[MUSIC] I am pleased to be here with Margaret Dahl, who is director of admissions at Yale University. She has spent her entire career in admissions at Yale and this is a role that she's very passionate about. So we're going to have a really interesting conversation talking about all the things that people would love to know if they could peer into the mind of an admissions officer. So I'm going to just kick right off with something that people really want to know. The criteria for admissions particularly add so called elite universities like Harvard and Yale really seem to be moving away from traditional quantitative metrics and trying to get a more holistic approach to admissions. Looking at the character of students that are being admitted. I wonder if you could say something about that. Sure. I actually don't know that anything has changed dramatically in recent years. I'm not sure that this really is that much of a shift I think for many, many years in my experience working at Yale we have been interested in both the academic part of the student and the personal part of the student and I think one of the reasons that we are able to spend so much time considering the personal side is because the students who apply to places like Yale or Harvard by and large tend to be very well qualified academically. It's why they are applying to places like us. They have done well for years in school. People have told them that they're that they're bright that they should aspire that they should aspire to go to great colleges and so they, and actually look at at at places like us which means that the depth of talent in the applicant pool extends very, very deeply into the applicant pool and we couldn't possibly make our decisions only based on academic credentials or numeric numeric credentials. Which means that we very quickly get into the question of sort of, what else, who else is this person beyond a good student. And that's where probably a lot of the distinctions really are made. And there are some students who are so powerful academically that they are clearly students who need places like Yale. They need to have powerful academic institutions. Our faculty want to teach those students and even in the absence of terribly well developed extracurricular interests or personal qualities, there will be a small number of those students who are simply in that rarefied intellectual category where they're likely to be admitted. But there are not that many of those students because the competition for for admission is so tough that we have the luxury of finding very, very bright students who also offer other qualities And that's where we get into all of those other personal personal characteristics and extracurriculars and human qualities and and that sort of thing. So I'm not, I'm not sure I would agree that Harvard Yale seem to be coming that seem to be becoming less numerically oriented and more personally oriented. I think we've been that way for a very long time already. So let's talk about how Yale looks at quantitative factors, things like standardized test grades, advanced placement courses. Do you find that there's a correlation at all between the pool of applicants who perform really strongly on these kinds of things and the more qualitative holistic look at students. I don't think there is any obvious correlation between the two. You can have students with very, very strong quantitative measures who do very little in the personal arena. They're not terribly interesting. They don't have any any obvious passions. They don't seem to spend time on any particular extracurricular activities. And there are also students who may not end up being realistic candidates for Yale that have you know, lesser academic credentials but are incredibly interesting, incredibly passionate, very involved and committed to things and reading an application like that. Sometimes the reader will say something like she is going to be a wonderful student at another school. So you you you know if we were not as selective as we were, we might love to have that that person on our campus but the the numbers just aren't there to make her competitive in our very selective pool. So I don't see any obvious connection between between the the testing and the all the other sort of qualitative qualities. So it's interesting to think about that topic and how you know testing doesn't necessarily draw out some of the qualitative factors. I heard for example that university of California their system has stopped using an SAT as a requirement and they're trying to measure more personal characteristics, things like curiosity, creativity, resilience, empathy. Is it really possible to measure those kinds of things in a quantitative way? I'm not sure it's possible to measure such things in a quantitative way. I think that a test like that will be a very different kind of test, it will be very interesting to see what they come up with. There's a professor at the Harvard School of Education named Rick Weiss Board who has been leading an effort called making caring common for many years. And his the entire effort of making caring common is to try and determine what whether it is possible to not only teach things like caring and compassion but also find a way for colleges to evaluate these things. So that's sort of an ongoing effort. And he's been working with a lot of school systems to try and develop programs within schools to to try and develop these qualities and to have colleges attempt to define what that values are important to them and to see whether they are eliciting those in their application, whether they're talking about those enough on their on their own website to communicate to students that those things are valued at that institution. So that's just sort of a side note that I would that I would say the challenge for schools, I would love to think that there is a test that could give us a measure of those things. I think making it quantifiable. I mean that would be the most convenient, that would be the most efficient. The challenge with schools like Yale or Harvard who get 30,000, 50,000 applications a year is that if the results of a test like that involved a lot of text and and commentary of the evaluation process, that becomes a bit of an issue for us simply because of the number of applications we have to get through. If there was a small number of students that had these more extensive commentary and evaluation, I think we could live with it just like we, find a way to accommodate the high schools right now that are that, that don't give grades but give comments at the end of of a course. But obviously it takes a lot longer to go through an application like that. And so one of the things that I would be interested in is, and