Ghostwriters

This is the fifth in a series of five posts. The forth one is here. The first one is here.

It should be absolutely clear that I don’t condone ghostwriting and would never advocate anyone using it. That said, it is clearly something that enough applicants do that it is a recognized problem. As originally reported in the April 7, 2007 edition of The Wall Street Journal:

Before mailing out acceptance and rejection letters over the past week, thousands of colleges and graduate schools conducted their usual reviews of test scores, transcripts and essays. But less publicly, admissions officers focused on something else: police databases, plagiarism checks and reports by private-investigators.

There's a new age of vigilance in academia. Spooked by incidents including guidance-counselor fraud in Los Angeles, blatant plagiarism at MIT and campus crime in North Carolina, colleges and graduate schools are shoring up their admissions process. In an era when applicants seek an edge with $500-an-hour "admissions consultants" and online essay-editing services, schools are using their own new methods to vet prospective students. Much like corporations that have been burned by CEO résumé scandals, universities are tapping into the burgeoning background-check industry to verify what's written -- or not -- on applications.

The problem of ghostwriting is just one part of a larger problem of inauthentic applications.

SOME ADMISSIONS CONSULTANTS ARE GHOSTWRITERS

Not just here in Japan, where I live, but elsewhere I know of counseling services that provide ghostwritten essays. Not only those pursuing MBA, but even LLM, MPA, MPP, and other degree programs, use such services. I certainly will not name these services. Anyone who wants to find them anywhere in the world can find them easily enough.

NO LECTURES ON ETHICS HERE
I will not provide a lecture on why ghostwriting is unethical. If you are so morally challenged that you find it necessary to cheat to get into school, anything I write will not matter.

THE DAYS OF GHOSTWRITING ARE NUMBERED
For those seeking admission to top programs, I strongly suggest reading The Wall Street Journal article referenced above. In particular consider the following:

Turnitin.com, a Web site that high schools and colleges use to check papers for plagiarism.
The nine-year-old site, which screens more than 100,000 student papers a day, added an admissions-essay service in 2004. Over the last three years, Mr. Barrie says, the site has screened more than 27,000 admissions essays, and found 11 percent included at least one-quarter unoriginal material. Mr. Barrie says about two dozen schools now use the site to check admissions essays; none of the institutions would agree to be identified.

Clearly more and more schools will be using the technology for detecting
plagiarized applications.

Now imagine how they will use content analysis software to analyze whether the person who wrote the GMAT, GRE, and/or TOEFL essay, is the same person who wrote the essay(s). While at present, admissions can probably only do this on a case by case basis, the detection tools of forensic linguistics are likely to eventually make their way into the application process.

STILL WANT TO USE A GHOSTWRITER?
You may get away with it. I would be dishonest if I said otherwise. I hope I have the chance to revisit this issue again and announce that admissions offices are now routinely eliminating ghostwritten applications using a standardized protocol.

CONCLUSION TO THIS SERIES OF FIVE POSTS
As an applicant, only you can decide what kind of advice you need and who to ask for it. This is a very important part of the process that you control. I hope this series of posts has helped you better identify who will be a part of your advising team.

Questions? Write comments or contact me directly at adammarkus@gmail.com.
-Adam Markus
アダム マーカス
MBA留学, LLM留学, 大学院留学

Editors

This is the forth in a series of five posts. The third one is here.

As I stated in the first post in this series, I believe that an ethical approach to admissions advising is one that involves the applicant doing the writing. As I will discuss in this post, I think that intensive editing may very likely involve crossing the line between the ethical and unethical.

ETHICAL EDITING
First, let me say that certain kinds of editing, seem quite ethical to me and I am on public record for stating that certain kinds of editing techniques are ethical:

Another example is helping clients understand the importance of writing about the individual in their essays, “The Japanese tend to have a hard time expressing themselves. So I often read first draft essays, and they are talking about the organization or the group—which is not what the admission is looking for. The admission wants to learn about the person. So, I think it is very legitimate to say to somebody—‘hey, this essay is not focused on you’. I teach them the rules. That is not ghostwriting.”

In fact, helping his clients coming to that realization, Markus believes, is an ethical, legitimate process.

....Besides large thematic problems, counselors also often help clients better convey their ideas through simple changes in language structure. In the Japanese language, the verb comes at the end of the sentence, denoting that the most important idea comes at the very end. This type of narrative structure is often reflected in their essay as well, and they may take a long time to get to the actual point of the story. A counselor’s job also includes telling his/her client to reverse the sentence and narrative structure in order to work well with a western admission officer, “I tell my clients, ‘hey, you take way too long to get to the point—your reader will lose interest,’ ” Markus says. “Or, ‘you need to reverse your sentence so the main idea comes first.’ That is not unethical. It simply makes the essay more logical to a western audience.”

