May 2009

Just received the following press release about a new program that employs social marketing to achieve measurable conservation goals around the world:

Rare---in Partnership with University of Texas-El Paso--Launches Groundbreaking Program in Four Locales, including Georgetown University in U.S.

(New York, NY; May 19, 2009) In a recent, much talked about Op Ed in The New York Times, Mark C. Taylor opines that we must “end the university as we know it” and make higher education “more agile, adaptive, and imaginative” if we want to solve the real problems facing the world today. An existing Master’s degree, with a new partner, is designed to better prepare community leaders to advance global conservation -- offers a look at how things might be done differently.

The majority of this Master’s Degree in Communication -- launched by the environmental non-profit, Rare (www.RareConservation.org), in partnership with the University of Texas-El Paso (UTEP) -- takes place ‘in the field.’ Students from areas of highest biodiversity around the world implement an entire social marketing campaign designed around a specific conservation goal, by mobilizing constituents in their communities. Rare’s CEO, Brett Jenks, emphasizes that, “The Master’s program participants do not graduate until they’ve made a measurable difference in the way people think about and practice conservation in their communities. Essentially, these students don’t graduate until they change the world…at least, their part of it.”

The program is administered in four languages by regional university partners in Mexico, China, Indonesia (as of late 2008), and, as of Spring 2009, at Georgetown University in the U.S. All graduates receive an accredited Master’s Degree from UTEP’s Department of Communication. UTEP has a strong commitment to grounding cutting-edge research and theory in real world applications. It is academic home to Dr. Arvind Singhal, one of the world’s foremost researchers and authors in the field of communication for social change. Dr. Singhal believes that the Rare/UTEP partnership “is a model of strategic alliance for conservation and beyond. It is a model of how social change should happen.” Rare’s Jenks adds: “We believe our partnership with UTEP fills a real educational gap in the conservation field – arming leaders with practical tools and solutions for mobilizing millions and changing behaviors as we race to stem the tide of species and habitat loss.”

Rare’s proven, honed model for changing local awareness, attitudes, and behaviors regarding climate change is called a ‘Pride’ campaign, so-called because it inspires people to take pride in, learn about, and act to preserve the precious natural resources that make their homes so unique. All students in the Master’s course are simultaneously ‘Pride’ campaign managers throughout the two-year program.

The Master’s program includes classroom training where participants -- most of whom are already career environmentalists chosen by Rare’s local partners -- learn how to change attitudes and behaviors, inspire support for environmental protection, and reduce threats to natural resources. The curriculum includes topics from social marketing and messaging, to threat analysis and multi-disciplinary strategic planning, as well as organizational, intercultural, and environmental communication and both qualitative and quantitative research methods.

The ‘in the field’ multi-media, social marketing component of the program includes the design of 30+ marketing vehicles, i.e., posters, mascots, bumper stickers, radio spots, press releases, festivals, school activities, sermons, workshops, billboards, etc., used to change minds and behaviors. Rare campaigns have been used to create new protected areas, reduce destructive fishing and illegal logging, and increase adoption of more sustainable agriculture, among other outcomes.

There's a nice collection of articles in today's WSJ for aspiring lawyers and JD/MBAs:

Creating a Shorter Path to a JD/MBA: This is a good discussion of the pros and cons of the 3-year joint degree. I would add that the 3-year program is too short unless you have a fair amount of work experience and very targeted goals for the joint program (and what comes after). You would need to hit the ground running as soon as you get there, and be very smart about mapping out those three years and the summers in between. Most law school applicants and many business school applicants I cross paths with don't have that much focus yet. They are going to graduate school to figure out what they want to do with themselves, and they are not really the ones who would benefit from the fast-track joint degree.

Law Firms Embrace Business School 101: Law firms are realizing that their attorneys lack management and business training and are therefore sending them to executive ed classes at business schools ("We realized our associates don't have an inside view of how our clients work").

Lawyers Often Lack the Skills Needed to Draw, Keep Clients: They don't teach you business development or client relations in law school, and I often remind law school applicants who tell me they're "not interested in business" that at a minimum, if they hope to advance as lawyers and own an equity stake in a law firm one day (whether at a large firm or as solo practitioners), they will have to learn how to think like business owners and learn how to run a business.

