7 Lies Told by College Admission Officers

In the maze of college admissions, it’s easy to cling to every word from an admissions officer. However, it’s crucial to discern fact from fiction. Not everything an admissions officer says may be grounded in truth, whether due to misunderstanding, tradition, or misinformation.

Admissions officers, even at our nation’s top universities, sometimes spread lies. These lies are not always told purposely; and it’s not that they necessarily have poor intent; oftentimes, these admission officers pick up these myths from their superiors or colleagues, and misconceptions become common talking points.

Over the years, at Ivy Brothers, we’ve been bold in speaking truth to power and calling out admissions officers for perpetuating lies about the highly selective college admissions process. These myths only make the process more stressful for everyone involved.

So, what are some of these lies that admissions officers perpetuate? While there are many, we thought we’d zero in on seven.

1. The “Need-Blind” Admission Myth — “Financial considerations don’t influence our admissions decisions.”

Contrary to the claim of need-blind admissions, colleges often ask about a student’s financial need on application supplements. If financial status truly didn’t matter, why would this information be solicited at all?

Realistically, if a school practiced truly need-blind admissions, they might risk financial instability. Tuition and fees are vital for the operation of even the wealthiest institutions, and the cost of education often surpasses what tuition covers.

Moreover, signs of applicants’ financial background are littered throughout the entire application, from parents’ occupation to the student’s type of high school, public or private, to their residence or zip code, to, most importantly, the school report sent by the school’s guidance counselor. A student’s socio-economic context is absolutely considered in admissions.

One of our counselors, Megan, who graduated from Yale, attests: “International students, in particular, are often misled by believing this lie of need-blind admissions for internationals at certain institutions.”

This lie often falls apart when considering the economic realities schools face, making genuine need-blind admissions more of a noble aspiration than a practiced reality.

2. The Legacy Admission Lie — “Legacy status only gives a slight edge in tie-breaker situations.”

This explanation doesn’t hold up when you consider that a significant proportion of early admissions at top schools are legacies. This rate suggests a more substantial advantage than just a tie-breaker, a lie that admission officers like to espouse.

Legacy admissions involve more than just alumni relations; they often include development interests, making the playing field uneven for non-legacy candidates. In other words, legacy applicants and donors often go hand-in-hand; and universities, operating as businesses that ensure the school’s healthy endowment, must consider these factors as well.

Despite the ongoing debates and investigations into this practice, like the recent scrutiny at Stanford, legacy admissions continue to be a contentious issue with a significant impact on college admissions.

Finally, legacy applicants, as a result of having a parent that attended these institutions, and likely in the know, often have an edge compared to a student whose parents hadn’t attended.

3. The Equal High School Opportunity Lie — “All high schools are viewed equally by admissions committees.”

The reality is that the reputation and relationships of a high school with colleges can heavily influence admissions decisions. Students from well-known, high-performing schools often have an advantage over equally qualified students from less recognized schools. This is because of the established relatonship that these schools have with these institutions, as well as these schools’ widely-known standard of rigor.

This disparity is evident from the consistently high number of students elite schools admit from top high schools. Take a school like Phillips Academy Andover, whose matriculation is publicly available; among the past 3 years from the 2023–4 report, 30+ students will be attending Harvard University, 30+ to University of UChicago, 30+ to Yale University… you get the idea. Yet, admission officers continue to state this lie that every high school is seen equally, even with elite schools’ outsized outcomes.

4. The Demonstrated Interest Lie — “Demonstrated interest isn’t a factor in our admissions process.”

While some colleges claim not to track demonstrated interest, in practice, many institutions do care about how much a student appears to prefer their school, especially for Early Action or Early Decision.

Demonstrated interest can affect decisions since it ties directly to a school’s yield, which in turn influences rankings and perceived desirability. Admission officers would rather tell this lie, with the hope that even the apathetic, uncompetitive applicant applies and boosts the volume of applications.

5. The Asian American Discrimination Lie — “There is no discrimination against Asian American applicants.”

Despite official statements, the experience of Asian American students often contradicts this. There is significant anecdotal and statistical evidence suggesting that Asian Americans face a massive uphill battle for getting into top schools such as those in the Ivy League. Back in 2015, 60 Asian American organizations filed a complaint with the United States Department of Education, decrying the significant challenge posed to applicants who identify as Asian American.

Admission officers continue peddling a lie that these applicants are on equal footing. This practice of pitting these students against each other, and blaming these students’ disadvantage on personality factors, is inherently unfair.

Our Asian American students at Ivy Brothers, however, don’t face this issue: Our admissions roundtable guides our students to build unique and diverse profiles; even our students interested in science and technology are able to portray the quirky, uniqueness to their profile that helps them stand out from other similar applicants. Unlike other agencies, our students stand out by being distinctively different no matter their interest area.

6. The Early Decision Advantage Lie — “Early Decision significantly boosts your admission chances.”

While applying Early Decision does correlate with higher acceptance rates, this statistic is often skewed by the high number of athletes, legacies, and well-prepared candidates who apply this way. For the average applicant, the supposed advantage is minimal, and even less for the non-binding processes of Early Action.

7. The Community Service Requirement Lie — “Community service is a must.”

While community service can enhance an application, it is not a universal requirement. Admissions officers look for passion and dedication, regardless of the activity. Katherine, one of our counselors on the team who graduated from Harvard University, opines, “Leadership in a particular interest area looks much better than mindlessly gathering service hours. If a student is interested in benefiting their community, at Ivy Brothers, we encourage them to build or found their own initiative that can maximize impact!”

Navigating College Admissions Myths with Ivy Brothers

Ivy Brothers offers counseling to help families figure out what’s true and what’s bogus in the highly selective college admissions process. These sessions provide a reality check; we cut through the fluff, formulate a plan, and tell students like it is. If you’re interested in better understanding the landscape of college admissions, sign up for a consultation to get personalized advice and insights.