Park1

Sydney Park
Writing 2010
November 23, 2015
Common Admissions Practices and Their Morality
The topic of standardized testing and holistic review is a widely talked about subject. The
admissions process as a whole is extremely controversial, let alone the small practices used
throughout the process. Some claim that application processes favor some more than others.
Whether or not this is true, it brings into question the various practices used throughout the entire
admissions process and their validity.
Some general themes that repeatedly appear throughout this conversation are the use of
holistic review, the credibility of the ACT and SAT, and the true motive of universities when
making final admissions decisions. Holistic review is a way of looking at potential candidates as
a person rather than just as another application. It has been questioned as to whether or not
holistic review is as fair as some make it out to be. It is occasionally thought of as the best ways
to assess students because it evaluates all aspects, but are all of these considerations actually
weighed the same? Another frequent topic is the validity of the ACT and SAT. There have been
many studies conducted to determine if these standardized tests can actually predict how well a
student will do in college. Many would argue that these tests do nothing more than give
universities another way to compare students against each other. One of the most controversial
topics in admissions is what the universitys true motive in final admissions decisions is. Many
universities who claim to practice holistic review have been accused of giving added weight to
certain categories in order to admit certain students over others. This brings into question their
true motive throughout the admissions process.

Park2
There are many different authors that share their opinion on the use of standardized
testing and holistic review in admissions. On the topic of holistic review, some prominent
authors are the Association of American Medical Colleges and Bovy. On the topic of the ACT
and SAT the main scholars are Witzburd & Sondheimer and Allen & Sconing. When talking
about the true motive of universities, the prominent authors writing about this are Bovy and
Ballinger.
Since these topics are so controversial, there are a variety of ways to discuss these topics.
One way you could discuss the holistic review topic is by agreeing that it assists universities in
getting well-rounded students. On the other hand you could argue that holistic review favors
certain qualities in people thus making the whole process unfair. On the topic of the ACT and
SAT, many have argued that it allows universities to equally compare students against each other.
However, many scholars have done research in order to argue the fact the standardized testing is
inaccurate in predicting college preparedness. Finally, on the topic of the true motive of
universities, many argue that universities use holistic review in order to determine the qualities
they want. Others would argue that holistic review allows universities to use predetermine biases
in order to pick out specific student that could help their rankings. All of these sides have their
validities and faults.
Introduction
A survey of nearly 204,000 college freshmen who started school in 2011 indicated that
only 58 percent of them enrolled at their first-choice college, the lowest percentage to do so since
the question was first asked in 1974.(Slotnik) Every year more and more students are being
turned away from the first choice university. This could be credited to many different reasons.
The admissions process has become more and more rigorous, but yet there is not clear

Park3
communication to the potential students of what their new standards are. Universities are not
giving a clear definition of the holistic review process, and as result there are unclear admissions
standards for incoming students.
Holistic Review Definition Discrepancy
Holistic review is becoming a very prominent part of admissions in many universities. As
defined by the Association of American Medical Colleges, Holistic review is a flexible,
individualized way of assessing an applicants capabilities by which balanced consideration is
given to experiences, attributes, and academic metrics. This idea of looking at candidates as a
whole rather than only certain characteristics is a ground breaking idea, but is it really all its
cracked up to be? Often times, students are under the impression that every consideration will be
looked at and weighed the same in their admission decisions, and why shouldnt they be? In the
definition it says, by which balanced consideration is given. The problem is, that this
definition is not held equivalently through all universities admissions committees throughout the
United States.
If universities are not using holistic review to its definition, then what is the purpose?
According to The Atlantic, From colleges perspective, holistic is just shorthand for, we make
the decisions we make, and would rather not be asked to spell out each one. (Bovy) Universities
dont want to have to explain why they want one student compared to another. This is where
holistic review comes into play. By having a system set in place to look at students as a whole,
universities take out any explanation as to why they chose one student compared to another. This
also provides universities the chance to keep their application rates high. Because holistic review
looks as many different aspects in students, there are no set requirements that would deter

