The Gatekeepers: Inside the Admissions Process of a Premier College (Paperback)

by Jacques Steinberg (Author) "Colleges make their admissions decisions behind a cordon of security befitting the selection of a pope..." (more)
Key Phrases: overall academic rating, admit minus, other admissions officers, New York, Los Angeles, Advanced Placement (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly
Education reporter Steinberg presents a compelling tale in this account, told from the perspective of Ralph Figueroa, an admissions officer at Wesleyan University. Expanding on a series of articles in the New York Times, Steinberg provides an insider's look at how Figueroa and the school's admissions committee factored grades, test scores, essays, extracurricular activities and race into account as they winnowed 700 students for the class of 2004 from nearly 7,000 applicants. Using real names, applications and interviews, Steinberg follows six applicants of varying backgrounds from their first encounter with Figueroa to their final acceptance or rejection. Although not a how-to book per se, Steinberg's work does include helpful advice, such as "there's no way to outthink this process" and "if you've got something you want to write, then write it the way you want." Steinberg portrays Figueroa and the other admissions officers as doing the best they can to give each applicant a fair assessment, despite their responsibility for 1,500 of them. Among the book's surprises are that supplementary material, no matter how impressive, carries no weight in deciding who gets in, while honesty about a mistake in one case, an incident involving a pot brownie can influence an admissions officer to admit. Wesleyan's high standards e.g., a 1350 combined score on the SAT may put some readers off, but the process that Steinberg describes is similar at most private colleges and universities.
Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From School Library Journal
Adult/High School-Steinberg had unparalleled access to the admissions process for the class of 2004 at Wesleyan, an elite liberal arts college in Connecticut. Originally presented as a series of articles in the New York Times, the stories were so compelling and the subject matter so topical, that he was convinced to expand them to book length. He followed Ralph Figueroa, a veteran admissions officer, for eight months, encompassing initial "marketing" trips, contacts with high school guidance counselors, the early-decision process, reading thousands of applications for final admissions, wooing reluctant candidates, and fighting for specific marginal cases. Evident throughout is the truth of Figueroa's assertion that there is no way to guarantee admission or any one thing that will make a certain candidate successful. Several high school seniors allowed the author to record their thoughts and concerns as he simultaneously followed the progress of their applications. While the close examination emphasizes the seeming inconsistency of the process, the resulting epiphanies and changes in perspective of the individuals followed in the year's march to college allow readers to see that a big name is not necessarily everything and that some students are much happier in a different atmosphere. The stories are so well written that teens will find this title a pleasurable read in the midst of much practical advice.
Susan H. Woodcock, Fairfax County Public Library, Chantilly, VA
Copyright 2003 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 320 pages
• Publisher: Penguin (Non-Classics) (July 29, 2003)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0142003085
• ISBN-13: 978-0142003084
• Product Dimensions: 7.8 x 5.3 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 12 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.5 out of 5 stars See all reviews (55 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #11,975 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in these categories: (What's this?)

  #16 in	Books > Nonfiction > Education > Policy
  #17 in	Books > Nonfiction > Education > Education Theory > Educational Reform
  #17 in	Books > Reference > Test Prep Central > College Entrance

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

43 of 44 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars REVEALING, November 24, 2002

By	BeachReader (Delaware) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)

This review is from: The Gatekeepers (Hardcover)

I agree with the reviewer who is an admissions officer that this book could have been about any private college. The methodology and procedures are the same everywhere, I am sure.

The book only reinforced what I already believed...that parents of those kids who are not star material are the ones who end up paying the bills for those who are at elite private colleges. I am one of those parents who paid! AS Steinberg says: "To help offset their financial losses due to increased costs for financial aid, colleges initiated an intense search for other 'customers' who could pay full price, whether from the U.S. or abroad."

I think the author did a marvelous job of making this a really interesting book, and immediately recommended it to my sister and brother, who both have boys in high school now. I did warn them, however, that what they read might be somewhat discouraging.

First, these admissions officers are very subjective (and how could they be anything else?)with a huge case load to handlein a very short period of time.

Second, I was appalled that one of the most important issues for college admission staffs seems to be how their rejection/yield rate is perceived by U.S. News and World Report.

And third, the way admissions standards are tweaked for academic stars or to achieve diversity can seem very unfair to those who have sons who fall into neither of these categories (a star or a minority).

I think there are many lessons about the college application process to be learned from reading this book. Perhaps the most important lesson is not to set your heart on one school.

I suggest this book as "must" reading for parents, students, and high school guidance counselors.

22 of 22 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars The god's do play dice with the universe, May 19, 2004

By A Customer

I read this book and had a wide range of emotions. I will start by stating my views tend to be fiscally and politically moderate. So, I had to temper my frustration in reading a book on college admissions written by a writer for the New York Times (a decidedly liberal newspaper)and of a quite liberal East Coast University, Wesleyan. The choice of school and admission officer to shadow express a liberal bias that may not entirely reflect the view of all top Universities, but is probably true to the nature of Affirmative Action nation wide. Mr. Figueroa, the Admissions Officer, deserves accolades for the passion he expresses in his responsibilities.

