VictorVictor wrote:
Since everybody is saying that everybody supposedly knows, why don't you share with the masses and tell us what those 8 questions are then?
because then the adcom will say, "ho-hummm, so the gmatclub kids and Sandy followers had an amazing advantage, but who cares, we ducked a bullet and can shut up and go back to junketeering around the world. So what if our process is bent and dumb. It's not like Wharton is paying us enuf to care."
what I want to have happen is have activist wise guys like you bombard adcom w. complaints saying NO FAIR, NO FAIR on their own blog, and see what they do when faced w., many pitchfork applicants who are being SCREWED and COMPLAINING. So what you suckers who do not know the questions should do, is start complaining.
that my pal, is called the democratic process.
what is in it for me, proof of what I have always said,
admissions consultants help keep the adcoms honest, that is ONE SERVICE they perform. And I have said that years and years ago, see my interview w. HARBUS, the HBS school newspaper, many, many years ago and pay attention to stuff in red :
https://hbsguru.com/media_harbus.htmlQuote:
HARBUS: OK, given the recent push back from adcoms about consultants, what are the best arguments in favor of consultants?
SANDY: Consultants can level the information grid, both in the obvious example that applicants from banks and consulting shops have a lot of contextual information about applying, about what questions really mean--if not the secret handshake--then just the data base of previous successful applicants from their firms, and access to mentors, successful peers now at school X, Y, and Z etc.
HARBUS: And?
SANDY: And in the not so obvious example of being a group of dedicated school watchers, who stay around year after year, (consultants) can be an added voice to that of the official information provided by the school. Consultants are like stock analysts, who are not perfect either obviously, but who do interpret what the official company line is, have industry expertise, and in cases, force a company to own up to mistakes, or just operate with the healthy knowledge that someone is watching them
sooo, if you are outraged about how unfair this is, start posting on Wharton applicant blog--dont worry, they will hear you. What they may do, of course, is just add dozens more questions, which will just make the whole outcome even more arbitrary--and if you read their whole spiel, destroy the very purpose of doing this in first place, which was to have alums grade ONLY THE 6 QUESTIONS AGAINST A GRADING SHEET SO EVERYONE IS EQUAL AND NO PERSONALITY OR HUMANITY SNEAKS IN. OR say that they will, given their assinine reliance on metrics, they have invented an algo which can control of answers which have been prepared by consultants. etc. etc. The W adcom has gone metric mad--and the adcom slide show to alums is just PROOF of that.