this is all, this is all sort of prospective that this hasn't happened yet. And so it's kind of, you know dreaming about what may be possible, would it be possible to come up with some sort of an assessment That is easier to absorb at the college end, which probably means it doesn't include four pages of evaluative commentary, but that actually is meaningful. And I guess my question is if it were to become a numeric evaluation, would it be valuable? Would it be valuable to know that a student got an 8 on compassion as opposed to a 4? Well, maybe if we believed in the test that we knew enough about what the test was measuring, that could be interesting. But I think that we really would have to have some faith in the test. I'm very interested in what Berkeley is going to come up with. They've sort of given themselves this five year timeline and the clock started to tick last year when they made these announcements. So they have until probably the 24, 25 admissions cycles. And it's a that's a big task but I'm glad that a major institution that is very, very widely respected is undertaking this project. And I think the jury is out. I don't know, I would love to think that there would be a way that we would measure these things right now. We don't have a numeric way to measure them and we have to look at all of the other indicators in the application for those kinds of qualities. >> Well, we're talking in this course about genius and the very difficult project of trying to understand what brings it about, what makes it possible, how much is it nature versus nurture. And I think some of the comments that you've made really shed light on that. The difficulty of coming up with a metric that allows us to measure someone's capacity for genius and specifically in light of your work, their capacity to be an excellent student at Yale and a good match for the values of the university and the kind of learning that happens at Yale. I wonder if you could say a little more about as you're sort of looking at those qualitative traits that Yale values because of the culture of the university, what kinds of things are important to contribute to the environment on campus at Yale. >> One of the things that is most valued at Yale I think is students who are able to be members of a close community. The residential college system here is so important and so defines the undergraduate experience that in the admissions process we put a lot of care into trying to determine what qualities a student has, that would suggest that they would be good members of the community, that they are collaborative that they communicate with one another well that they have a sense of caring or compassion or whatever. Which means in school recommendations it often comes through in comments about about peers. And first of all are their comments in an application about peers. Once in a while I will get through an entire application, but maybe, you know, a fairly impressive application and I get to the end of it and say, wait, did I read anything about peers here and also to go back to the beginning and run through it again and say, no, I didn't. Now, that doesn't mean that the student has terrible peer relationships. It means it's just a question. It may be that the teachers had so many other things they wanted to talk about, that they sort of forgot to mention peer relationships, but that's a student for whom an interview might be very, very important to see if that comes out in the interview. I think that an enthusiasm and sort of the energy to embrace interests and activities beyond the classroom is also of interest to us because part of what makes us so great is that there is so much going on campus at the extracurricular level. And even though there are some things that students do in high school that they will not do at Yale, they can't bring their pet animal that they've raised to the state level and tied up to a tree in the new Haven green or anything. But the capacity to be committed to something is a transferable quality. And students who have been genuinely committed to things over a period of time will bring that quality to their college. They will bring the ability to continue to be committed to things. And, whether those things change because their interest change, but that's a quality that they have demonstrated in what they've chosen to pursue in high school. And a sense of curiosity, you can have straight A's and top test scores across the board and not be intellectually curious at all. You just know how to get AIDS, you know, how to do the work. And that's where you know, being being curious about the courses that you're taking about the peers you eat in the dining hall with about speakers who come to speak at Yale about, you know, something that's going on at the art gallery, that just being curious about things generally is a is a wonderful quality. And it's the kind of thing that does tend to come through. Sometimes it comes through a student's writing very clearly. Sometimes it comes through recommendations. Teachers in particular who will talk about the level of curiosity that that a student events is, and the fact that when they raise their hand, they know the conversation is just about to take three steps forward, because that's just what the student tends to, tends to do to bring the class along with them. And so, you know, that's another quality and it's not that every applicant is going to have all of these things, but I think they're all valuable to us and to a lot of a lot of selective colleges. And so, you know, we we sort of read between the lines in essays, we read recommendations very, very carefully, We read a counselor report very carefully and these things can also come through interviews if the student does have an interview and they're they're not, everybody is interviewed. But that's usually a conversation with a stranger and sort of how did this student do sitting down with a Yale graduate who they don't know, presumably they shouldn't know if they're interviewing with them and sort of what what comes through there and and that, you know, those kind of personal qualities are often commented on in the interview report as well. So it's really, we come at the student from a lot of different directions. And even the academic piece does not just live on the transcript and on the test results. I mean, the academic piece is very much in the teacher recommendations as well. And and you know, the the the the teachers really helped separate those straight a students who are very good students and those straight a students who are very good students, but also passionate and curious and intellectual and all those other kinds of things. So you know, they help sort of separate the excellent from the excellent