什么樣的學(xué)生可以進入頂尖大學(xué)？（上）

The admissions process is out of whack. Just ask the heartbroken applicant, rejected by her dream school. Ask high school counselors, who complain that colleges don’t reward promising students for their creativity, determination or service to others. Even the gatekeepers at some famous institutions acknowledge, quietly, that the selection system is broken.

大學(xué)招生過程已經(jīng)亂了套。只需去問問被夢想中的學(xué)校拒絕的心碎的申請人。問問高中輔導(dǎo)員們，他們抱怨那些因為有創(chuàng)造力、毅力或樂于助人而前途遠大的學(xué)生，并不能得到大學(xué)的賞識。即使是一些著名學(xué)府的招生者也悄悄承認，篩選體系非常糟糕。

Ask five people how to fix it, though, and they’ll give five different answers. Sure, you might think colleges put too much stock in the SAT, but your neighbor’s kid with the near-perfect score thinks it should matter a lot. More than half of Americans say colleges shouldn’t give children of alumni a leg up, according to a recent Gallup poll; yet nearly half say parental connections should be at least a “minor factor.”

然而，若是去問五個人該如何解決這個問題，他們會給出五個不同的答案。當然，你可能認為大學(xué)太過看重SAT考試，但是你鄰居孩子的SAT成績接近完美，所以他認為這個分數(shù)應(yīng)該很重要。根據(jù)最近的一次蓋洛普(Gallup)民意調(diào)查，超過一半的美國人認為大學(xué)不應(yīng)該給予校友子女優(yōu)先入學(xué)待遇;然而也有近一半的人認為招生時，父母的關(guān)系至少應(yīng)該充當一個“次要因素”。

The debate about who gets into the nation’s competitive colleges, and why, keeps boiling over. The Justice Department has confirmed that it’s looking into a complaint, filed in 2015 by a coalition of 64 Asian-American associations, charging discrimination against high-achieving Asian-American college applicants. Also, students for Fair Admissions, which opposes affirmative action policies, has filed discrimination lawsuits against Harvard, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the University of Texas at Austin.

究竟什么人可以進入這個國家最優(yōu)秀的大學(xué)，為什么?這一直是個熱門話題。司法部已經(jīng)確認，它正在審查一個由64家亞裔美國人協(xié)會組成的聯(lián)盟于2015年提起的申訴，他們指控大學(xué)在招生過程中對成績優(yōu)秀的亞裔美國申請人存在歧視。此外，反對平權(quán)措施政策的“公平招生”(Fair Admissions)協(xié)會中的學(xué)生也向哈佛大學(xué)、北卡羅來納大學(xué)教堂山分校(University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)和德州大學(xué)奧斯汀分校(University of Texas at Austin)提起了歧視訴訟。

Although the Supreme Court affirmed last year that admissions officers may consider an applicant’s race among other factors, polls show that a majority of Americans disagree with that decision. Critics of affirmative action see plenty of room for future legal challenges.

盡管最高法院于去年裁定，招生負責人可以把申請人的種族納入考慮，但民意調(diào)查顯示，多數(shù)美國人不同意這一決定。平權(quán)措施的批評者認為，未來它在法律上還有很多可以質(zhì)疑之處。

Whatever happens, age-old questions about fairness in admissions will surely endure. For one thing, the nation can’t come to terms with a tricky five-letter word: merit. Michael Young, a British sociologist, coined the pejorative term “meritocracy” over a half-century ago to describe a future in which standardized intelligence tests would crown a new elite. Yet as Rebecca Zwick explains in her new book “Who Gets In?” the meaning has shifted. The word “merit,” she writes, has come to mean “academic excellence, narrowly defined” as grades and test scores.

不管怎樣，關(guān)于招生公平的古老問題一定會持續(xù)下去。別的不說，國家首先無法就“merit”(大意為優(yōu)點、才能、價值——譯注)這個棘手的詞達成一致。半個世紀之前，英國社會學(xué)家邁克爾·揚(Michael Young)創(chuàng)造了貶義詞“唯才是用”(meritocracy)，用來形容未來社會通過標準化智力測驗篩選來新的精英。然而，正如芮貝卡·茲維克(Rebecca Zwick)在她的新著《誰進去了?》(Who Gets In?)中解釋的那樣，這個詞的意義已經(jīng)發(fā)生了變化。她寫道，“merit”這個詞已經(jīng)成了“學(xué)習(xí)成績優(yōu)秀”的意思，“被狹隘地定義為”評級和考分。

But that’s just one way to think of an applicant’s worthiness. Dr. Zwick, professor emeritus at the University of California at Santa Barbara, has long been a researcher at the Educational Testing Service, which develops and administers the SAT. She disputes the notion that testing prowess — or any other attribute, for that matter — entitles a student to a spot at his chosen college. “There is, in fact, no absolute definition of merit,” she writes.

