Check what a reader can actually find
A memorable application makes a piece of work easy to understand. Repeating a catchphrase cannot supply missing evidence. Try reading the application as someone who has never heard of the project.
The Ivy Institute
Search for the claim
Circle one adjective such as innovative or influential. If you removed it, could a reader still name what was made and for whom?
Common App’s activities guide explains the information a reader receives.
Follow the trail
Pair the claim with one artifact, decision or revision described inside the application. A reader may never visit an external portfolio. Put the essential fact in the submitted text.
Revise the snippet
Replace a self-description with a sentence containing a verb and an object. Explain what changed, who else contributed and where the evidence stops.
The original column also discusses a 2024 New York Times opinion essay about applicant branding.
Edit an application search result
“I am an entrepreneurial problem solver.” A reader has no action to picture.
“I reorganized a pickup list after volunteers missed deliveries.” The reader can now see the problem and the work.
“Two dispatchers tested the new list.” This keeps the team’s contribution visible.
Build a proof sentence
Use the three prompts to build a short record you can copy or print. Your entries stay on this page.
Where this leads
From our advising notes
In one application review, our team suggested revising activity titles and descriptions so a reader could see the actual work behind them. The useful editing question was what the student did, especially where the original title did little to explain it.
For the next decision, use the related guides to follow one claim through the application and put one activity on the workbench.
Continue with student case studies, our advising team or a conversation about your own plan.
Two different but conceptually related conversations have found a fascinating point of junction in the ongoing rhetoric surrounding college admissions. Notably, we published an article here at The Ivy Institute comparing the process of applying to colleges to search engine optimization (SEO). From this vantage point, applicants are encouraged to consider themselves as a distinct, marketable "Brand" and to gather pertinent experiences that serve as "Keywords" to increase their attractiveness to admissions committees. It's interesting to note that this strategy was mentioned in a recent article by Sarah Bernstein in the New York Times, which explores related topics of how college admissions are changing.
Published on March 31, 2024, Bernstein's article is a moving assessment of the state of admissions today, where students are under increasing pressure to portray themselves as brands. Bernstein effectively demonstrates the limitations and expectations placed on applicants with the symbolic picture of a doll wearing a country-western attire and imprisoned inside a box labeled "Environmentally Conscious Musician" and "Awesome Applicant." This visual commentary offers a sharp critique of the way in which applicants are shaped into prepackaged images in an attempt to stand out in a crowded field.
As Bernstein points out, this occurrence is a reaction to the growing competition of the admissions process rather than just a trend. The personal branding technique has gained traction as acceptance rates decline, and the article brings attention to the growing importance and need of college admissions consultants to help students and families navigate the higher selectivity. These advisors and companies support building a personal brand as a vital differentiating tactic. It is believed that this method assist pupils in becoming as recognizable and memorable as a cleverly phrased commercial tagline.
Nonetheless, these tactics have a variety of ramifications. On the positive side, they offer the possibility of streamlining the applicant's identity presentation and facilitating admissions officers' ability to quickly understand the essence of a candidate. In contrast, as Bernstein states, is the worry that the crucial exploratory stage of adolescence may be limited by this focus on early and decisive branding. The haste to fit one's self with marketable characteristics and narratives may obscure the importance of this stage for real self-discovery and personal growth.
Critical questions concerning how to strike a balance between authenticity and self-promotion during the college application process are brought up by both Bernstein and us here at The Ivy Institute. While Bernstein cautions against the risks of such techniques and emphasizes the fuller, albeit messier, path of personal growth and identity formation, The Ivy Institute frames its debate within the strategic arena of SEO and suggests a measured approach to personal branding, while also leaving room for discovery. Both essays articles attention to the tremendous demands that contemporary college admissions officers face and argue for a more careful analysis of the ways in which these pressures affect young people's growth and sense of self.
