next »

[acrimone]

I hope this is the right place to post this.

We've started getting admissions packets in already, and my colleagues and I are having a very interesting debate about one of our applicants who actually has completed her application packet already.  She's an odd one, but clearly at least a potential superstar.  (Maybe i just like her because she reminds me of me?)

She is, if her recommenders are to be believed, one of those Horatio Alger stories.  Didn't do so well in college, but got at least minimally acceptable grades in philosophy (3.27).  Nevertheless, her profs apparently think she's the bee's knees.  Then, after a missing two years in her records, she was tackled an MBA/JD at a top 20 school (in a sudden turn of academic performance, in the top five of her class at both schools).  She's been doing consulting for the last eight years, apparently quite successfully.  She has absolutely perfect GRE scores (1600/6.0) for what that's worth, and her statement of purpose is, if not necessarily the most focused and professional thing I've ever read, gripping, informative, full of ambitious idealism, and extraordinarily well-written.

I and three others have already decided we want her in barring some revelation that she's cheating on her GRE's.  Her writing sample is, if not the best, probably in the top 20% or so of the one's I've read.  That's impressive considering it was written 14 years after her last philosophy class, while holding down a full time job.

Two of our colleagues are virulently opposed to her application.  They don't like the fact that the undergrad grades really aren't there (although she went to a fine school), and they're very suspicious about what the missing two years in the cv are.  They've said that the woman wouldn't be able to socialize with the rest of the graduate students because of all her experience, and they are also extremely troubled by the fact that only one undergraduate professor wrote a letter of recommendation.  The others were by a law professor and one of her professional colleagues.  The letters are extremely strong on personal qualities and intellectual energy and inquisitiveness, but are lukewarm as far as actual scholarship.  The doubters cite this in conjunction with the general reputation of both Business and Law school to argue that she's probably not really that sophisticated of a thinker.  (I have to say, though, she's at least a better writer than some of my colleagues.)  For the record, we're an extremely selective program, fairly highly ranked, and the aplpicant's undergrad GPA would probably be the worst in the admitted class if we let her in.

What do you do with such a student?  If we can't get one of those two dissenters to come aorund, odds are that she'll not make the cut.  Thankfully we don't need to worry about this until February, really, but the fact that the application was in and completed this early has also raised some concerns that maybe this person is too high strung for academia (which I find to be a silly objection, but there you are...).  I just thought this was interesting enough to throw out to the forum and see what comes in.  I am always fascinated by what I like to call "color" candidates (that's not a race reference) and their ability to start arguments.

[histgradstudent]

She is, if her recommenders are to be believed, one of those Horatio Alger stories.  Didn't do so well in college, but got at least minimally acceptable grades in philosophy (3.27).  Nevertheless, her profs apparently think she's the bee's knees.  Then, after a missing two years in her records, she was tackled an MBA/JD at a top 20 school (in a sudden turn of academic performance, in the top five of her class at both schools).  She's been doing consulting for the last eight years, apparently quite successfully.  She has absolutely perfect GRE scores (1600/6.0) for what that's worth, and her statement of purpose is, if not necessarily the most focused and professional thing I've ever read, gripping, informative, full of ambitious idealism, and extraordinarily well-written.



Two of our colleagues are virulently opposed to her application.  They don't like the fact that the undergrad grades really aren't there (although she went to a fine school), and they're very suspicious about what the missing two years in the cv are.  They've said that the woman wouldn't be able to socialize with the rest of the graduate students because of all her experience, and they are also extremely troubled by the fact that only one undergraduate professor wrote a letter of recommendation.

Some of these objections seem a bit strange. If she went to college that long ago, it seems reasonable that a reccomendation from an undergrad advisor wouldn't be all that relevant. Ditto actually for the somewhat low grades if what she has done since then is impressive. Don't see the issue there.

As far as her not being able to socialize with the other students...Is this an appropiate thing for an admissions comittee to worry about? I'm in a very friendly, social program, but obviously not everyone is always hanging out at the bar together. Those of us in our twenties tend to hang out more with each other than with some of the older students who might be married and have more responsibilites outside of school, but I have good friendly relationships with a lot of these people. They aren't pariahs or anything. But who cares at any rate. If the concern was that someone was going to be an unpleasant or disruptive influence that would be one thing, but I don't see why socializing with other students should have much to do with an admissions decision.

[acrimone]

Ahh... context. 

We've had a few years of trouble with graduate cohorts that didn't get along very well, and that made the department environment a little chilly.

That's what that's about, and that's why there's the possibility people might listen to that objection.

[minor_t]

 

Two of our colleagues are virulently opposed to her application.  They don't like the fact that the undergrad grades really aren't there (although she went to a fine school), and they're very suspicious about what the missing two years in the cv are.  They've said that the woman wouldn't be able to socialize with the rest of the graduate students because of all her experience, and they are also extremely troubled by the fact that only one undergraduate professor wrote a letter of recommendation. 

They're concerned about grades from 12-15 years ago??  I'm truly surprised.  She got her act together after her disappointing undergrad records and "there's no angel like a sinner reformed."  She sounds like a good candidate to me.

Why would she want letters from her undergrad faculty anyway - their recommendations would be from a "previous life" and the faculty may not even be there and available to write letters.  Much better that she should get letters from the professional school.

And what do they think happened in those two years?  Jail?  If so, they can check the bar to see if her license is valid.  A child?  If so, well, good for her.  Working to pay off her undergrad debt?  Also good for her.  What could possibly have happened that would affect her ability to earn a degree?

As for the objection about socializing, that is outrageous.  I am amazed that they even voice it as a criticism. 

