Changes

In mid-May, the Wall Street Journal asked the presidents of 10 U.S. universities/colleges to answer one question (of the Journal’s choice) from their school’s application.  Colin Diver got stuck with this one:

“A range of academic interests, personal perspectives, and life experiences adds much to the educational mix. Given your personal background, describe an experience that illustrates what you would bring to the diversity in a college community, or an encounter that demonstrated the importance of diversity to you.”

I found the essay a bit disjointed – the leap from a moment of conflict that happened to have a racial aspect to the musing on diversity didn’t really gel, to my mind.  But that wasn’t really my main problem with the essay.

My main problem can be summed up in five words:

What happened to “Why Reed”?

I’m probably misremembering (as is more often the case the more certain I am about a memory), but I thought the only essay I had to answer for Reed’s application was the “why Reed” one.  It was an introduction to the school’s ethos, succinctly wrapped up in two words.  “Reed is about free thinking, lateral thinking, creativity, individuality.  We’ll demonstrate it by not having the standard set of essay questions to which you can regurgitate a standard answer.  Instead, we will put pressure on you from the very first to think beyond the usual, and to demonstrate your ability to think for yourself, without leading and hand-holding.”

I got my essay back at graduation, as does everyone.  And I’m not sure I would have admitted myself based on what I wrote.  (Thank goodness the admissions team wasn’t made up of me in 1999!)  But still, the “why Reed” question prompted some of the best, most creative responses imaginable in the applicants whose applications I read while working at the admissions office during my senior year.  If the question posed to Colin Diver has supplanted the “why Reed” question, my opinion is that it was a very poor substitution indeed.