beyond the numbers: the national trends toward holistic admissions csu professional development...
TRANSCRIPT
BEYOND THE NUMBERS: THE NATIONAL TRENDS TOWARD HOLISTIC ADMISSIONSCSU Professional Development InstituteJanuary 6, 2010
A brief history of public college admissions
1940s-1960s: GI Bill, Affirmative Action
1970s-1980s: enrollment limit pressures, evolution of “EOP” admissions programs
1990s: Further selectivity, Anti-affirmative action, EOPs shut down
2000s: comprehensive/holistic review takes off
National factors in college admission Number of available students is in flux
Distribution of students is changing in regard to: Race/ethnicity Socioeconomic status Geographic location
National imperatives to educate/innovate
What it means to review holistically Take “non-traditional factors” into account,
not just grades, scores and curriculum minimums
Consider that different students bring different strengths to the class, some of which are not yet evident
Assess the difference between a student’s choices and opportunities
Select a person, not just a student As much about recruitment as selection
Misconceptions about holistic review…
…makes admission easier
…makes admission harder
…is a back door for Affirmative Action
…is non-predictive
…is only for highly selective colleges
What are “the right” approaches?
Admit students based on future potential, not just past performance
Carry out a system that is as consistent as possible
Recognize that “objectivity” is elusive at best
Shape a class to fit the institution’s mission
Don’t penalize students for things they cannot control
Know the student’s “local context”
Assess and refine process each year
What are grades worth?
Weighting as help vs. hindrance
Connecting to performance at college
Class rank often helps
Grading practices always reflect a school’s culture, not just its rigor
Are grades given out equitably and fairly?
What are test scores worth?
Standardization is generally a good thing What do these tests measure? Are tests inequitable, or do they simply
illustrate inequities?Sent scores to CSU Enrolled at CSU
SES and first-generation by race
Race/ethnicity % Pell eligible % First-gen attend
% both
African-American
44% 30% 19%
Asian-American 33% 25% 14%
Hispanic/Latino 41% 31% 23%
Native American
34% 15% 7%
Not Indicated 15% 11% 4%
Pacific Islander 43% 20% 13%
White 14% 7% 2%
Total/Average 20% 15% 7%University of Washington resident enrolls, 2007
Education in the Local Context (ELC) What is the average % of students on
FRL at Colorado high schools?
How many are over 50%?
How many Colorado high schools offer an IB program?
How many offer AP courses?
How many of those offer only five or fewer sections of AP?
ELC variance among CO high schools# of AP Sections
offered# of high schools
Average % FRL
0 146 40%
1-10 69 31%
11-20 54 29%
21-30 27 15%
31-40 6 8.5%
41+ 4 16%
High schools with 41+ sections of AP:Smoky Hill High School (41) 23%
Eaglecrest High School (45) 22%
Grandview High School (52) 11%
Cherry Creek High School (66) 6%
A few examples: California
Proposition 209 (1996) Variations among the
ten campuses Essays but also
extensive use of scores In very selective system,
ELC of critical importance
University of Michigan
Subject of Supreme Court case (2006)
“points” system specifically barred
Drawing on external data for ELC
University of Washington
Initiative 200 (1998) First used a
comprehensive review then went to a more “true” holistic one
Considers long-term school performance data for ELC
Oregon State University
Institutional Imperative
Based on the research of William Sedlacek, professor at the University of Maryland
Insight Resume©- assesses non-cognitive attributes
To read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/03/02/holistic
Oregon State Results
Using the Insight Resume © has allowed students with different learning styles to demonstrate their potential, which often is not the case with traditional admission criteria.
It has provided valuable information for use in academic advising.
Academic profile has increased slightly, retention rates have gone up and minority enrollment has increased.
Overview- CSU Approach
Emphasis on the high school curriculum- both the number of courses completed and the academic rigor of those courses.
Academic preparation may take several forms; students contribute to the campus community in a variety of ways.
The university has deemed non-academic factors, personal characteristics and individual experiences as important and positive for the campus community.
Committed to meeting state requirements as set forth by CCHE.
Process- CSU Approach
Each applicant receives a holistic review by one or more CSU admissions staff members who assess academic rigor and performance and personal qualities.
Applicants who meet the Admissions Standards are considered priority candidates for admission.
Applicants who do not meet the priority consideration requirements are still considered for admission; files are reviewed by an admissions committee.
