sites and you will see that a number of colleges list their admission staff, and many (but not all) will have profiles.Is that good enough for you?
david13 - August 27, 2010 at 11:52 pm
By the way, the 400 or so EA and/or ED programs I mentioned were in the first message by Emily, see “early admissions”, so that is where I got it. And as for these, I am guessing you have an issue only with ED programs, as EA is just for early notification, and generally does not use different standards than RD.The whole theme of the responses by a few people reminds me of the story of shark attacks in SuperFreakonomics. There is a great deal of fear and nervousness about shark attacks, even though there are on average only 60-70 documented attacks per year worldwide, and on average less than one death per year. Elephant attack deaths average over 200 per year. But hey let’s panic over the shark attacks (or admissions issues) because they are in the news yearly, and make good headlines, no matter the facts.
daaroncc - August 28, 2010 at 4:13 pm
What bothers me most about the comments is the attack on the ability of admission officers to make decisions on whether or not students get in.1. Rarely does an individual admission officer have the power to admit/deny a student. They usually go by guidelines set by the dean/admission committee based on grades, test scores, essay quality, etc…2. If you read a couple hundred essays and have a BA, you could probably tell the good ones from the bad ones.3. When I started as an admission officer, I made $27,500 per year. With a job that is generally thankless (and often attacked by those outside of it) and requires a significant amount of travel, you now want to include further credentials. It would be difficult to find/recruit people at those salary levels. That means we’d have to pay admission officers more, which means schools would need to cost more, and the system would become even more unbalanced towards those with financial means.If you want to argue that you could simply pay top level administrators less, then you should also argue that schools could play the lottery with hopes to win. That would be equally likely.
goxewu - August 28, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Re #21:* I’m willing to stand corrected, but I can’t find any numbers in Emily’s first “message.”* Lots of colleges and universities in the U.S., and three state universities (Florida, Alabama, Delaware), don’t constitute much of a counter-example. Here, we probably need a stat table and not just personal experience and single instances (which just might be the exceptions that prove the rule).* OK, shark attacks and elephant attacks occur much less often than people think. But what if college admission problems are more like something else in the news: home foreclosures? Re #22:* (2) “If you read a couple hundred essays and have a BA, you could probably tell the good ones from the bad ones.” I don’t think so.* (3) rather makes a case for why (lousy pay, thankless work, too much travel) admissions officials really aren’t very good, doesn’t it?
david13 - August 28, 2010 at 11:57 pm
goxewu: That is the whole problem I have with your argument, that you and Emily throw out “problems” without backing up the information with any sort of facts. As for the colleges with counselor information, I found these within three minutes. I am guessing you can find out the academic credentials for a wide range of admissions offices by just looking, but unfortunately, Emily did not do this. All she did was make blanket statements without any real data or research. You are okay with the lack of data from Emily, but you dismiss my information because you disagree with mine point of view. If you are going to make these type of blanket statements, at least back it up with actual data!
goxewu - August 29, 2010 at 10:59 am
Re #24:* Still don’t know where david13 got the alleged numbers in Emily’s first “message.”* I tried a three-minute drill: one Ivy, one Big Ten state university, one small state university in a system, all off the top of my head. Only the last divulged the names of any admissions officials, but with no credentials attached. And from the capsule descriptions, the admissions officials seemed to be mere clerks, in charge of keeping the records in order and answering FAQs, rather than having a hand in any admissions decisions.* I suspect that david13 knew exactly what three schools to go to in order to get the results that he wanted. BTW, I spent a few minutes surfing the University of Florida’s website–which david13 touted for having gotten rid of its waiting list–and couldn’t find anything more specific for the admissions office than the office’s contact numbers. So, since UF fits one of david13′s criteria and not another, I suspect he, being in the admissions-business know, is rather cherry-picking his examples.
david13 - August 29, 2010 at 1:58 pm
goxeuw: Actually, I did not know where to go, I just selected a few and found specific information. As well, I did not say that each school would have specific information, only that some do and some do not, but to make blanket statements without knowledge is a poor way to defend your premise. As normal for you it seems, you are making a judgement without knowledge. Accusing a person of something without and facts seems to fit your profile. Again, what I am saying is actually do research, get facts, and then base your ideas off of that. As for each college’s admission staff, I am guessing that a majority of the departments use this as a recruitment tool, and it depends upon the individual office. I took another two minutes and looked at two colleges in California (I live nowhere near there and have no connections to it). USC lists their staff and educational backgrounds,and UCLA does not. What I am saying is not that every school has this info, but that a commenter should not state that admissions offices do not this information without actually looking for it! As a teacher, Emily should know to do her homework first!As for the UF wait-list issue, I believe I read about it in the news within the last 6 months or so. Again, do research, then argue. I am guessing this will be my last post on this issue, as it does not seem like you are adding anything to the actual discussion, but more throwing out insults without actual knowledge.
11147066 - August 29, 2010 at 5:08 pm
No one is “throwing out insults,” David. There must be many admissions officers who are qualified for their positions. As I stated earlier, state colleges have a somewhat different agenda than private ones and are generally less prone to deceptive practices since their sources of funding are different. If you look at the most selective colleges, the Ivy League and others, your will see the greatest secrecy about relevant statistics and qualifications, or even identity, of admissions officers. Certainly,most students do not apply to these schools. Most attend large public unversities, only a small number of which are selective. Since you are accusing others of picking random schools and facts, I suggest checking the admissions sites of Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Columbia, Penn and Dartmouth. You will find that most list no names for admissions officers, while others list names without credentials. A simple google search of those listed will put in perspective some of my allegations. I am not suggesting there are not other institutions with different approaches and personnel. As for your complaint that it is unrealistic to expect better credentials from a profession which is so poorly compensated financially, I agree with you one hundred percent. That is part of my point. For an excellent if dated perspective on early decision/admissions I suggest reading James Fallows’ 2000 article in the Atlantic Monthly. It gives an overview of the history and development of early admissions and other practices. Although it dates from 2000 it explains many of the controversies that continue today. Emily
hugyourcounselor - September 7, 2010 at 2:04 pm
Let me paint a picture of a real admissions “drone”. We actually prefer to be called counselors, but that’s another matter.At my university, we are required to have masters, but are paid like we only have bachelors degrees.We are on the road up to 10 weeks a semester, making it impossible to have a personal life.We have to deal with entitled teenagers, rude parents, in (sometimes, not always) stressed out guidance counselors, who we try our best to work with.Some of us have panic buttons in our office, just in case a parent “goes too far”.Our staff is too small to do interviews, and we actually hand read each application, which means that occasionally I work 50 hours a week.I am not whining, or making excuses, but sometimes parents and guidance counselors forget that we are real people, and not drones handling paperwork. We actually care for the students we work with, and sometimes, we do take it personally if a student doesn’t gain admission.Think about that, Emily.
rts6677 - September 10, 2010 at 10:31 pm
THANK YOU, EMILY! After going through the college admissions process for the last two years with my oldest two sons, I appreciate you summing up my frustrations with the admissions process in such an articulate and succinct manner. You write well and truthfully, and you speak for many of us. The Chronicle should hire you.
dhenderson46 - September 17, 2010 at 6:48 am
Many thanks to Emily for her cogent comments. I find the rash of ostensibly sympathetic but essentially pejorative characterizations of parents by admissions professionals to be an exercise in diverting attention from the culpability of colleges in creating a highly commercialized and self-serving admissions process. We all know examples of helicopter parents, but most parents do not fit this stereotype and are merely trying their best to help their children navigate a system that is anything but transparent. Colleges create and control the admissions process, and only colleges can change it. Parents respond to the system they are faced with.