Hand in hand with client relations, it's also important for young attorneys to learn how to interact appropriately with more senior associates and law firm partners. Here's a recent example, in the form of an email exchange, of a junior law firm associate who needs to learn those skills (tone, content, spelling, judgment). It's a good reminder that going to a top law school is not the same thing as knowing how to succeed in the working world.

Thoughts? Comments? Please share.

LSAT tutor and blogger Steve Schwartz sends me this intriguing email. Check out his series of postings.

Hi Anna,

Hope you've been well.

I just published a series of posts about LSAC.

In this series, I report on the fact that certain LSAT PrepTests are only available to students who take prep courses. These exams are not available to students who choose to self-study.

The series includes excerpts of email and phone conversations with LSAC representatives, as well as emails from prep companies, verifying this.

There are five posts in the series, all of which I just published:

1. The Case of the Secret LSAT PrepTests

2. Official LSAT PrepTest February 1997

3. Cost of LSAT PrepTests | Self-Study vs. Course

4. LSAC's PrepTest Licensing Policy

5. Suggestions for LSAC on Restructuring LSAT PrepTest Sales

 

One of the questions I am asked most frequently is to provide advice for parents and students choosing between the SAT and the ACT.  As my responses to the questions regarding the differences and similarities have become more polished and concise over time, I’ll share them with you in a Q&A format, because it seems like the most efficient way to answer them.  Or maybe because I like talking to myself.  You be the judge.

 

Q:  Which test should I take, the SAT or the ACT?

A:  Well, it depends on what type of a student you are. The factor that most often determines your choice is the speed at which you read.  If you are the type of student who reads well and reasonably quickly, but doesn’t ever read a single book or article that hasn’t been assigned by the teacher, you’re going to be in the ACT camp.  The ACT offers more straightforward reading questions that lack some of the complexity and most of the vocabulary of the SAT, but at the tradeoff of requiring you to complete the section without much time to spare.

On the other hand, if you are a capable reader but just read slowly, then the SAT is going to be your best option to get to all of the questions.  I’ve worked with very smart but very slow readers before, and the frustration of not being able to complete all the passages on the ACT gnaws at readers’ consciences, leading them to try and rush and make lots of careless mistakes.  While studying for the SAT requires a student to memorize lots of arcane and abstruse vocabulary, students with time issues have a higher score ceiling on the SAT than the ACT.

The other reason reading speed factors into the decision process is the ACT science section.  The science section is very tightly timed; if a student has trouble getting finished with the ACT reading section, he or she is definitely going to have trouble getting the science section done in time.

Of course, if you fall somewhere between these two categories, sometimes it is just easier to take a diagnostic test in each, pick one, and stick with it.  If you are a fast reader with a great vocabulary, then the world is yours.  (Seriously.)

 

Q:  Ok, but lots of colleges prefer the SAT, right?

A:  First of all, a disclaimer:  as a tutor, my primary responsibility is to get a student’s score up, and to figure out the best way and the best test to do just that.  As I have often worked closely with very talented college advisors, I try to remain agnostic about the college advising process.  My advice should never be construed to conflict with that of a competent college counselor (because some colleges might have specifically stated policies of which I am unaware).

With that said, the general feedback that I have received indicates that colleges are primarily looking for a number that makes you look good.  They would rather see a high score on the ACT than a low score on the SAT.  If you’re a student who reads well in school but has never learned any vocabulary that wasn’t forced upon you, then unless you have a change of heart, the SAT is going to be an uphill battle.  

In every SAT class I have taught, I start harping on vocabulary from day one.  What unfortunately happens is that some students ignore me (and the vocabulary quizzes I give out), and discover by the end of the course that vocabulary is the single thing holding them back from their dream score.  By that time, they have to wait a month or two to take the test again, which, when coupled with final exams, causes them real pain.

