28 Oct “It Depends”: Lessons from the NJACAC Fall Admissions Panel

At the New Jersey Association for College Admission Counseling (NJACAC) Fall Workshop, featuring admissions leaders from Princeton University, Rutgers University (New Brunswick), The College of New Jersey (TCNJ), Villanova University, and New York University (NYU), the theme that emerged again and again — sometimes with a smile, sometimes with a sigh — was simple: “It depends.”

Every policy, every practice, every “rule” in college admissions has an exception. Whether discussing standardized testing, the use of APs, or the impact of AI, each institution described how its decisions are grounded not in national trends but in its own data, mission, and context.

In a moment when families crave certainty, the truth is more complicated — and more interesting.

Testing: One Question, Many Answers

Few topics illustrate “it depends” more clearly than testing.

Princeton University announced that it will reinstate its standardized testing requirement beginning with the Class of 2031 (students applying in fall 2027). Dean of Admission Karen Richardson explained that Princeton observed “a clear difference between applicants who had submitted testing and those who had not.” For the university, testing remains one useful data point among many, particularly as grade inflation continues to blur distinctions among transcripts. Still, Princeton reviews results within context, considering school environment, socioeconomic background, and access to preparation.

Rutgers University, by contrast, has seen no measurable difference in GPA or retention between test submitters and non-submitters, reinforcing its commitment to remaining test-optional. As Associate Vice Chancellor Marco Dinovelli noted, “These decisions have to be data-informed and specific to each institution.”

At The College of New Jersey (TCNJ), testing is required for nursing and accelerated programs, where math proficiency is closely correlated with success, but it is optional for most other majors. Meanwhile, Villanova University continues to find strength in flexibility: even with roughly 70% of its most recent class applying test-optional, the university recorded its highest retention rate in history.

The conclusion? “Test-optional” does not mean the same thing everywhere. It depends—on a college’s mission, research, and philosophy of learning.

APs, Dual Enrollment, and the Many Faces of Rigor

The same institutional nuance applies to APs, IBs, and dual-enrollment coursework.

At Princeton, students are expected to take AP exams and report scores, though the university does not grant credit for them. The admissions office looks for students who challenge themselves and pursue breadth: not just multiple APs in one subject, but a well-rounded academic story that includes the arts and humanities.

Villanova reads the transcript differently. AP scores are not reviewed until enrollment, and taking the advanced course carries more weight than the exam result. At Rutgers, internal data continues to show that success in advanced courses is the strongest predictor of college success, so performance — not participation alone — matters most.

TCNJ’s lens is developmental. Their reviewers want to see progress: that students are pushing themselves, showing growth, and balancing ambition with self-awareness.

Each of these perspectives reflects a different definition of rigor. As one panelist put it, “A transcript tells a story, not a statistic.”

AI and the New Frontiers of Admissions

Artificial intelligence inevitably surfaced as one of the year’s most pressing topics. Here, too, institutional approaches diverge — sometimes dramatically.

Rutgers shared that while the university does not use AI to review applications, it will employ AI detection tools when there is reason to believe AI might have written an essay. A low AI probability score isn’t cause for concern, but when results return as overwhelmingly AI-generated, the admissions team will take a closer look.

Villanova noted a growing number of essays that sound “ChatGPT-polished,” with some students even leaving behind traces of AI instructions in their text. The admissions team emphasized that they expect an applicant’s writing to align with their academic record and classroom performance.

TCNJ discussed efforts to responsibly embrace AI, including training faculty and staff in its ethical use. NYU is experimenting with AI for administrative efficiency but continues to rely on human readers for all admissions decisions, underscoring the limits of current technology.

The takeaway: colleges are not rejecting AI outright — but they are drawing clear lines around its responsible use.

The Broader Landscape: Change, Competition, and Concern

The panel also acknowledged the shifting landscape of higher education. The conversation about colleges closing was not about the panelists’ own institutions but about smaller private colleges facing demographic and financial pressures. Panelists noted that the coming decade will bring increased competition for students and, for some schools, a fight to survive.

At the same time, all five institutions are adapting in proactive ways:

• Villanova is expanding its campus footprint through the newly acquired Cabrini property and introducing new programs, such as Biomedical Engineering.
• Rutgers is investing in partnerships with community colleges and new medical facilities.
• NYU continues to grow its global presence with degree-granting sites in Abu Dhabi and Shanghai and first-year study options in Florence, London, Madrid, and Washington, D.C.
• TCNJ is launching innovative pathways, including three-year bachelor’s degrees and a Digital Filmmaking and Television specialization.
• Princeton is completing a major construction phase, adding a new art museum, laboratories, and a residential college to accommodate a growing student body.

Each of these updates reflects the same balancing act: growth with mission, access with excellence, and innovation with integrity.

What Keeps You Up at Night?

The session closed on a poignant note: “What keeps you up at night — and what gets you up in the morning?”

Despite the pressures of policy shifts, politics, and AI anxiety, the responses were deeply human:

• Villanova’s Matt Harris spoke of his frustration that a profession rooted in good intentions is too often viewed cynically. “Most people in this field are trying to do right by students,” he said.
• Rutgers’ Marco Dinovelli put it simply: “We don’t save lives, but we do change them.”
• NYU’s Kristy Materasso highlighted the joy of relationships — with students, counselors, and colleagues — describing herself as a “relator” by nature.
• TCNJ’s Gracie Montero, reflecting on her faith and new role as a grandmother, shared that what keeps her hopeful is “seeing a student feel seen — like when one was greeted in Spanish and lit up.”

It was a reminder that amid policy debates and institutional pressures, admissions remains, at its core, a people-centered profession.

The Takeaway

If there was a unifying theme across institutions, it was this: complexity is the new normal.

Colleges are making decisions informed by their own data and values — not by national headlines. For families, that means moving away from seeking blanket answers (“Should my child submit scores?”) toward asking contextual questions (“How does this college use scores?”).

In an era where “it depends” is the truest answer, the role of counselors is not to simplify but to clarify — helping students and families navigate nuance, interpret policies in context, and focus on what matters most: finding environments where students will not only be admitted, but will thrive.