in a way. >> I love the way you summarize that passionate, curious intellectual and you talked about having a collaborative personality and being sort of connected to peers. It really describes a culture that gets built around learning at Yale And I wonder if you have any thoughts on how that culture sort of lends itself to the ability of education to bring out the best in those students when they come in. >> Maybe just sort of flip this on its head a little bit. The fact that that environment exists at Yale draws the faculty that it does. You know. And I think the education at Yale sort of starts with the quality of the faculty and and I think the fact that undergraduate education is so highly valued and the college is so much the sort of heart and soul of this university. There there are definitely people who are teaching at Yale because of that. And there are some faculty who have not left Yale despite entreaties from other schools. Because of that, they don't want to leave this place. So, when you have that faculty that is incredibly talented and also very, very dedicated to teaching undergraduates, and then you put in front of them a classroom of students who, if we've done our job in the admissions office properly, is bright and curious and motivated and really want to learn. And there's just a sort of energy that happens in those classrooms. And I think without both pieces, the other piece wouldn't be as dynamic if you have these fabulous faculty, and students who were really smart, but a little bit deadbeats and not that curious and they came in and took their notes and left the class. I mean, those faculty wouldn't stick around for long. They go to a place where they have students that are really excited, and those students, if they were excited and curious and motivated had these dullards speaking in front of them in the classroom, they wouldn't be real interested in sticking around. So, I think both groups really feed off one another and I don't think you can have one without the other, I guess I would say. But, does that answer your question? >> I think that this really draws out one of the points that Professor Craig Wright makes in his book, the Hidden Habits of Genius, which is that somehow geniuses find their way to hubs of, as you said, energy and activity in the world and they find their peers. And you're describing this situation where the faculty and the students really feed off of each other, and then there's this kind of an intellectual synergy in an environment, a culture that creates the opportunity for brilliant ideas to be expressed. I want to think for a minute about that. Those that perhaps don't get to that same starting line where they've managed to find their way to the right environment or the right community, or perhaps they don't come from an environment that fosters intellectual excellence for example. So just thinking about equality and access to all the tools that prepare you for an application to a school like Yale. I wonder if you have anything to say to how do you as an admissions person think about the issue of getting people to a fair starting line? >> One of the things that we think about and that is written somewhere into our mission statement which actually is in the form of a of a letter that was written by the Yale President in 1967 has been updated since then. But it is such an eloquent statement of of what Yale should be looking for, that it still stands basically as our admissions policy and he used the phrase equality of opportunity as something that is of great value at Yale. And I think that means we want to sort of offer this equality of opportunity to students of a variety of backgrounds. And I think that for the students who haven't had the opportunities to reach their maximum just they haven't had all the opportunities that you're that you're implying. We we look at them in the context of the level of opportunity that they have had. And so one of the reasons that our admissions officers are organized by geography, they are each responsible for a state or a part of the state or sometimes a school. And it means that they will be the first reader of all of those applications. So there is one person in the office who has read everyone from the state of Illinois or everyone from southern California and then within high school all of those applicants. And when we actually present students to the admissions committee, it is done by high school so that students are are sort of evaluated within the context of the level of opportunity that they that they have had or have not had and you don't expect a student who goes to a school that has no advanced placement courses, You don't look at the transcript and say well where the A. P. S. They aren't there. Whereas a school that has 25 A. P. S. And an applicant has had three will not look that applicant will not look as competitive and applicant in our pool as their peer at the same school that has taken more A. P. S. Or lots of honors courses or has obviously a more rigorous transcript. So when we look at the students from under resourced schools we will we will expect that they have done absolutely the most they possibly could with what was available whatever the more advanced courses are in their school. Even if they're not ap courses we will hope they have been in them. And whereas at a very very strong school we may be totally comfortable taking number 25 in the class at a very under resourced school where there are very few students who have high academic aspirations. We may not be comfortable going that deeply into the class because the there will be a few students at the top and then there will be sort of a fall off in terms of quality and motivation and transcripts and whatnot. And but that's also a case where the things that they're recommend ear's say are going to be very important. And even the story that the student tells is going to be very important. And I think for students who have been in in under resourced schools and in families that have not had education have not had the opportunity to go to college and they live in neighborhoods where they may be one of the only students who go to this particular school that they managed to be admitted to or whatever. I mean, clearly it is not, it is not a situation that values education highly. Their parents may value education, but they don't have the capacity to help them with homework or with their college applications or something. , what the recommended as say carries a lot of weight and they,, they will often say, this is the diamond in the rough. This is the gem I've been waiting for. I have been encouraging the student. It's remarkable given his background, what he has been able to achieve. I am, I am pushing him to apply to good