In that other comment you said “If there are preferences, they’re nonobvious, and it’s not clear how you would go about discovering them.”
Well, there is a large and well-developed industry of getting high school seniors into colleges. There are a lot of people who gave a lot of thought to the issue of how to present the best image of an applicant to the admissions office. These people write books, give seminars, offer consulting, etc.
The issue of “correct” extracurriculars is extensively discussed. Some of the people discussing them used to be admissions officers and now work in the college-advice industry. As far as I know the general consensus is that extracurriculars matter. Not enough to compensate for bad grades or low SAT, but if you’re applying to a college that’s in the right range for your grades/SAT, the extracurriculars matter a lot.
You seem to be ignoring what is, basically, existing literature, and putting out your own recommendations on the basis of several conversations that you—as a member of the public—had with several admission offices. Are you quite sure that you understand the issue in sufficient depth to give advice to other people and maybe even charge for it?
Well, there is a large and well-developed industry of getting high school seniors into colleges. There are a lot of people who gave a lot of thought to the issue of how to present the best image of an applicant to the admissions office. These people write books, give seminars, offer consulting, etc.
I don’t think that what I wrote is out of sync with what these people say about extracurricular activities. For example, the founder of AdMISSION POSSIBLE writes
“When it comes to extracurricular involvements, it doesn’t really matter what the content is. Anything from doing a major DNA research project to volunteering at a school that serves low income students to excelling at fly-fishing is legitimate fodder for college application grids. No matter the activity, colleges look for quality of involvement rather than quantity of activities.”
As far as I know the general consensus is that extracurriculars matter. Not enough to compensate for bad grades or low SAT, but if you’re applying to a college that’s in the right range for your grades/SAT, the extracurriculars matter a lot
This is my understanding as well.
You seem to be ignoring what is, basically, existing literature,
How? What does the existing literature say that contradicts what I wrote in the post?
Are you quite sure that you understand the issue in sufficient depth to give advice to other people and maybe even charge for it?
It’s possible that we should investigate in more depth, doing a more thorough review of what others have written, but we’ve already done some of this.
In that other comment you said “If there are preferences, they’re nonobvious, and it’s not clear how you would go about discovering them.”
Well, there is a large and well-developed industry of getting high school seniors into colleges. There are a lot of people who gave a lot of thought to the issue of how to present the best image of an applicant to the admissions office. These people write books, give seminars, offer consulting, etc.
The issue of “correct” extracurriculars is extensively discussed. Some of the people discussing them used to be admissions officers and now work in the college-advice industry. As far as I know the general consensus is that extracurriculars matter. Not enough to compensate for bad grades or low SAT, but if you’re applying to a college that’s in the right range for your grades/SAT, the extracurriculars matter a lot.
You seem to be ignoring what is, basically, existing literature, and putting out your own recommendations on the basis of several conversations that you—as a member of the public—had with several admission offices. Are you quite sure that you understand the issue in sufficient depth to give advice to other people and maybe even charge for it?
I don’t think that what I wrote is out of sync with what these people say about extracurricular activities. For example, the founder of AdMISSION POSSIBLE writes
“When it comes to extracurricular involvements, it doesn’t really matter what the content is. Anything from doing a major DNA research project to volunteering at a school that serves low income students to excelling at fly-fishing is legitimate fodder for college application grids. No matter the activity, colleges look for quality of involvement rather than quantity of activities.”
This is my understanding as well.
How? What does the existing literature say that contradicts what I wrote in the post?
It’s possible that we should investigate in more depth, doing a more thorough review of what others have written, but we’ve already done some of this.
(I’ll add that posting to LW is one way in which we’re vetting our research and advice.)