FERPA wisely

Last month, a group of Stanford students publicized a discovery that FERPA rights can be invoked by students to gain access to their admissions files, complete with comments and evaluation. As students in colleges across the nation increasingly begin issuing demands to view their files, the question of whether this tendency is doing more harm than good becomes especially poignant. We cannot prevent students from taking advantage of their rights as provided by FERPA. However, we discourage accessing admissions files and recommend that those who choose to view their files do so in a responsible manner. While seemingly constructive on the surface, it is necessary to be conscious of the negative effects this new movement could have.

First, accessing one’s admissions file can affect student confidence. Discovering that one was very close to rejection can be discouraging and students who discover such may feel isolated among peers who were “sure” admits. Although it is easy to shrug off the shadow of other merit-based numbers such as SAT results, admissions scores may be perceived as a more holistic evaluation of the student as a person. Such evaluations are therefore more prone to being used as tools of ostracism and stratification. We know that these feelings may already be common among students admitted off the waitlist, but their ability to move beyond this perception is a valuable example to be followed.

Second, from accessing files, students can glean important information about the preferences and tendencies of admissions offices. Although such access may yield greater transparency in an otherwise murky and ambiguous admissions process, the potential negative ramifications outweigh the benefits. Knowledgeable students can share important admissions practices gleaned from their files selectively with friends and family, thus giving unfair network-based advantages. Alternatively, this information can be bought and sold or used by admissions consulting companies as a service provided for money. Although we do not completely oppose a “market” for college admissions information, this new knowledge may be used by applicants to construct their application—and even their whole high school experience—as a targeted effort tailored to the admission tendencies of a specific school rather than as a reflection of their holistic growth as a person.

Proponents of the new movement claim that it promotes admissions transparency. Officers now must own up to their policies and will be incentivized to eliminate criteria that they are ashamed of. However, these same results would more easily come about if admissions offices were pushed to release detailed aggregate data on admissions procedures. If communal transparency is our goal, allowing individual students to minutely study their files for personal satisfaction might not be the best way to achieve it.

We cannot stop a process already underway, but we can try to minimize its negative effects. If you do choose to examine your files, or learn the admissions information of other people, take everything with a grain of salt. There must be a healthy skepticism on the ability of admissions officers to effectively evaluate the true character and competency of an individual from an array of scores and short essays. An admissions score is, therefore, more of an entertaining tidbit rather than a total judgment of a student. Finally, students' activities and standing on campus are far more important than the specifics of how they got there. These backward-looking curiosities should never detract from a sense of future potential.