For every ACT student just starting the test preparation process, the first thing I do is to give him or her a reading section.  The thought process and mistakes will get ironed out eventually, but I want to make sure that the student has enough time to get through each passage.  If that’s not the case, I have to manage the lessons much differently, and so it’s one of the most important things I can determine.

 

Q:  Ok, but seriously, isn’t the SAT regarded as a “tougher” exam, so it’s “worth more” on your application?

A:  When I was applying to college many, many moons ago, I had never heard of the ACT.  [Charles, you are not that old. Young grasshopper! - Anna] I grew up in Connecticut, and taking the SAT was a rite of passage.  Since around 2004, when I first encountered it, until now, the ACT has been gradually increasing its presence and market share and has gained roughly equal footing. 1.5 million people took the SAT last year, and 1.42 million took the ACT, according to each test’s respective web site.  As more and more stories have been written about the problems surrounding the SAT, (see here for an example), many colleges out there want to seem impartial or are deemphasizing standardized tests in their own admission rubrics.  The fact that you took an SAT or an ACT matters much less than the score you eventually got, which sometimes (but not always) matters much less than a lot of the other stuff on your application.

 

Q:  One last question.  Doesn’t the SAT test you more on “how smart you are,” while the ACT tests you more on “stuff you’ve learned?”

A:  No.  Both exams have one purpose in mind:  to divide the Junior class of American high school students into neat little piles so that they can sell off data piece by piece to different colleges and universities.  Both tests do this by providing a test of complex questions, although they manufacture complexity in different ways.  

The ACT’s attitude is, “We’ll give you a lot of questions that are more straightforward, but that you most likely won’t have time to complete, and ‘certain’ people will be able to get a good score.”  The SAT’s attitude is more, “We’ll give you fewer questions with more time to do them, but some of them are so hard that only ‘certain’ people will be able to get a good score.”  Both the SAT and ACT want you to believe that these “certain” people are the “smarter” or “more capable” students, but the research used to support this is highly prone to self-interest.  

See this link for an example, then contrast it with this one.  If you actually read the report (in the box to the right of the College Board press release), the College Board heavily massages its data to get the conclusions it wants.  If you wade through the thicket of language that they use to describe the “corrections” that they apply to the correlations, then you are a very patient reader indeed.

The takeaway is that you can exploit the differences between the SAT and ACT to find a test that is better aligned to who you are as a test taker (which is not necessarily the same as who you are as a student).

Agree?  Disagree?  Have any questions or similar points about graduate admissions exams?  Please comment.

Charles Williamson has helped hundreds of students prepare for standardized tests. He blogs for the Ivey Files about test prep, the intersection of education and technology, education policy, and whatever other topics strike his fancy.  

Could you tell me if schools gives applicants time to visit if they are admitted from the waitlist or hold category? Also, when do they make this decision?

Some schools give an option to visit (or at least give you a little time to decide), while others will give you only a short window to accept or decline the offer. The latter is more likely; if you were admitted off the waitlist, you may be told that you have a week (or less) to decide because they need to know whether to offer the position to someone else on the waitlist. In short, I would not bank on having time to set up a formal visit.

In terms of timing, there’s no way to predict that, because it all depends on how few or how many people who have already put down deposits decide to withdraw over the course of the summer (either because they themselves have been admitted from waitlists at other schools, their plans change, or they just fail to show up at orientation). That's called the "summer melt." I’ve known students to be admitted from a waitlist as late as August and even during orientation in September.

My suggestion is to put down the initial deposit at your top choice and then if you are admitted elsewhere and want to make the switch, all you’ve lost is the deposit. Just be sure you read the fine print on the letter of acceptance and/or letter for the deposit to make sure they aren’t asking you to withdraw your applications at other school (in which case, you can't stay on wailtists elsewhere). More on that below.

 

Say that next month I am admitted from a waitlist at School X. Can I still remain on other waitlists?

Waitlists are very odd, and there’s no way to predict if or when you’ll be admitted from one of them. Chances are relatively low, in fact, so I don’t think you’ll be faced with acceptances from more than one waitlist. That said, if you are accepted at School X, you will send in a deposit to secure your spot in the class. If, at some point after that, you are admitted to School Y, the “loss” to you of accepting the later School Y offer is the deposit you have at School X.

