16 Aug What Selective College Admissions Officers Actually Notice: Lessons from IECA Case Studies

At this year’s IECA conference, I attended a compelling session featuring Matthew McGann, Vice President and Dean of Admission at Amherst College, and Jordan Pascucci, Vice Dean and Director of Admissions at the University of Pennsylvania. Through a series of case studies, they offered a rare behind-the-scenes look at how selective colleges evaluate applications and, perhaps more importantly, what families often misunderstand about the process.

The session reinforced several themes that increasingly define highly selective admissions today: authenticity matters, intellectual fit matters, and applications are evaluated as holistic narratives rather than collections of accomplishments.

Below are some of the most important takeaways from the session.

Fit Still Matters — Even at the Most Selective Colleges

One of the most interesting contrasts presented during the session involved two Amherst applicants. Both students were academically strong. Both had impressive records. Both had family connections to Amherst.

Yet one student was deferred, while the other was admitted.

The difference was not simply grades, test scores, or activities. It was how clearly the student’s academic and intellectual interests aligned with Amherst’s educational philosophy.

The deferred student’s application centered heavily around business, DECA, marketing, and athletics. While these were meaningful commitments, Amherst’s admissions office felt the application did not strongly communicate engagement with the liberal arts nature of the institution or the intellectual exploration encouraged by Amherst’s open curriculum.

By contrast, the admitted student’s application reflected broad academic curiosity. Her coursework choices, essays, recommendations, and extracurricular involvement all reinforced a liberal arts orientation. Teachers described her classroom participation and intellectual engagement. Her essays connected civic involvement, city planning interests, and thoughtful reflection.

Both presenters emphasized that selective admissions is not simply about determining whether a student is “good enough.” It is also about understanding whether a student is likely to thrive within a particular academic culture.

This is an important reminder for students building college lists: colleges are not interchangeable. Applications are strongest when students understand not only what they want from a college, but also what the college itself values educationally.

Intellectual Engagement Often Shows Up in Small Choices

One recurring theme throughout the session was that admissions officers pay close attention to academic choices over time, not simply to the number of AP courses listed on a transcript.

What stood out was not necessarily maximizing rigor in every subject, but how students made choices within the opportunities available to them. Dean Pascucci noted that there is no single formula for rigor or preparation. Instead, admissions officers look at whether students make thoughtful academic choices that reflect who they are as learners and position them for success.

Examples included:

• Choosing AP Italian because it reflects genuine intellectual interest
• Taking AP Language or AP US History because they align with the reading- and writing-intensive nature of the institution
• Pursuing coursework that reflects curiosity rather than strategic résumé-building

This reflects a broader shift in highly selective admissions. Increasingly, colleges are less interested in perfectly optimized applications and more interested in coherence, authenticity, and intellectual self-awareness.

Recommendation Letters Matter Most When They Add Dimension

The session also highlighted how recommendation letters are used in selective admissions.

Contrary to what many families assume, recommendation letters rarely “make or break” an application on their own. However, they can significantly strengthen the overall narrative.

Both presenters emphasized that the most effective letters do more than praise a student. 

Strong recommendations:

• Bring a student into focus as a learner and community member
• Provide specific anecdotes and observations
• Show how a student contributes in the classroom
• Illustrate intellectual curiosity, resilience, or engagement
• Add information not already obvious elsewhere in the application

At small colleges, recommendation letters can be especially important  because of highly discussion-based classroom environments. Dean McGann noted that at Amherst, recommendations help admissions officers understand how students will function in small seminar settings where faculty interaction is central to the educational experience.

Both presenters also emphasized that admissions offices understand the context in which recommendation letters are written. Some teachers and counselors have large caseloads, limited time, or school structures that make it difficult to know every student deeply. Admissions officers do not penalize students when a letter is less detailed because they recognize that context matters.

At the same time, this is why students should do what they can to help recommenders write informed, specific letters. A thoughtful brag sheet or student information form can give teachers and counselors useful context—academic interests, meaningful experiences, activities, goals, moments of growth, and examples of classroom engagement—so their letters can move beyond general praise and bring the student more fully into focus.

The Rise of “Application Inflation” Has Increased Pressure—and Risk

One of the most sobering parts of the session involved integrity issues in admissions.

Both Amherst and Penn discussed the increasing number of cases involving exaggeration, misrepresentation, fraudulent reporting, or violations of Early Decision agreements, resulting in rescinded admission decisions.

Perhaps most striking was how both admissions officers described these issues as becoming far more common.

Both presenters repeatedly emphasized that students do not need to manufacture extraordinary accomplishments to be compelling applicants.

In fact, they cautioned that highly strategic or artificial application-building can backfire.

Daily Engagement Matters More Than “Award Moments”

One of the most memorable themes from the session was Penn’s emphasis on what Dean Pascucci called “rehearsal moments rather than recital moments.”

In other words, admissions officers are often more interested in how students consistently show up every day than in isolated headline accomplishments.

The strongest applications frequently reveal:

• Sustained engagement over time
• Genuine curiosity
• Classroom participation
• Community involvement
• Reliability and follow-through
• Incremental growth and contribution

Dean Pascucci noted that “99% of standout qualities” are visible not through carefully orchestrated résumé moments, but through consistent patterns of engagement developed over years.

This perspective can be reassuring for students and families who feel overwhelmed by the increasingly performative nature of college admissions culture.

Selective colleges are not simply looking for students who collect awards. They are trying to build educational communities filled with students who contribute thoughtfully, engage deeply, and participate meaningfully in campus life.

Selective Admissions Is About Building a Community — Not Winning a Game

Perhaps the most important takeaway from the session was the presenters’ repeated effort to “lower the temperature” around selective admissions.

Both admissions leaders emphasized that the process should not be viewed as a game to be manipulated through strategic positioning or last-minute résumé additions. Instead, they framed admissions as an educational process centered around fit, learning, and community-building.

Dean McGann noted that admission work is fundamentally about building educational communities composed of students with diverse interests, experiences, talents, and ways of thinking.

That perspective matters. At a time when students increasingly feel pressure to optimize every decision for admissions outcomes, this session served as an important reminder that the strongest applications are usually not the most engineered ones. They are the ones that most clearly and honestly communicate who a student is, how they engage with the world, and what they genuinely value.

The students who stand out are rarely those who try their hardest to look impressive.

More often, they are the students who consistently showed up—intellectually, academically, and personally—over time.