What to know: Soule said this in the context of a conversation about admissions data and transparency. As college access professionals advocated for sharing more information, Soule pushed back, wondering how much data was enough and whether it would be truly meaningful. Perhaps most notably, she shared an anecdote in which her decision not to disclose acceptance rates in a press release—instead, she described qualities of the admitted class—spiraled completely out of control. Very quickly, she saw her words celebrating the fact that 1/3 of the incoming Penn class conducted research twisted into statements that Penn requires research. Soon, a new cottage industry of pay-to-play high school research programs was leveraging this sound bite into profits. Soule was, understandably, rattled by this—and clarified that, no, Penn does not require research. That’s not a thing. (Really.)
Perhaps of all the speakers we saw, Soule best described the selective admissions process, and gave an important reminder to families: even when you have all the data, it cannot tell the whole story of a holistic, human process. This, unfortunately, makes it easier for misinformation about the process to spread. For example, in a local community, one student with a certain number of AP courses getting into Penn very quickly becomes a perception that students must take that many APs or they cannot get into Penn. Soule pointed out, “We have tens of thousands of students meet the criteria. We’re never saying, ‘Thank god we found a kid with 8 APs!’”
The moral of the story: holistic admissions is messy. It is confusing. Perhaps more often than not, to an outsider, the decisions do not make any sense. This is why it’s important to approach every piece of admissions advice you receive—especially if the source is not the college itself—with a hefty dose of skepticism.
