More from the President of the National Association of College Admission Counseling

Hi Everyone-
Here is another installation of the NY Times series, "Answers from the President of NACAC- the National Association of College Admission Counseling.

Please enjoy and forward any questions you have about the college process anytime!
~The Admissions Director

Guidance Office: Answers From the President of Nacac, Part 3
By Bill McClintick
Guidance Office
Questions for the President of Nacac
Bill McClintick, director of college counseling at Mercersburg Academy in Pennsylvania and the president of the National Association for College Admission Counseling, a membership group, answers reader questions.
All Guidance Office Posts »
The Choice at Nacac
Beginning Thursday, The Choice takes readers backstage as nearly 5,000 admissions officers and counselors gather in Baltimore.
On Thursday, nearly 5,000 college admissions officers and high school counselors will gather for the 65th annual convention of the National Association of College Admission Counseling.
Presiding over this gathering will be Bill McClintick, the director of college counseling at Mercersburg Academy in Pennsylvania. Mr. McClintick worked previously in admissions at Hartwick College in New York and Kalamazoo College in Michigan.
Below, he answers reader questions on the calculus of withholding some SAT scores from colleges, and on the “marketing” of applicants (as well as of colleges.)
Mr. McClintick’s answers to select reader questions will conclude later this week.
Meanwhile, be sure to visit The Choice on Thursday and Friday, for regular blog posts from the conference floor. — Jacques Steinberg
Q.
Could you address Score Choice regarding SATs and how to enter it on the Common Application. If there is choice, what is the point, when all scores need to be listed on the Common Application. Is this the same process for the Universal Application?
—sandy
Q.
How would the colleges feel if counselors advised their students to leave the standardized test page of the Common Application blank in order to preserve flexibility and allow customizing?
—Alan Haas
A.
There have been several questions posted about how to report test scores and how the College Board’s new Score Choice policy will impact the admissions process that I would like to address.
First, it is important to understand that whatever scores a student self-reports on his/her application are not considered “official” scores. Whether a student includes those scores on the application or leaves them blank is not going to have an impact on his/her chances for admission. If a student does include scores, the admissions office will still look to verify the scores from either a high-school transcript or an official score report from the testing agency.
No decision will be made based solely on self-reported scores.
The cause for concern within the profession surrounding the implementation of the College Board’s Score Choice policy centers on the fact that students now have the ability to “hide” scores from colleges.
In addition, many have expressed the concern that this will further enable students with greater financial resources to keep taking the tests over and over again until they achieve the scores they want, while students from less-advantaged backgrounds who do not know how to “game the system” will continue to take the test only one or two times.
While students have always been able to take the tests as often as they wanted, now they can do it without a college knowing that it took them four, five, or even six sittings to earn those scores.
There are a number of the most selective colleges that will ask students to report all of their scores and not use the Score Choice option, but the student has the ability to “override” this request if they so choose.
What is interesting about this is that if students employ the Score Choice option, they can choose their best scores from one particular date, but not mix and match results from different dates. Those of us in the profession know that for students taking the exam two or three times, it is rare for them to achieve all of their best scores on the same date.
Typically, colleges have employed a “mix and match” policy where they will combine students’ best scores from the SAT sections to arrive at each student’s best combined scores.
It is important to note that many colleges do not employ this same method when evaluating the ACT. They tend to simply take the best composite score. However, it is interesting to note that the ACT has had a score-choice option of its own for years which allows a student to report the scores from a single test date, but that policy does not seem to have caused the same furor as the new College Board policy.
The most important thing to bear in mind is that if a student chooses to use the College Board Score Choice option, that decision will take away the college’s ability to mix and match to get that student’s best scores.
I know many may be skeptical that colleges truly disregard the lower scores, but the reality is that it is in the college’s best interest to use the student’s best scores because it simply makes the school’s own profile that much stronger in all of the external guides and rankings.
Q.
Students are often discouraged from “polishing” their applications by using expensive admissions consultants who help them write essays and supplemental materials. In effect, they are told to be authentic and not market themselves for the sake of “getting in.” Can you comment on why most colleges spend millions of dollars on marketing consultants, brochures, web sites, email campaigns, and the like? This seems to be an example of “do as we say, not as we do.”
—DS
A.
Our writer raises a legitimate question when stating that there seems to be a disconnect between what colleges say and what they do when it comes to the topic of marketing. There are several topics embedded within your comment that I would like to address.
First, it is important to understand that 20 to 30 years ago colleges were far less concerned about “marketing” themselves than they are today. While we would openly talk about “recruiting” prospective students, we were not overly concerned with market positioning and national rankings. In fact, during the good old days we would focus on “fit” and whether a student could thrive at our institution.
There are certainly some schools that still operate under this model, but all of this began to change with the advent of the national rankings. Now, it is not at all uncommon to see colleges hiring presidents (and stacking their Boards) with individuals from corporate backgrounds who are more obsessed with moving up in the national rankings than delivering the finest educational experience possible. We speak at times in the profession of the “arms race” to build the fanciest dorms and fitness centers while faculty salaries continue to languish at low levels for most undergraduate professors.
To be candid, I share your concern. I think some institutions have lost their way and do not have their priorities straight. They are far more interested in the glitz than the substance. That being said, I feel that most of us who work in the admissions and counseling profession still view education as a means to lift students up. Therein lies the contradiction; a good admissions officer will still gladly steer a student towards another institution that may offer a better fit for their needs. One who works for an institution that is simply trying to drive up the number applications in order to increase selectivity so their school can move up in the rankings will not.
When it comes to the individual student “marketing” themselves to a college, there are also a wide variety of opinions. Again, it is important to remember that twenty to thirty years ago, very few of the cottage industries that have sprung up around the college admissions process existed. Individual consultants who help polish up applications and resumes, test prep firms, and the plethora of “How to” guides were a rarity. Now, these firms have many families convinced that if they don’t “market” their child to colleges, they are putting them at a disadvantage in this competitive market.
The truth of the matter is that the vast majority of colleges and universities don’t really care how “polished” your child is. If they are qualified; they will be admitted. If they are not qualified; they won’t get in. It is really a very small sector of the higher education world that people obsess about getting their child into — and it is the same names of colleges that you see in the press all the time — that drives this frenzy.
While some schools may say: “Sure, put your best foot forward. We’ll look at whatever you send us,” others will say that they are still looking for that good fit in their applicants and that the well-polished applicant has no advantage over the less-sophisticated but more earnest applicant.
As I have noted in several other responses, there is no uniformity in terms of how colleges will respond to the “packaged” applicant vs. the “normal kid.”
All of this being said, there are many of us in the profession who share your concerns that perhaps there is too much emphasis on beauty, and not enough on substance in higher education today.