���񱦵�

Holistic review in graduate admissions is the process of reviewing an applicant as a whole individual, not merely select parts, such as GPA or test scores. Holistic review challenges the idea that quantitative measures alone are an accurate predictor of success in graduate school and offers admission committees with an alternative method for evaluating applicants.

Typically, departments that use a holistic process for graduate admissions place less emphasis on standardized scores and GPAs and attend more to socio-emotional variables like persistence and creativity. They use rubrics to systematize evaluation across reviewers. They keep clear, written records and revisit their processes annually, consulting application, admit, and yield data to assess effectiveness. There is no one-size-fits all approach; each program has unique needs; thus, holistic review looks different in different fields.

A holistic, or “whole file” review process in graduate admissions considers every aspect of an applicant’s file equally, without any one factor deciding admission. Holistic review also entails understanding an applicant’s achievements in the context of available opportunities and challenges faced. Holistic review employs a systematic, comprehensive, and contextualized approach to graduate admissions. It can help a program identify talent, avoid bias, and ensure inclusive excellence. Thus, holistic review serves the mission of the ���񱦵� to shape tomorrow’s leaders, be the top University for innovation, and to positively impact humanity.

Holistic admissions processes for graduate programs are designed to evaluate prospective students in a comprehensive and multifaceted manner, considering a wide range of factors beyond traditional academic metrics like GPA and standardized test scores. Holistic review challenges the idea that quantitative measures alone are an accurate predictor of success in graduate school and offers admission committees with an alternative method for evaluating applicants. These processes aim to select candidates who not only demonstrate academic aptitude but also exhibit qualities and attributes that align with the values and objectives of the graduate program.

The ���񱦵� Graduate ���񱦵� Application also prompts prospective students to provide a wide spectrum of information that may well indicate the applicant’s persistence in and commitment to educational success, as well as their potential for contributing to the community of the department. These may be found in responses to questions about:

• Parental educational attainment;
• Citizenship and parents’ citizenship;
• Native language(s);
• Demonstrated commitment to diversity in academic and civic realms;
• Personal statement;
• Diversity Statement;
• Curriculum vitae or resume;
• Volunteer activities;
• Work experiences;
• Recommendations addressing student promise and achievement;
• Educational background that is underrepresented in graduate education, such as attending a Minority Serving Institution (MSI), single-gender college or community college; or
• Participation in undergraduate research programs such as the Summer Multicultural Access to Research Training (SMART) program, Undergrad Research Opportunity Program (UROP), Maximizing Access to Research Careers (MARC), TRIO McNair Scholars Program, and other undergraduate research programs.

If you’re just getting started, the best place to begin is with a department-wide conversation about the place of graduate admissions in your program and field as a whole, what counts as success in your field, what qualities ensure graduate student success, if your process currently looks for those things in an applicant’s file, and if not, what changes to your process you might consider.

Some things for programs to consider before beginning the review of applications:

• How do we measure “success” in our program?
• What is our program’s ideal graduate student? Ideal cohort?
• What criteria are we currently using to evaluate applicants?
• Are our evaluation criteria and processes the same across faculty reviewers?
• In the future, what can we change about our application or application process to evaluate holistically? Are there criteria that are outdated that we still require? Are there criteria we should add?
• How do we define our program mission, values, and objectives so we can look for candidates who can contribute positively to the academic community and help fulfill our program's goals?

Resources

There are a number of resources available to aid in furthering knowledge about Holistic ���񱦵�. We encourage faculty and staff involved in the evaluation of prospective graduate students to explore further by looking at these resources.

• , NAGAP
• , Harvard University
• The Case for Noncognitive Measures, William Sedlacek in , Wayne Camara & Ernest W. Kimmel (Editors)
• , ETS GRE
• Beryl Lieff Benderly, Science
• Michele Sandlin, AACRAO
• , Council of Graduate Schools
• , University of Michigan, Rackham Graduate School
• , Julie R. Posselt
• , William Sedlacek
• Toward Inclusive Excellence in Graduate Education: Constructing Merit and Diversity in Ph.D. ���񱦵�, Julie R. Posselt, American Journal of Education
• , ETS GRE
• ,�����ճ�
• , Arthur L. Coleman & Jamie Lewis Keith, supported by the College Board and Education Counsel