Many schools take deposits in stages, and follow-up deposits will typically be larger than the initial deposit. At some point you may be asked to send in your first tuition check (typically before classes start). In that situation, the “loss” to you would increase since you’d have more money invested in School X.

One caveat to this (and it’s an important one): read the fine print when you send in admissions deposits to make sure the school isn’t saying, “By sending us this $ you are promising to withdraw from all other waitlists.” In many cases, if a school is offering you a spot off a waitlist, then they are under the impression that you are committed to that school. That will vary by school, so read the language and/or listen to any communications you have with the schools.

 

I am on multiple waitlists. I don’t want to commit to my genuine number one choice, get rejected, and then not get into to my second choice because I didn’t make as strong a declaration of interest or intent to accept Is a declaration of intent binding? If it is unlikely that I would be admitted from more than one waitlist, would it be OK to send a declaration of intent to more than one school?

I understand your issue with writing to one school, getting rejected, and not getting into a second choice. There is no formal policy saying that a letter of continued interest in which you “pledge” to attend is binding. That said, the process requires honesty from everyone—applicants, admissions people, etc. You can certainly write to multiple schools and express “strong” interest in remaining on the waitlist to be admitted (or some other phrasing), but you should definitely not make a “pledge” (or anything that could be construed that way) to more than one school.

 

I want to send a "pledge" letter to a school that waitlisted me. How do I phrase it? What does pledging mean for me and the school? Can it ever hurt my chances of admission?

A letter of interest (or email) in which you "pledge" to attend a school if admitted from its waitlist is fine. Generally, people say something along the lines of: “If offered a place in the class, I would definitely accept” or “if admitted, I would definitely attend.” There is no formulaic answer or phrasing needed.

Pledging won’t hurt you. It is used to signal to the school that you will have a positive impact on its yield (the percentage of admitted applicants who accept a school's offer). That is, you’re telling the school that if it offers you a spot, you’ll help the school's overall yield by definitely accepting the offer. For the school, it’s a signal—a message indicating that it will not be wasting an offer (and take a hit to its yield) if it extends one to you from the waitlist.

There is no formal policy saying that a letter of continued interest (or email) in which you pledge to attend is binding. That said, you should definitely not make a pledge (or anything that could be construed that way) to more than one school.

 

I'm planning a trip to a school where I'm waitlisted. Is this a good idea? If they let me visit, is there anything I need to do?

There's no reason for them to not “let you” visit; in fact, you can visit whenever you’d like. Whether you get to speak to someone in admissions is a different story, but at the very least you can visit and see what’s what.

If you get a chance to speak with someone from admissions, make sure to introduce yourself clearly so he/she knows your name. You'll need to show specific (rather than generic) interest in the school and emphasize your fit. You can also use that opportunity to update them on any developments or more recent accomplishments.

School visits can be helpful to you in identifying what you like (and dislike) about a particular place, but don't expect that a visit will cause you to be removed from the waitlist and rewarded with an offer of admission. While you can make an impression on admissions representatives during your visit, there's no guarantee that the school will take anyone from the waitlist.

Still, visits can make an impression about the sincerity of your interest in the school, and they also help you in your own planning. If you haven't visited the school before, it can be hard to decide, on the spot, whether to accept a waitlist offer or not (particularly if a given waitlist school is not your obvious first choice). The more you know about the school before accepting, the better.

As an aside: If you can't visit, it's still a good idea to emphasizefit and update them about any developments in a LOCI (a letter ofcontinued interest, which you should be sending them about once amonth). If you've already included those pieces of information inprevious communications, it's fine simply to say that you're still veryinterested in remaining on the waitlist and thanking them for theircontinued consideration of your application.

 

Do you have any tips or feedback from your own waitlist experiences? Please share in a comment. You can find more waitlist advice in a previous posting here.

 

Gregory Henning is a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Virginia Law School. After graduating from law school, he clerked for Judge R. Lanier Anderson of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and then became an Assistant District Attorney in Boston. As part of the Anna Ivey team, works primarily with law school applicants.