Park4
students from applying. Many students see holistic review as a way for their strong suits to
compensate for areas that they are lacking in.
At the University of Utah, holistic review is practiced in admissions. When looking at
their policies for their admissions decisions, one thing stood out to me. The University reserves
the right to deny admission for any lawful reason. Circumstances that may lead to the denial of
admission include, but are not limited to: Failing to meet the academic requirements for
admission. (University of Utah) When digging further into these requirements, I found the
profile for their middle 50% of scores. At the bottom of the chart is the following statement, If
you do not meet the above requirements, it is likely you will not be admitted. (University of
Utah) By definition holistic review is giving consideration to many different aspects in the
admissions process, but the University of Utah is holding students to certain requirements that
you often have to seek out in order to know. The final astonishing statement I found was,
Likelihood of admission may also depend on the quality of the applicant pool and University
enrollment goals. (University of Utah) This proves that the admissions committee will select
students based off of their enrollment goals, not based off of the student as an individual. This
leads to a lot of confusion as to whether or not they are actually using holistic review as it was
intended.
Some would argue that the universities are still taking the time to look at all of the
different factors whether or not that actually reflects in the final decision. Although this may be
true, the problem isnt with how they come to the decision, but the misleading pretense the
decision is made under. If universities are going to pride themselves on using holistic review,
then they need to practice it to the fullest. This includes looking at the applicants as person rather
than a number to help their rankings.

Park5
Unclear Standards for Students
The large problem that leads to confusion and frustration in potential students is the lack
of clear expectations for students. Applying to universities would be significantly less stressful if
they told you exactly what they want; unfortunately this is just not the case. The holistic review
process gives universities the opportunity to pick out the qualities they want in students. They
make the weight in admissions more or less to fit their wants. This is seen though a study done
by Princeton scholars on preferences given to certain students in admissions. Elite universities
give added weight in admission decisions to applicants who have SAT scores above 1500, are
African American, or are recruited athletes. (Witzburd & Sondheimer) This is how universities
are able to tailor holistic review to they types of students they want. By not telling students what
they are looking for, they are able to keep a high volume of application while accepting the
students they want at the university.
It is not only elite universities that practice unfair weighing in holistic review. At the
University of Utah, there is a lot of biasness in decisions based off of a students ACT (American
College Testing) and SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test) score. In an interview I conducted with a
university admissions representative, I was informed that, the ACT is the biggest determinant of
admissions for freshman and transfer applicants. (Anderson). Even though the university
practices holistic review, they dont actually weigh things equally. According to a publication
called Why and How Socioeconomic Factors Should Be Used in Selective College Admissions,
holistic review looks at academic achievement, college preparatory courses taken, grade trend,
independent intellectual growth, community service, income level of the school, any personal
disadvantages, overcoming any educational disadvantage, cultural awareness, and any unique
perspective offered, among a variety of other things (Ballinger). If there are so many different

Park6
things considered in admissions, why put so much focus on the ACT and SAT scores? This is a
question many a still trying to answer.
The ACT and SAT have continuously been under a lot of scrutiny due to the question on
whether or not they can accurately predict how well a student will do in college. There was a
study conducted to determine if there was a correlation between the ACT score a student
achieved and how the student did in their first year at the university. It was determined that,
Although they are useful predictors of success in first-year college courses, ACT scores above
the cutoffs do not guarantee success. (Allen & Sconing) Basically, once you reach a certain
benchmark ACT score, the test is unable to predict how well you will preform throughout
college. This brings up an even larger problem of why the ACT and SAT hold such a large
weight in the final admissions decision if it can only predict preparedness to a certain extent.
Holistic review provides other sources to help predict college readiness, but if equal
consideration is not given to all subjects, then it defeats the purpose of using holistic review in
the first place.
Some could argue that admissions committees arent being deceitful by not saying
exactly what they want in each of the students. Instead, they are simply leaving room for a
variety of students to apply. Although this may be true, they are also giving students a false sense
of hope that they will get into the university. Students are typically excited for holistic review
because for what they lack in one area, they make up for in another. Then students get the
extremely disappointing news that they didnt get into the university as a result of not being what
the admissions committee wanted in the first place.

