Weekly Summer Edition Ann Arbor, MI
MichiganDaily.com
CELEBRATING OUR ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-FIFTH YEAR OF EDITORIAL FREEDOM
inside
OBITUARY
four main types of information highlighted by admissions:
personal or extenuating circumstances
NEWS
Talent Showcase The Library Talent Circus featured performances from library staff >> SEE PAGE 3
NEWS
#MISafeCampus Sue Sndyer hosted summit discussing campus sexual assault prevention
Your Application read & scored by admissions staff member
middle score
OPINION
New legislation incentivizes mass incarceration >> SEE PAGE 4
ARTS
Music Festivals Columnist explains how to start your own >> SEE PAGE 6
The Daily hands out its final grades for the Michigan softball team >> SEE PAGE 12
INDEX Vol. CXXI, No. 136 | © 2013 The Michigan Daily michigandaily.com
NEWS ....................................2 OPINION ...............................4 ARTS ......................................6 CLASSIFIEDS.........................8 CROSSWORD........................8 10 SPORTS..................................
final decision based on the 2 to 3 admissions readers who score applications from 1
(best to worst)
15
What happens next: ‘U’ admissions process explained University admissions officers discuss application review process Daily News Editor
Grading Softball
read & scored by territory counselor
read & scored by senior admissions staff member
ADMISSIONS
By SHOHAM GEVA
SPORTS
teacher recommendations “other considerations”
>> SEE PAGE 9
Privatization
high school performance
“When evaluators look at applications overall, Sanders said, they place emphasis on understanding a prospective student’s individual situation and resources .”
high or low score
Through the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act, students can view their applications to schools where they were accepted and attend, as publicized by Stanford University newsletter The Fountain Hopper in January. Earlier this year, with the hopes of gaining insight into the admissions process, the Daily worked with nine students who viewed their applications to the University, along with evaluative comments made by the Office of Undergraduate Admissions. The nine students represented a variety of genders, class standings, races, ethnicities, sexual orientations, socioeconomic
statuses, in- and out-of-state residencies, nationalities and geographic areas. The University did not allow the students to make copies or photographs of the applications, but did permit them to take handwritten notes, which they provided to the Daily for the purpose of this article. This article was written with the purpose of providing more first-person information about a typically closed process often surrounded by assumption and myth, with the understanding that among an application pool of tens of thousands, testimonials from individual applications will not necessarily be definitive of the overall process. The process Cumulatively, over the three years covered in student applications reviewed by the Daily — 2012, 2013 and 2014 — nearly 140,000 prospective students applied to the University. What the admissions office’s final decisions stemmed from, according to the applications we
Thursday, June 11, 2015
reviewed, were largely an average of two- or three-page-long evaluations and a rating between 1 and 15 — 1 being the highest rating an application can receive, 15 being the lowest. Among the nine students’ applications, there were several different paths taken through the admissions office before being admitted to the University. Some were only evaluated by an admissions staff member and a senior admissions staff member, for a total of two evaluations. Others, however, had an additional evaluation from an admissions territory counselor. In an interview with the Daily, Erica Sanders, interim director of the Office of Admissions, and Melissa Purdy, assistant director of the Office of Admissions, said applications receive differing numbers of evaluations based on the first evaluator — one of 82 part-time staff members who are assigned files at random. According to the admissions See APPLICATION, Page 3
‘U’ donor Bertram Askwith dies at 104 Donated funds for renovations in Shapiro Undergraduate Library By COLLEEN HARRISON Summer Daily News Editor
University donor and alum Bertram Askwith passed away at the age of 104 Monday night, according to a University press release. During his years as an undergraduate, Askwith served as an editor for The Michigan Daily. He majored in economics with a minor in journalism, and graduated from the University in 1931. Askwith began his business, Campus Coach Lines — a company that transported students who were New York natives home for holidays and school breaks — as an undergraduate student. He started the business after a railroad strike in 1928 left many students struggling to find ways home from campus. From 2000 to 2008, Askwith served as the vice chair of the Michigan Difference campaign. He also created the Askwith Fund for Innovation in Asthma and Allergy Management in the Center for Managing Chronic Disease within the School of Public Health, which focuses on creating new techniques to aid those affected by asthma or allergies. Askwith, himself, donated to the fund. Askwith established the Benny Friedman Fellowship in Sports for Knight-Wallace Fellows and the Mary Sue Coleman See ASKWITH, Page 8