Admissions on a slippery slope

This year, Duke received 31,565 undergraduate applications, a 6 percent increase from last year. As the number of Duke applicants continues to rise, the Office of Undergraduate Admissions has enacted a policy change to streamline the process in future application cycles. Previously all applications were evaluated by at least three individuals before being rejected, but now only a single regional officer will read an application in the first round of consideration, with the power to reject it outright.

This policy change may initially seem gut-wrenching, particularly, since in its inaugural year, it resulted in one-third of applications being cut after only a single read. The idea that a single individual can determine the fate of an applicant seems to contradict Duke’s allegedly holistic approach to admission. We ideally imagine that the admissions office would devote extensive time and manpower to roundly understanding each candidate, in all his or her intricate and individualistic qualities, and this step appears antithetical to that end.

With a closer look, however, the new policy proves to be an important and necessary change given the constraints of an ever-growing applicant pool. For one, the office has mitigated the risk of rejecting qualified applicants by requiring that the first reader be a regional admissions officer specializing in the applicant’s home area. These readers have the most familiarity with the applicant’s context, including school and demographics. This familiarity will add considerable nuance and accuracy to that first read.

The primary benefit of the new policy is that it frees up readers to concentrate on the candidates who move past the first round. This will result in a more comprehensive look at more competitive applicants. These applicants require even a closer examination to differentiate. A holistic approach to the most competitive applicants is particularly important to building a diverse class each year. More broadly speaking, rising admissions numbers are a double-edged sword. Although the growing number of applications speak to the University’s growth and caliber, the sheer volume of applications places an extremely heavy burden on admissions. In this sense, the policy change is only a temporary salve for the problem.

We expect admissions to produce a class that is diverse and well-rounded, but the current system buries officers under a mountain of applications, making this task nearly impossible. Incremental policy changes, such as the new one, can alleviate some of the workload, but too many changes will sacrifice the integrity of Duke’s holistic approach. A re-evaluation of the entire system is necessary to cope with the emergent trends. If Duke hopes to keep up with consistently increasing numbers of applications, a new long-range plan will be necessary.

The most recent admissions policy change may seem alarming. At the very least, it will result in more applicants blaming their rejection letters on an admissions officer’s bad mood. However, the change simply copes with extreme conditions that are constraining the admissions office’s time and resources. We hope such a change will prompt a more thorough look at our admissions process as the landscape of undergraduate admissions at Duke continues to evolve.