Sophia Wushanley | College admissions, take two

Another Look | When it comes to college applications, is a video really worth 1,000 words?

By Sophia Wushanley 10/13/14 10:13pm

“Y ou ’re more than just a number” is the motto for Goucher College’s new video application option, for which students submit a two-minute video talking about themselves in lieu of test scores or transcripts. All they need in addition is two works from high school, one of which must be graded.

The implication here seems to be that Goucher, unlike other schools, sees you as more than your grades and scores. Yet virtually all liberal arts colleges in the United States claim to see their applicants holistically and take creative submissions into account. This idea isn’t groundbreaking.

So what’s the real difference between Goucher’s video application and a standard college application? In the promotional video for this new application format, Goucher’s president Jose Antonio Bowen explains that this option might be great if “test bubbles aren’t your thing.”

We can assume that this also benefits students who aren’t really into papers either. In fact, the entire idea of testing students on their ability to understand and analyze concepts taught in a classroom is effectively removed from consideration, and what distinguishes the video application from its long-form predecessor is that it tells students outright that going to college isn’t for people for whose “thing” is academics. Then who exactly is it for? Far from being the solution to the insanity that is college admissions in America, Goucher’s video application is perfectly symbolic of its problems.

To start, college admissions have become more about competition between colleges than about students. Colleges that attract the most applicants can boast the lowest admission percentages — i.e. appear the most selective — so it’s in every school’s best interests to encourage as many applicants, qualified or unqualified, to pay the fee and send in an application.

Further, as high school diplomas can no longer promise decent career prospects, there are no real alternatives to college for high school graduates looking to succeed. The rational decision for anyone who can afford to pay for college is to go, and the distinction of going then becomes based on neither intelligence, creativity nor intellectual curiosity, but on the ability to pay.

President Bowen says a driving force behind the initiative is Goucher’s desire to address this problem, and that “higher education should be about potential, not privilege.” This is an admirable goal, but an initiative like the video app isn’t a logical way to achieve it.

While it’s true that low-income students are less likely to have impressive transcripts and resumes, what deters them from applying to college isn’t the fact that they would have to submit transcripts. It’s that, even if they were accepted, they wouldn’t be able to afford tuition. Without changes to financial assistance policies, the prohibiting factor for attending college for lower-income students just gets pushed down the line. It doesn’t matter if you’re accepted to a university you can’t afford to attend.

So if Goucher’s real aim were to increase the socioeconomic diversity of its student body, a publicized initiative to increase need-based aid would make much more sense. As it currently stands, Goucher does not guarantee to fully cover demonstrated need, and still puts aside money for merit-based scholarships.

One might hope, then, that Goucher’s video option might help lower-income students with less impressive transcripts and resumes win a merit scholarship. But it’s noted on the website that video applicants wishing to be considered for a merit scholarship must submit a transcript. That is to say, in terms of the video app, Goucher isn’t willing to put its money where its mouth is.

So if the video application doesn’t make sense as an initiative to increase the socioeconomic diversity of the school, nor as a way of attracting applicants who wouldn’t already have demonstrated potential in a creative supplement, what’s left?

Well, the initiative is just bizarre-sounding enough to be newsworthy, and that, of course, is the point. The video application is not game-changing, nor is it intended to be. It’s nothing more than a publicity stunt, and it will probably succeed in attracting more applicants to Goucher, but it won’t do anything to improve the state of college admissions in Ame rica.

Sophia Wushanley is College senior from Millersville, Pa., studying philosophy. Her email address is wsophia@sas.upenn.edu. “Another Look” appears every Tuesday.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.