Softer criteria for college admission helpful

By Rong Xiaoqing Source:Global Times Published: 2016-2-4 19:33:14

Illustration: Shen Lan/GT

Whenever friends in China who want to send their children to the US to study ask my advice, the first thing I tell them is always be cautious of the misperception that children in the US are under less pressure than those in China. A more flexible classroom atmosphere, more opportunities to participate in extracurricular activities and the more holistic screening criteria for college admissions have left parents in China with this impression.

They couldn't be further from reality.

It is true that children in the US don't have to spend all their time studying textbooks, and colleges don't tie their admission decisions to entrance exams. But if you set your hopes on Ivy League college places, the preparation often has to start in kindergarten. Instead of only focusing on studying academic subjects, you need to allocate your time to a variety of activities, such as piano playing, swimming or voluntary work. You need to have this kind of broad profile to fit into the current college admission formula. And this doesn't mean less pressure for students but more.

Many top universities in this country also realize the problem. In mid January, Harvard Graduate School of Education released a report calling for changes. The report, titled "Turning the Tide," suggested a reduction in the weight of standardized tests and extracurricular activities in the admission criteria and put more weight on whether a candidate was a caring and responsible member of society.

For example, the time a student spends on caring for a sick family member, baby sitting or tending a community garden may be considered important in the application.

The report was endorsed by the admission offices of many universities, and some of them have decided to make changes in their process as early as this year to reflect the recommendations. Former and current students, teachers and college counselors also broadly gave it a thumbs-up and left many positive comments online.

There are also people who frowned upon the report, and among them are many Asians. Asians in the US have had a difficult relationship with Ivy League colleges in recent years. They suspect that Asians, whose share of places in many Ivy League colleges is already much bigger than their share in the overall population, were shortchanged by these universities which are under pressure to make the student body more diverse.

Last summer, more than 60 Asian organizations filed a complaint against Harvard University with the Office for Civil Rights of the US Education Department, accusing the school of discriminating against Asian-American students in its admissions policy. 

So it was not a surprise that some Asians saw the recommendations in the report as a conspiracy against them. The headline of one popular post on WeChat said, "While we are trying to win within the system, they are changing the rules of the game."

Generally, I am more optimistic than some members of my community and I believe Asian students who are doing comparatively well under the current admission system may not be left behind under the new formula. But how to make the new formula fair and transparent, or fairer and more transparent than the current one, might be a concern not only for Asians but for many others.   

The report made it clear that the current admission formula can favor the wealthy because students from poor families cannot afford to pay for SAT preparation or, for example, the lessons needed to learn to play a musical instrument. So, the focus on the character and behavior of applicants will help to level the playing field.

But compared to the current formula, the new one seems to rely more on the personal judgment of admission officers. After all, being caring, loving and responsible are more subjective concepts than an SAT score. A system that relies on subjective assessments is prone to mistakes as much as one that relies on quantitative criteria.

But a bigger challenge for the new formula comes from society. In the US, the value of a person is largely judged by his or her achievements at work. And work achievements are often measured in a quantitative way. The college admission policy is a reflection of this. In other words, colleges are merely responding to the requirements of society in selecting students who will be able to fit into that world. It may be unfair and just plain wrong but human responsibilities such as caring for children and seniors have long lost their value in such a work-focused system.

It is not easy to break this vicious cycle. But if top colleges would like to give it a try by making these changes, then they deserve our support.

The author is a New York-based journalist. rong_xiaoqing@hotmail.com

Posted in: Columnists, Viewpoint, Rong Xiaoqing

blog comments powered by Disqus