Park7
My Experience With Holistic Review and Admissions
My experience with holistic review and admissions is rather different. I have seen both
sides of what holistic review accomplishes. One the one hand, it gets fantastic students in
universities. On the other hand, it deters students who may be better suited somewhere else. My
brother never actually applied to college. Universities loved his high ACT score of 32. Therefore
they were just extending him offers of admissions left and right. He ended up with a full ride
scholarship to Weber State University. Now contrary to holistic review, he received his
scholarship solely off of his ACT score. He had no community service, extra curricular activities,
or participation in sports; but because his ACT score was so high, universities wanted him a lot
more.
When it was my turn to start applying to colleges, I was determined to go to Yale. I had
worked it out that if I got a certain ACT score I could go to the university. I had a lot of great
extra curricular activities, sports, volunteer work, awards and achievements, and GPA. Really
everything they look at in the holistic review process. Unfortunately I couldnt pull my ACT
score up to what Yale was looking for. I was under the impression, as many have been before,
that in holistic review, all considerations are weighed equally. I thought that by overachieving in
certain areas, it would make up for underachievement in other areas. Sadly enough, I was wrong.
With elite universities, they pride themselves on having high scores that improve their rankings.
That wasnt my score. If holistic review was used by the definition, I may have actually gotten in
to Yale.
Throughout this process of applying to schools, I had my aunt help prepare me as well as
my applications. During her career she worked at Yale and was familiar with their admissions
expectations. She helped me perfect my application essay, groomed me for my interview, and

Park8
gave me a list of things to do to make me more competitive in the admissions process. Even after
all of that it was still not enough. My score wasnt going to help their admissions decisions, so
its no wonder why I wasnt accepted. If anything, the score I had couldve thrown off their
rankings.
Some would argue that I have a personal bias against because of my poor experience
while applying to Yale. Although I was upset at their decision, I understand it. No one can blame
Yale for wanting to keep their rankings high. This is how they keep their high volume of
applications over the years. Its a business, being competitive is how they make money. They
want the application fees and higher rankings. They do what it takes to keep both of those high.
Even though I dont like it their decisions, I cant say that I dont understand why they make
them.
Conclusion
The definition of holistic review is unclear to students and not consecutively used
throughout participating universities. This causes confusion as to what holistic review looks at
and how much consideration is given to each. Universities are unclear on their standards and
expectations for prospective students. This gives a sense of false hope for potential outcomes in
the admissions process. Finally, even if a student has great and competitive qualities, if it is not
what the university wants, they are not getting accepted. This can be a harsh realization for many.
If universities are going to participate in using holistic review, they need to use it to its definition,
balanced consideration is given to experiences, attributes, and academic metrics. Even though
universities might not score quite as high in rankings as they would previously, the will be able
to gain an abundance of diverse, college ready students. Also this will help clarify any

Park9
misunderstandings between universities and students and ultimately create a less troublesome
application process.

Park10
Works Cited
1. "About Holistic Admissions - Holistic Review - Initiatives - AAMC." About Holistic
Admissions - Holistic Review - Initiatives - AAMC. Association of American Medical
Colleges, 2015. Web. 15 Nov. 2015.
2. Allen, Jeff, and Jim Sconing. Using ACT assessment scores to set benchmarks for college
readiness. ACT Research Report Series 2005-3. ACT Incorporated, 2005.
3. Ballinger, Philip. "Why and how socioeconomic factors should be used in selective college
admissions." New Directions for Student Services 2007.118 (2007): 3-15.
4. Bovy, Phoebe Maltz. "The False Promise of 'Holistic' College Admissions." The Atlantic.
Atlantic Media Company, 17 Dec. 2013. Web. 09 Nov. 2015.
5. "Freshman Admission Standards." - Office of Admissions. University of Utah, 2015. Web. 09
Nov. 2015.
6. Regulations Library." Policy 6-404: Undergraduate Admission. University of Utah, 2015.
Web. 09 Nov. 2015.
7. Witzburg, Robert A., and Henry M. Sondheimer. "Holistic reviewshaping the medical
profession one applicant at a time." New England Journal of Medicine 368.17 (2013):
1565-1567.