To kick things off here with my new column at the Ivey Files, I wanted to share an idea that's been going through my head recently: the idea of efficiency in test preparation.  

As a tutor, I would sometimes get calls from parents who wanted to find out more about what kinds of "services" I offered. More than looking for a specific answer, they seemed to be trying to assess whether I sounded competent.  

Well, having spent many years thinking about the tutoring process, I wanted to answer this question a little more completely and give an idea of what it is a tutor actually does (or is supposed to do).  At the same time, I hope to provide a framework so that everyone can make a well reasoned decision regarding whether hiring a private tutor, taking a class, or just buying some test prep books is the best way to study for a standardized test.  (I'll talk about online preparation in another posting.)

First, let me hit you with a whammy (in bold, no less): 

Test prep students would drastically improve their scores if they simply bought the official study guides, read them cover to cover, did all the exercises, and spent time trying to learn from their mistakes.   

In other words, the idea that certain classes and tutors possess "proprietary knowledge" or "secret tricks" is a quaint hypocrisy.  (This is a topic I will cover in detail in a later posting.)  

That last part of the statement in bold is especially important.  One of the things that baffles me the most is when students show zero interest in understanding why they got a question wrong.  I have spent more time than I would care to recount trying to convince students to spend more time learning from their previous mistakes and less time taking new tests.  I think there are some deep-seated psychological reasons for this, and the consequence is that people spend massive amounts of time making the same kinds of mistakes.  

When studying for any standardized test, you need to cover a certain amount of groundwork, whether you work with a tutor, a class, or a book.  Far too many people out there think that if they hire a tutor or sign up for a class, then they can skip the groundwork.  Part of what I hope to show over the course of these postings is how mistaken this notion is.

To those of you who read the statement in bold and think, "Well who has time to read the book cover to cover?":  you're on the right path.  What classes and tutors actually do is to provide a more efficient process.  A good class or tutor can zero in on exactly what you, as a student, are doing right and wrong, and prevent you from having to spend the time to read that book cover to cover.  The Official SAT prep guide currently clocks in at 889 pages, the ACT guide at 623.  My point is that if you actually took the time not just to read what was contained in those pages but actually to learn it, then you would be able to get most, if not all, of the score increase that you would get from a class or with a tutor.  

Classes and tutors provide a quicker way to learn the same thing.  Tutors are more efficient than classes in the same way that classes are more efficient than reading a book.  When thinking about getting a tutor or signing up for a class, don't just look at the dollar cost of things, but make sure that you factor in the amount of time that it will take to get your goal score, and factor the amount of time you need to spend getting there into your calculation.  

If you discover that your time isn't free (and it almost never is), then think about signing up for a class or getting a tutor, but just going through this exercise will prepare you to start asking some smart questions of whatever tutor or class you run across.  "How will you get me to my goal score faster than reading the book?" rather than "What can you teach me?" is an example of the way I would think about it.

There are two conclusions here.  The first is to remember to stay on your toes.  If you start working with a class that's basically an excuse to do problems and then go over them in class, ask yourself, "Could I be doing this on my own or do I need a classroom to keep me focused?"  If you think you could be doing the exact same thing on your own, then it's probably not a good class to be in.  If you're working with a tutor and the tutor is merely walking you through a set of classroom type exercises, ask yourself if the tutor is really making the process more efficient.  Too many classes and tutors fall into lazy habits.  Being aware of the bigger picture can keep you on your toes.  

The second conclusion is that any option needs to cover that important groundwork.  Efficiency doesn't kick in until that groundwork is covered, so before you start looking to classes and tutors, make sure you spend some time reviewing the basics.  If you have to spend lots of time in a class or with a tutor covering the basics, then you've essentially discovered a more expensive way to read a book.

Any thoughts or comments from your own test-taking experience? Please share.

Charles Williamson has helped hundreds of students prepare for standardized tests. He blogs for the Ivey Files about test prep, the intersection of education and technology, education policy, and whatever other topics strike his fancy.