If by editing, one means making very targeted suggestions to a text or suggesting different ways to tell a story, I think that is ethical. The problem is when editing becomes rewriting.

WHEN EDITING BECOMES REWRITING
Editing becomes rewriting when the editor is no longer making suggestions about how the writer should rewrite the text, but is actually doing the writing. It is at this point that the ethical line has been crossed and we are beginning to enter the world of the ghostwriter.

EDITING VERSUS ADMISSIONS CONSULTING
Ethical editing is a part of admissions consulting. It can also be a standalone service. Some applicants might find that they don’t need an admissions consultant, but just an editor.

If you can answer “yes” to the following questions, you don’t need an admissions consultant, but an editor:
(1) I am confident about my overall admissions strategy.
(2) I don’t need assistance with brainstorming my essays.
(3) I don’t need assistance preparing for interviews. (If you are applying for an MBA, you better have someone to practice with.)
(4) I don’t need someone to review my recommendations in any great depth.
(5) I don’t have any substantive questions about the application process.
(6) I am certain that the stories in my essays present me as effectively as possible.
(7) I just need someone to proofread my essays and give me their overall impression of my content. I can handle any substantive changes myself.
(8) I am not interested in going through an examination of my goals and life experiences in order to determine whether the stories I intend to tell in my essay(s) and/or interview are the most effective stories for me to tell.
(9) I have sufficient advice already to succeed at the admissions game.

If you answered “No” to one or more of the above questions, I think you should consider using an admissions consultant if you can afford to so.

Questions? Write comments or contact me directly at adammarkus@gmail.com.
-Adam Markus
アダム マーカス
MBA留学, LLM留学, 大学院留学

Graduate Admissions Consultants

This is the third in a series of five posts. The second one is here.

If your mentors can't provide you with the assistance you need, you will need to pay for assistance. Admissions consultants (also known as admissions advisers, admissions counselors, and application counselors, and some even call themselves editors) are one such option.

WHAT IS ADMISSIONS CONSULTING?
The newly created Association of International Graduate Admissions Consultants (AIGAC) provides the following excellent summary of what admissions consultants do:

• Guide applicants as they explore professional and educational options
• Teach applicants to prepare applications that fully present their qualifications.
• Serve as mentors through the grueling admissions process.
• Provide the critical, objective, and knowledgeable eye that benefits all writers when submitting important material like application essays, personal statements, and resumes.

Regarding the use of "mentors" above, I think it is important to differentiate this from the kind of unpaid mentors that I mentioned in my last post.

WHO ARE ADMISSIONS CONSULTANTS?
Admissions consultants are a mixed group. Typical backgrounds for admissions consultants:
1. Former admissions officers.
2. Counseling professionals with degrees or certification in career counseling, social work, and/or a related field.
3. Professional educators
4. Individuals with a strong academic pedigree who found they are good at helping others with the admissions process.
5. At some companies that focus on MBA consulting, they have an MBA.

The advice they offer reflects this background: It is mixed. One can’t go to school to become an admissions consultant. It is a trade one picks up. A review of my resume (See my LINKEDIN profile and/or the humorous version), would reveal that my prior experience in higher education, international education, and test prep gave me a good background for the admissions consulting work I began in 2001. In general, I think you would find that most experienced consultants have a prior work history that similarly prepared them.

WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF GREAT AND BAD ADMISSIONS CONSULTANTS?
Just as their background varies, so does their ability. If you decide to use a consultant, I think the criteria below will help you determine who to work with. Here are some of the characteristics of great and bad consultants:

Great consultants:
1. They will listen to you and provide highly individualized advice.
2. They will understand your strengths and weaknesses as a candidate
3. They will have a solid set of methods for explaining all aspects of the process to you.
4. They will be totally honest. (For example, when discussing school selection they will provide you with an honest assessment of how your GMAT, TOEFL, and/or GRE scores will impact your chances for admission to a specific school.)
5. They will become engaged with you and your life.
6. They will refine their advice to you as your sessions proceed.
7. They are great at brainstorming and helping you tell your story.
8. They will push you to revise your essays and, if applicable, push you to practice your interviews.
9. They will let you know when they think an application is done regardless of either your expectations or their financial benefit. That is to say, sometimes they will advise working on something more than you think and sometimes less than you expected.
10. They either have or know how to obtain any admissions information that you will need.