Could it be that they are intimidated by her lucrative consulting business, perfect GREs, and law degree?

Some other university will get a fine candidate if you don't take her.

mt

[edwidge]

She sounds like a breath of fresh air. If her recommendation letters all tout her personal qualities and her intellectual energy, why on earth wouldn't she be able to get along and socialize with the other members of her cohort?

Does she live nearby? Do you ever bring in potential admits to interview? We do this for potential PhD students if there is a split among the committee members, or if we have collective ambivalence about admitting them.

Get the sticks-in-the-mud to come around, and admit her!

[prytania3]

Why do I think this is a trick question?

[acrimone]

Because you're naturally suspicious?

I dunno.

[minor_t]

 

Why do I think this is a trick question?

Well, it could be a trick question (Acrimone does like to roil up the pot), but it's an interesting one.  Sure got my attention.

mt

[larryc]

I'm with you Acrimone, this sounds like a great student.  That part about her not socializing with the other grads sounds like 1) speculation, and more seriously 2) age discrimination. Would the phrase "age discrimination" make your colleagues back off, or dig in their heels on this one?

[prytania3]

(Maybe i just like her because she reminds me of me?)

If she's like you, Acrimone, that's reason enough to admit her. Clearly, she will be an interesting, intelligent, and thought-provoking addition to any educational program.

As for the naysayers, they will no doubt have favored candidates who are not unilaterally liked by everyone else on the committee. Use them as bargaining chips.

[philoctetes]

Sounds a bit like me too. Durning my BA I was so busy doing so many different things, and studying was not always one of them. I had a B average but my transcript included every grade from A+ to F.

Then I spent 7 years working in the private sector. It taught me that I what I wanted to be was an academic. So I took some courses as a mature student in my current discipline (Philosophy, my BA was in Classics) and got all A+s. This got me into a MA programme, where I also got high grades.

When I applied for PhD programmes, however, the offers didn't overwhelm me. I contacted the departments which didn't let me in and several told me that my application wasn't even considered by the committee, because of my undergraduate grades it had been pre-screened out.

I couldn't blame them I guess, but I did think them a bit narrow minded.

The place I finally attended let me in after an interview. An interview that I suggested, and drove 7 hours to get to. They called me the next day told me I got in and that they were giving me full funding. 

So I too am sympathetic and would of course let the student in.

As for cheating on the GREs, don't they check out all perfect scores?

And I doubt that age will matter much, in all my graduate education the age range was all over the map, and someone's age never determined whether they were well liked. In fact, on average, I think older students would be a bit more mature, and hence more likely to keep personalities from causing rifts amongst the graduate student.

[acrimone]

Why thank you, Pryt.  That's very kind of you to say.

The two biggest things going against her right now are actually two of the biggest strengths in her application:

(1) the perfect GRE scores focus attention on, well, the GRE scores, and GRE scores aren't usually that big of a consideration.  I know that sounds weird, but it's like if 3% of the admissions decision was based on musical composition, and Mozart applied.  Everyone would be talking about that 3%, and people would naturally say "But that's only 3% of the aplpication" and it kinda makes everything else (more important everything else) look worse by comparison.

(2) A lot of people in the Philosophy field think (not without some justification) that law school is for intellectual lightweights, so that's some more baggage to overcome.

The age discrimination angle is an interesting one... I'll have to consider it but my natural tendency to recoil in horror from such allegations may mean that I have to wait for a proxy willing to make the argument.  I'm not sure I could sleep well at night if I were to suggest that. :)

And yes, Pryt, the horsetrading never ends.  Ah, politics.

And Philo... the cheating thing isn't about reporting the scores (they check out), it's about how some of the faculty have trouble believing that people actually get perfect scores.  (shrug)  What are you gonna do?

[tamiam]

Your problem student could be me! right down to the (in my case, near) perfect GRE scores and the MBA from a top school, after a very mediocre undergraduate experience.

I would really hate the idea that being unfocused at the age of 19 could have such long lasting repurcussions. She is not the same person that she was then; she is obviously full of drive and ambition. She will do fine at whatever she sets her mind to do.

Now, whether your program is the place for her, I don't know. If the prejudices of the faculty would create barriers to her success then you're not doing her any favors by admitting her. Also, the mind-set and work habits that make for successful consulting in a fast-paced "get a lot done" world are most definitely not the same as those required for success at Ph.D. level studies. She'll have to slow down and dig a lot deeper than she's probably used to.

[hum_postdoc]

The reservations sound pretty lame to me. Not everyone gets to grad school through the same path. I served on an admissions committee for my Ph.D. program, a top-ranked department on the West Coast, and we admitted several people who were years removed from undergrad and had a career or two before applying to grad school. They didn't have the pedigree or grades that the younger folks we admitted had, but they were interesting and accomplished in their own way and convinced us in their personal statements that they were serious about pursuing a Ph.D. and would likely do just fine. And when I was in grad school, I remember the people who had the most difficulty and eventually dropped out were not people like the applicant you describe. They were usually the straight-from-the-Ivy-League twenty-somethings who were incredibly bright, but just not ready.

I agree with what someone else said. Admit her or some other good program will snatch her up.

[tranquility]

Please give me some faith that our system is not so cookie-cutter that promising students that are missing some typically-measured strengths but clearly showing many more-than-compensating strengths will still be given a chance, and let us know that she did in fact get an invitation :)

As for someone getting something in early, to me that might be indication of a potential non-procrastinator....a rarity in  a grad student  (I can't think of any, myself) but a bad thing? I have a hard time imagining it. (Oh and if she doesn't rub it in, her colleagues won't hate her for it either. Maybe they'll actually appreciate her helping remind them of upcoming deadlines...)