但這只是衡量申請人價值的一個方面。茲維克是加州大學(xué)圣巴巴拉分校(University of California at Santa Barbara)榮休教授，長期以來，她一直在負責開發(fā)和管理SAT考試的教育考試服務(wù)中心(Educational Testing Service)擔任研究員。她不認為一個學(xué)生能否進入自己選擇的大學(xué)，應(yīng)該由應(yīng)試能力或這方面的其他能力來決定。她說：“事實上，關(guān)于才能，沒有一個絕對的定義。

That brings us to you, the anxious applicant, the frazzled parent, the confused citizen, all wondering what colleges want. It’s worth taking a deep breath and noting that only 13 percent of four-year colleges accept fewer than half of their applicants. That said, colleges where seats are scarce stir up the nation’s emotions. Each year, the world-famous institutions reject thousands and thousands of students who could thrive there.

因此我們明白，你們——焦慮不安的申請人、心力交瘁的父母、一頭霧水的公民——都想知道大學(xué)究竟想要的是什么。我們有必要靜下心來想一想，在四年制大學(xué)中，入學(xué)率低于五成的僅占13%。話雖如此，牽動國人情緒的是那些競爭激烈的學(xué)校。世界諸多著名學(xué)府每年都會拒絕本可在那里茁壯成長的莘莘學(xué)子。

Yes, rejection stings. But say these words aloud: The admissions process isn’t fair. Like it or not, colleges aren’t looking to reel in the greatest number of straight-A students who’ve taken seven or more Advanced Placement courses. A rejection isn’t really about you; it’s about a maddening mishmash of competing objectives.

是的，被拒絕令人傷心。但是大聲說出來吧：招生是不公平的。不管你喜不喜歡，大學(xué)要找的不是修讀了七門乃至更多大學(xué)預(yù)修課程并取得最好成績的全優(yōu)生。拒絕不是針對你個人的;招生是一個瘋狂的大雜燴，各種目標混雜在一起，互相競爭。

Just as parents give teenagers a set of chores, colleges hand their admissions leaders a list of things to accomplish. When they fail, they often get fired.

正如家長會讓青少年做些家務(wù)一樣，大學(xué)也會給招生負責人列出任務(wù)清單。如果他們不能完成，往往會遭到解雇。

“We don’t live in a cloud — the reality is, there’s a bottom line,” said Angel B. Pérez, vice president for enrollment and student success at Trinity College, in Hartford. “We’re an institution, but we’re also a business.”

“我們不是過著脫離現(xiàn)實的生活——事實是，我們有一個底線，”三一學(xué)院(Trinity College)負責招生和學(xué)生發(fā)展的副校長安吉爾·B·佩雷茲(Angel B. Pérez)說。“我們是一個學(xué)院，但同時也是一個企業(yè)。”

On many campuses, financial concerns affect decisions about whom to admit. A recent report by the National Association for College Admission Counseling found that about half of institutions said an applicant’s “ability to pay” was of at least “some importance” in admissions decisions. Among other targets is geographic diversity, which is now seen as an indicator of institutional strength and popularity. (Some presidents have been known to gripe if the freshman class doesn’t represent all 50 states.) A campus might also need a particular number of engineering majors or goalies.

在許多學(xué)校里，財務(wù)問題會影響錄取決定。美國全國大學(xué)招生咨詢協(xié)會(National Association for College Admission Counseling)最近的一份報告發(fā)現(xiàn)，大約有一半的院校表示，申請人的“支付能力”在招生決定中至少“有一定重要性”。其他目標還包括地域多樣性，它現(xiàn)在被視為大學(xué)實力和受歡迎程度的一個指標。(有些校長會因為新生不是全國50個州的人都有而不滿)。學(xué)校也可能需要一定數(shù)量的工程專業(yè)學(xué)生或者球隊的守門員。

Indeed, a college could accept 33 percent of all applicants, but that doesn’t mean each applicant has a one-in-three chance. Success depends on what a student brings to the table.