Bad consultants:
1. Don’t listen to you.
2. Their advice lacks any depth or specificity.
3. They lack integrity.
4. They will not push you to work hard.
5. They are basically indifferent to you as a person because they just consider it to be their job to review your application materials or prepare you for an interview, which they will do only formally.
6. They don’t have high standards.
7. You will notice that they quickly fail to learn more about you after the first couple of sessions.
8. They have rigid preconceived ideas that they will foist upon you.
9. They are more likely to act like editors than counselors.
10. They seem to lack key information about the admissions process.

You will notice that in my list of characteristics for a great consultant, I did not include years of experience. From my perspective, much of what goes into making a great counselor is everything they did and the person they were before they even started consulting. Of course, a highly seasoned professional is more likely to produce a better outcome than a novice.

CONSULTANT OR CONSULTING SERVICE?
You will quickly find that admissions consultants are either working as independent service providers or part of a service. The biggest potential differences between hiring an independent service provider and services are as follows:

1. Service structure. Independent consultants, for both good and bad, are not part of larger organizations and hence the level of service you can expect will be personal and is likely to reflect the personality of the consultant. If you are someone who loves rules and regulations, a service is more likely to provide that level of bureaucracy. An independent consultant should be able to provide you with services in more flexible manner.

2. Changing your consultant. If you eventually discover that you don’t like an independent consultant, there is no organization to complain to, and depending on the way you are paying for the service, you may find yourself stuck with the consultant. On the other hand, if you use a consulting service, you will likely have the option of switching to a new consultant.

3. Choosing your consultant. Obviously if you use an independent consultant, you have chosen that person. On the other hand, if you decide to use a consulting service, depending on your contract, they may have the right to switch consultants on you. If you use service and don’t specify the consultant first, you may also find that the consultant you wanted to meet with is too busy to meet with you because they already have too many clients.

4. Getting multiple perspectives. One advantage some consulting services have over independent consultants is that they offer clients the possibility of getting the viewpoint of more than one counselor. While this can be quite helpful, it also requires managing the perspectives of multiple consultants, will likely be less efficient, and may prove confusing.

While some services will claim that they have an informational advantage over independent consultants or other rivals, I think this is an increasingly difficult argument to make given the accessibility of free or low cost information.

THE BOTTOM LINE
Ultimately the question to ask is ”Does the consultant have expertise?” No matter whether you use an independent consultant or service, you should really consider that is the consultant who will be impacting you. Regarding expertise, I think it is mistake to assume that you need to see a consultant who has an academic credential in your intended field of study. Just because someone does not have an MBA, LL.M., PhD in Electrical Engineering, a Masters in Art History,etc. is not not inherently a problem. Instead you need someone who has expertise in the admissions process, in listening to you, in helping you tell the most effective story you can, and in helping you present yourself at your best.

Questions? Write comments or contact me directly at adammarkus@gmail.com.
-Adam Markus
アダム マーカス
MBA留学, LLM留学, 大学院留学

Mentors & Unpaid Advisers

This is the second in a series of five posts. The first one is here.

First, two stories:

A Happy Story
As I mentioned in a previous post, when I applied to graduate school in 1990, I was fortunate to have an excellent mentor, a PhD student at the University of Chicago, who remains to this day one of my closest friends. I was lucky because he understood the admissions process and the relative difficulty for obtaining admission at a time when the US Economy was weak and many people were applying to graduate school. His advice was timely and practical and helped me succeed.

A Sad Story
In 1988, during my senior undergraduate year, I decided to apply to graduate school. As I was graduating in three instead of the usual four years, I was 20 years old. I sought advice from two of my professors, both were tenured, one had his PhD from Harvard and the other from Princeton. They supported me, wrote recommendations (that I later used successfully in 1990), but provided me with little guidance on the admissions process. I simply followed the application instructions and made a horrible mess of the whole thing. I was dinged everywhere.

There are two differences between my happy and sad stories.
The first has to do with me. When I applied at age 20, I was completely immature and totally lacked a real sense of the process or its relative difficulty. Two years later, I understood what the application process really involved and was able to make the right decisions.
The second has to do with my advisers.

My team of 1988 mentors simply consisted of two professors. While they were great professors who were recognized in their fields and wrote me very good recommendations, they were totally ineffective admissions advisers:
(1) Their advice was not based on actual contemporary knowledge of the admissions process. Since both taught primarily undergraduates and were part of departments that did not have graduate programs, they did not actually know the process because that had finished their graduate work decades earlier.
(2) They did not give me practical advice beyond simply following the application instructions.
(3) They were too busy to be really involved with my process and I was not aggressive enough to really get their full support.

