Application Review at the University of Rochester

Categories

Jon Burdick writes the third part of a four-part series (part 1) (part 2) (part 4) on Rochester’s new “test flexible” stance for undergraduate admissions.

The factors application readers look for at Rochester:

1. Rigor of school and coursework (how much rigor the applicant sought, both in the local context and as part of our overall class profile)
2. Trend and patterns in grade performances and learning experiences
3. GPA and rank in class
4. Test scores (SAT/ACT, SAT-IIs, AP, IB, A-levels, TOEFL)

5. Self-directed learning experiences (e.g., taking a class most don’t take, having clear priorities and preferences in one subject, specific comments in letters of recommendation)
6. Evidence of general curiosity and self-knowledge (through essays and letters)
7. Unique talents, achievements, and ways of thinking (through activities list, etc.)
8. Demonstration of good character, resilience and ethical behaviors (including recognizing limits and knowing how to seek help)

9. Evidence of commitments growing and deepening over time
10. Breadth of intellectual interests (not “well-rounded” filling every line, but not one-dimensional either)
11. Leadership (both overt, formal positions and informal role modeling)
12. Evidence of relating to peers in general and those from different backgrounds in particular (like those they will encounter on a compact campus and in roommate situations)

13. Understanding and valuing our unique curriculum, likelihood of appreciable success in one or more areas of academic interest that we offer, likelihood of stretching beyond the classroom into intellectual, enterprising, creative or research experiences (often the interview)
14. The record of efforts to gain and explain an understanding of Rochester (through activities such as interviews and visits and the quality of the supplemental essays)
15. Institutional interest factors, which can include (for all) diversity of background, academic preferences, geography, nationality, likelihood of persistence; (for some) legacy, financial security, and expected talent contributions to teams and ensembles

What do you think of the new test-flexible policy? Be sure to leave your comments below.