事實上，一所大學(xué)可能會接收33%的申請人，但這并不意味著每個申請人都有三分之一的機會。申請成功與否，取決于學(xué)生能夠帶來什么。

Generally, nothing carries more weight in admissions than grades (plus strength of the high school curriculum) and ACT/SAT scores. With limited time and resources, those metrics offer a relatively quick way to predict who will succeed. But the measures have drawbacks. Grade inflation has complicated the task of evaluating achievements, and so has the variance in high school grading policies. Standardized test scores correlate with family income; white and Asian-American students fare better than black and Hispanic students do. Also, when colleges talk about predicting “success,” they usually mean first-year grades — a limited definition.

一般來說，在錄取過程中，平時成績(加上高中課程的強項)以及ACT和SAT成績是最為重要的。在時間和資源有限的情況下，這些指標提供了一個相對較快的方式，可以預(yù)測誰能最終獲得成功。但是這種措施也有其弊端。成績的通貨膨脹令評估工作變得復(fù)雜，各高中的評分方式也不一樣。標準考試成績與家庭收入相關(guān);白人和亞裔美國學(xué)生的表現(xiàn)要好于黑人和西語裔學(xué)生。另外，大學(xué)的所謂預(yù)測“成功”，通常指的是第一年的成績——這個定義是有局限性的。

And so, many colleges rely on “holistic” evaluations, allowing colleges to contextualize applicants’ academic records and to identify disadvantaged students who might lack the sparkling credentials of their affluent peers. Did they attend low-performing high schools or well-resourced ones? Did they participate in extracurricular activities? Do they have leadership experience?

因此，很多大學(xué)都要依賴“整體”評估，這讓它們能夠以申請者的學(xué)業(yè)成績?yōu)楸尘百Y料，識別出那些或許不像富裕的同齡人那樣擁有耀眼成績單的弱勢學(xué)生。他們上的是低水準的高中，還是資源充裕的高中?他們參加過課外活動嗎?他們有領(lǐng)導(dǎo)經(jīng)驗嗎?

What colleges look for sends a powerful message about what matters, not just to admissions officers but in life, and students often respond accordingly.

大學(xué)所尋求的東西清楚地表明，在招生人員眼里——以及在生活中——什么才是重要的，而學(xué)生常常據(jù)此做出響應(yīng)。

Dr. Pérez, a first-generation college student who grew up in a low-income family, recently revamped Trinity’s process to better identify promising students, particularly the disadvantaged. While reading applications, its admissions officers now look for evidence of 13 characteristics — including curiosity, empathy, openness to change and ability to overcome adversity — that researchers associate with successful students. These are also qualities that the liberal-arts college values, inside and outside the classroom.

佩雷茲出身于一個低收入家庭，是家中的第一代大學(xué)生，他最近改革了三一學(xué)院的招生程序，以便識別出有前途的學(xué)生，尤其是弱勢學(xué)生?，F(xiàn)在，該學(xué)院的招生人員閱讀申請材料時，會尋找13個特質(zhì)，其中包括好奇心、同理心、樂于接受改變和有能力克服困境等。被研究人員拿來與優(yōu)秀學(xué)生掛鉤的這些特質(zhì)，也是諸多文理學(xué)院在課堂內(nèi)外所看重的。

Trinity’s officers can check as many qualities as apply using a drop-down box labeled “Predictors of Success.” They must note where they saw evidence of each quality in the application. “It can’t be just a hint,” Dr. Pérez said. He recalls a teacher recommendation describing how an applicant had taken a stand on a controversial social issue in class, even though other students vocally disagreed with him. Impressed, Dr. Pérez checked the box for “Comfort in Minority of 1,” a sign, perhaps, that the student would contribute to campus dialogues. Also on the drop-down: “Delayed Gratification” and “Risk Taking.”