My 1990 team was different. I talked with my professors about academic issues, but as far as the practical issue of applying goes, I had a new mentor, who:
(1) Gave me timely advice based on the actual admissions process.
(2) Provided me with a set of strategies for success beyond the application instructions.
(3) Fully committed to supporting me. He put in the time to advise me on strategy and review my materials.


If you have a mentor like my friend, you are indeed very lucky. If not, you may be able to bring together a group of mentors (professors, friends/colleagues who succeeded at the admissions process, experts in your intended field of study, current students of the school(s) you want to attend, and/or alumni) who provide you with all the support you need.

Alternatively, you may find that your mentor(s) can't provide with all the help you need because
(1) they don't have enough time,
(2) they lack sufficient knowledge about the process,
(3) you are finding that they can only advise you based on their past experience,
(4) your mentors are contradicting one another and you are not sure which one is right,
and/or
(5) you want extensive assistance putting your applications together.

MENTORS AND/OR UNPAID ADVISERS YOU SHOULD HAVE
Depending on the type of graduate program you are applying to, I think you will find it useful to develop a team of mentors and/or advisers who can support you. Highly experienced admissions consultants can usually provide equivalent support for what I mention below, but even if you use an admissions consultant, I would still get a second opinion from a mentor and/or unpaid adviser.

All applicants: Try to find an alum who has recently graduated and/or a current student to give you insight into each program you apply to. Students and recent graduates are really in the best position to tell you what a school is really like. This is especially important and relatively easy for MBA applicants. In other fields it maybe more difficult, but many schools have graduate students available for applicants to talk with.

For all graduate school applicants in general and PhD applicants in particular: As I mentioned in an earlier post, it is often extremely valuable to make faculty contact. Check with the admissions office for each program first before doing so. Those applying to MBA are less likely to use this strategy and depending on the school might be told not to contact faculty. Obviously if you contact faculty you had better have an academic topic related to your study plans to discuss with them.

For LLM applicants applying to Harvard Law School and most other top programs. You will need to discuss one or more of the legal issues you are interested in studying in a great deal of depth and thus you would be well advised to consult with a lawyer or law professor who has sufficient knowledge in the field you plan to study to assess the depth and accuracy of your thinking.

For those applying to programs where a writing sample or other sample(s) of past work is/are required. Make sure that you have someone in your intended field of study who can assess the strength of your writing sample. Professors and/or professionals in your intended field are ideal for this purpose.

For those applying to research based programs in the arts and sciences. If possible, have your research plan reviewed closely by a professor and/or other professional in you field who can assess it.

FINALLY
If your mentors and/or unpaid advisers are not enough, you have three alternatives. In the next post in this series, I will discuss admissions consultants.

Questions? Write comments or contact me directly at adammarkus@gmail.com.
-Adam Markus
アダム マーカス
MBA留学, LLM留学, 大学院留学

Good Article on Chicago GSB Essay Three

UPDATE: Click here to begin to read my analysis of Chicago GSB's essays for 2008 admission. Question 1. Question 2. Question 3. Optional Question 4.
If you planning to apply to Chicago GSB and want further insight into Essay Three, the PowerPoint Question, I suggest taking a look at the following AP article (excerpts below):

In a first, the University of Chicago this fall will begin requiring prospective students to submit four pages of PowerPoint-like slides with their applications....

By adding PowerPoint to its application, Chicago thinks it might attract more students who have the kind of cleverness that can really pay off in business, and fewer of the technocrat types who sometimes give the program a bad name....

"We wanted to have a free-form space for students to be able to say what they think is important, not always having the school run that dialogue," said Rose Martinelli, associate dean for student recruitment and admissions. "To me this is just four pieces of blank paper. You do what you want. It can be a presentation. It can be poetry. It can be anything."

...Martinelli acknowledges one reason for the requirement is that students inevitably will have to master the technology in their jobs.

But she says students won't be judged on the quality of their slides. Rather the slides are an outlet for judging the kind of creativity the business world needs.

Chicago does have a few ground rules: no hyperlinks and no video. Beyond that, "I really don't know what we're going to get," Martinelli said.

In a series of future posts later this month, I will discuss the Chicago essay set. Till then, you should take a look at accepted.com's and clearadmit.com's analysis.

-Adam Markus
アダム マーカス
シカゴ、ビジネススクール, MBA留学