colleges. I'm the one who suggested Yale or, or whatever. , they may, they may give us some context about family, which gives us a sense of distance travel. what, where the students started and how they have achieved to the point that they have achieved. They may comment that the student was able to get into,,, some sort of an internship over the summer which was very influential. ,, we will look at the, the extracurricular activities of a student like that and see that, that this, This kid works 15 hours a week, sometimes 20 hours a week. We don't look at for a long extracurricular list. Beyond that if you're working 20 hours a week to help support your family, you don't have time to be in the band and volunteer down the street and, join the theater and and play a sport and you may do some of those things, but at a much less level. But we give as much value to the work that that student is doing as to a longer list of extracurricular activities. ,, for a more affluent school down the road. So I think, I think judging a student in their own context is the fairest way for us to evaluate these students and also to see what other people say about them. It can also be an interview with a Yale. Alumni can be really, really helpful if there is a student like that who's had very few resources. But the application clearly has some interest for us that this is a viable application. We are, we are interested. We will absolutely try and get that student interviewed because that Means somebody who knows Yale well, is now talking to the student who aspires to go to Yale. And do they see a fit? Do they think that this kid would be okay? And doesn't mean they won't have a tough transition. They're kids from more affluent backgrounds who have tough transitions to college or terribly homesick, nobody's been at college before. But the alumni interview can also be very, very helpful in those situations. But there's no question we realize that the playing field is not level out there and that in many ways life is not fair. My father always used to say nobody ever said that life was fair. And so we just do our best to try and evaluate potential. The difference is that in some of these kids they've achieved to the point that they could, which is not as high as what they might have done had they been in in a more affluent environment. But they're just signals that the potential is really there, there's a lot of curiosity that comes out of what they've written and they list. Interesting majors or their essay just captures a sense of wanting to know more, wanting to do more. And you get a sense of a student who if they're put in an environment like the one at Yale, they're just going to take off. And it might take them to their second year to hit their stride. But you just get the sense that when they hit their stride, they're they're really going to take off. >> I think I'd like to close with this question as a person who has spent their entire career in admissions at Yale, ushering some of the best and brightest kids into this university. And also making the decision for others that although they may be among the best and the brightest Yale is not the right place for them. What would you say to the young, up and coming student, whether they're an eighth grader or a high school student about shaping their path toward the college admissions process? What's the best thing for them to think about doing? Is it getting into that perfect school? Is it finding their path or some a more eclectic and less deterministic process? >> So, I would say my fantasy is that nobody in eighth or ninth grade would already be thinking about where they want to go to college. Because that's four years down the road, that's four years of growth and four years of development and four years of maturity and developing different interests and whatnot. How can you possibly know before all of that has transpired what school you want to go to? And I think that an eighth grader probably doesn't know a whole lot about a school. So it means that they're ascribing some value to that place without probably a whole lot of knowledge about real knowledge in terms of how they would fit there. How the person they will become, which they haven't become yet would fit there and to me it just feels a little bit empty. Why would an eighth grader say, well I want to go to Yale and what does that mean? And if I were to ask them they probably wouldn't even be able to answer it. I think there is too much emphasis on schools that have gold stars attached to them for all the wrong reasons. And students who are authentic and honest with themselves will say I'm going to do the things that I love to do because I love to do them. And I will be a better person by doing those things. And as an admissions officer I would add and he will be a more authentic person by doing those things. And then let me see where I am approaching my senior year or sometime maybe in my junior year. And what are the things about a school? What are the things I want to find in a school? I want a school that has these opportunities, I want a school that values these things. I realize that I will function better in a somewhat smaller environment which doesn't mean an Ivy League school except maybe Dartmouth. I realized that even though I've grown up in a fairly small town, I get a charge when I'm in a city, my blood starts moving faster. And so I think I'd like to spend time in the city now you can't know that when you're 12 years old. So, I think that the more you can hold off thinking about college until maybe you're a junior year, the better. Kids should have the time to be kids and do what they want to do and not have this sector of college hanging over them. And that has everything to do with parents because kids are not born thinking about college. It's usually adults who start talking about college or maybe much older siblings. But I think that sometimes that they're the most wound up about the process, or students whose parents have perhaps been talking about it since they were in eighth grade. And constantly reinforcing you need to do this and you need to do that and you need to get these grades. And some of those kids end up being so anxious in their senior year about their performance. And where they're going to get in that it actually diminishes their attractiveness to to a college like Yale, which is so selective. Because there's just undercurrent of anxiety running through the application, which doesn't help them get in. >> So in summary, figure out who you are and then be yourself. >> Yes and then find a college where you can continue to be yourself. >> Well, thank you so much Margaret this has been such a fascinating conversation. >> Well, thank you for asking such good questions.