That said, my analysis must be dispassionate since my oldest child is currently looking at colleges. So here it is:

1. The Wesleyan pie is first divided this way, 30% African, Latino and Asian students. Many deserve admission, without question, no matter who you measure them against. These are the HP (high priority) minority students. Others are in the generally acceptable population range according to averages, courses taken, class rank, activities, leadership etc.. Some are at risk students, as are some in the other applicant cohorts. True, these students may be cut a little slack but, remember they still must pass courses to matriculate at the university. The U.S. News and World Report is watching and will note the number of non matriculating students. They will also note the number of students who are accepted and decide to go elsewhere. And so the games begin!

2. Foreign students are given 3% of the pie. Diversity by ethnicity and country raised in and state of origin produce robustness. The rules for foreign students are very similar I suppose although the book does not go into great detail.

3. 67% is carved out for those with European ancestry. My only beef here is that there are significant cultural diversity distinctions even amongst Europeans! We are not all rolled out of the same batch of flour or using the same cookie cutter, so to speak. But, alas I digress.

Of this group an expectation of SAT = 1340 or so is expected. This is the benchmark. Quality points are given for challenging AP courses as compared to your peers. The harder the competition at your High School and the more people apply to the same university the lower the probability you have to be picked over your classmates. Unless, of course, you are the one to apply early decision and have all the goods. Subjectivity always is a confounding variable. A wonderful essay read by an Admissions Officer at 3am on Saturday may work as well as the car built by the worst crew on the last Friday of the quota month. But chance does favor the prepared mind so make your essay special for you.

Activities count, clubs, organizations, etc., but being an officer or say President of the Student body counts more for showing Leadership. Life experiences expressed in a well written essay could tip the scale, as well.

Sports are important if you are "the one" who is needed for the team, but usually not without the other components mentioned. A much needed Oboist should get the nod, sometimes even if some deficiencies need to be overlooked.

Diversity by domestic geographic origin also is a consideration. Schools want to recruit and report diversity from all 50 states. Obviously, East coast schools will attract more people from the east and therefore you compete with other east coast students for a subset of the seats to a greater degree than you think!

So, keep the grades up, take the most challenging curriculum, be a leader in school organizations, express yourself in your essays, note any ethnicity that is accurate and listed (or not listed), take an SAT prep course, grind through old SAT exams, know the TEST and how to take it. Take it twice unless you have exceeded the requirements of the schools to which you have applied or you dialed 800 verbal and 800 math. Check out the requirements for financial aid, this sometimes requires persistence. Make a list of schools prioritize them as, dream schools, desirable schools and safe schools. Visit as many schools as possible to be sure they are a good fit for your academic major, that you like the culture of the school, the feel of the campus and that the location makes it easy to get home to see the family...

Roll the dice! Then it all becomes the mathematics of probabilities. Good luck! Remember, the harder you work the luckier you get! And you may find yourself thinking the refrain from an old song which stated in self proclamation, "My future's so bright I gotta wear shades!"

32 of 34 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars What is better? The overachieving 6 or underachieving 8?, February 27, 2003

By	P. Meltzer (Wynnewood, PA USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

This review is from: The Gatekeepers (Hardcover)

First, let me say that I thought that this was an excellent book and would recommend it to anyone who is at all interested in the college admissions process. Second, I was surprised at how many of the reviewers seemed shocked--shocked!--that applicants got bonus points for coming from minority backgrounds. Was this some kind of revelation? However one thing that surprised me a little bit is how--even moving beyond race entirely--the more advantages you have had in life, the more disadvantageous it will be for your admissions process. For example, I was unaware that having successful parents would be, in essence, held against you on the theory that more would be expected of you. While other reviewers have (jokingly?) said that they would advise their white kids not to check the "Caucasian" box, I might advise my (still very young) kids to say that their parents have been unemployed their whole life.

I suppose that the main issue which this whole process really boils down to is the following: As a college applicant, is it more important to succeed in life relative to the world around you (i.e. relative to your classmates, to others of your race, to others of your geographical area, to your own parents' life and accomplishments, etc.) or is it more important to succeed absolutely and not on a relative scale. This book clearly informs us that the answer is the former and not the latter. Whether that should be the answer is another question.

For example, say that a student's entire life could be distilled into 2 numbers each on a sliding scale from 1-10. The first number is simply your academic performance (grades, SAT's, course load, etc.) The second number is your background (race, economic circumstances, gender, etc.) In the case of Wesleyan, it seems clear to me that they would rather have a student whose first number was, say, a 6 if his or her second was a 2 (take Mig for example in Steinberg's book) than a student whose first number was an 8 if the second number was a 9 or 10 (take Tiffany Wang for example). Whether that is the right approach is certainly a legitimate issue for discusion and I'm not saying that it's not.

I suppose that one of the things that would be interesting to know (even though one never really can know of course) is whether those numbers will change in the future. For example, if one were to know that Mig would always be a 6 and Tiffany would always be an 8, would that change the analysis as to which is the right approach? I suspect that part of the reason that a school like Wesleyan would favor the overachieving 6 over the underachieving 8 is due to the hope or expectation that those trends will continue in the future and that one day the 6 will actually be ahead of the 8. And maybe that's the way it works. Who knows.