三一學(xué)院的工作人員可以使用一個叫做“成功預(yù)測因素”的下拉框，勾選他們發(fā)現(xiàn)的所有特質(zhì)。他們必須注明自己是在申請材料的哪些地方發(fā)現(xiàn)每一個特質(zhì)的。“不能僅僅是一種感覺，”佩雷茲說。他還記得，一位老師的推薦信描述了一名申請人如何在班上堅守對某個有爭議的社會議題的立場，盡管其他學(xué)生都出言反對。這令佩雷茲印象深刻，他在下拉框勾選了“樂于成為唯一的少數(shù)派”(Comfort in Minority of 1)，這或許標志著這名學(xué)生會促進校園中的對話。下拉框里還有：“滯后滿足”(Delayed Gratification)和“勇于冒險”(Risk Taking)。

While Trinity still values conventional measures, the new model has expanded the staff’s understanding of merit. “We’re trying to give students more credit for these characteristics, especially those who’ve had some challenges,” Dr. Pérez said. The new approach, along with the college’s recent decision to stop requiring ACT/SAT scores, has helped it diversify its classes. Low-income and first-generation students represent 15 percent of this fall’s freshman class, up from 8 percent three years ago.

三一學(xué)院仍然很看重一些傳統(tǒng)的標準，但這種新模式拓展了工作人員對才能的理解。“我們正試著讓擁有這些特質(zhì)的學(xué)生得到更多的肯定，尤其是面臨某些挑戰(zhàn)的學(xué)生，”佩雷茲說。這種新模式，還有三一學(xué)院最近做出的不再要求提交ACT/SAT分數(shù)的決定，已經(jīng)幫助提高了其班級的多樣性。今秋的大一班級中，來自低收入家庭以及身為家中第一代大學(xué)生者占比15%，三年前則是8%。

“I’m trying to increase the tools we have, and get beyond a system that is absolutely antiquated,” Dr. Pérez said. “As the country becomes more diverse, as we learn more about the correlation between standardized test scores and wealth, we have to be a lot more creative in predicting for success in college.”

“我正設(shè)法讓我們多擁有一些工具，擺脫一個絕對過時的體系，”佩雷茲說。“隨著這個國家變得更加多元，我們對標準化考試分數(shù)和財富之間的關(guān)聯(lián)有更多了解，我們必須采取更具創(chuàng)新性的方法來預(yù)測誰能在大學(xué)里獲得成功。”

What most colleges ask for from applicants doesn’t reveal much about the many skills and talents a student might possess. But what if colleges asked for more? The admissions process at Olin College of Engineering includes a live audition. After completing a traditional application, selected students visit the campus, in Needham, Mass., for an intense two-day tryout. In addition to sitting for interviews, they work in small groups to complete a tabletop design challenge, such as building a tower that can hold a specific weight. On the second day, they are given another task, like designing a campus building. This time, evaluators observe each student, noting how well they communicate with others and adapt on the fly.

大多數(shù)大學(xué)要求申請者提供的材料，無法很好地揭示一個學(xué)生或許具有的很多技能和才華。但如果大學(xué)提出更多要求，會怎么樣?奧林工程學(xué)院(Olin College of Engineering)在招生流程中加入了現(xiàn)場選拔。走完傳統(tǒng)的申請程序后，被挑選出來的學(xué)生會造訪位于馬薩諸塞州尼德姆的校園，參加為期兩天的緊張選拔。除了坐下來接受面試，他們還要與人結(jié)成小組，完成一項桌上設(shè)計挑戰(zhàn)，比如制作一個可以承受特定重量的塔。第二天，他們會接到另一項任務(wù)，比如設(shè)計校園里的一棟建筑。這一次，評估者會觀察每一個學(xué)生，注意他們能否與其他學(xué)生進行良好的溝通，能否快速適應(yīng)環(huán)境。

The experience is meant to help prospective students understand Olin’s collaborative culture, while giving the college a better glimpse of each applicant before finalizing acceptance. “It’s hard to nail down a student’s mind-set from the traditional elements of the application,” said Emily Roper-Doten, the dean of admission and financial aid. “This allows us to see them in motion, in an educational moment.”

這道程序旨在幫助未來的學(xué)生了解奧林的合作文化，同時也讓這所大學(xué)在做出最終錄取決定之前更好地審視每一個申請者。“通過申請材料中的傳統(tǒng)內(nèi)容，很難判定學(xué)生的思維方式，”奧林工程學(xué)院招生和財務(wù)資助部門主任艾米麗·羅珀-多滕(Emily Roper-Doten)說。“這種辦法讓我們在一個有教育意義的時刻，看到他們處于興奮狀態(tài)時的樣子。”

A desire to see what students can do with their hands inspired a recent change at one of the world’s most renowned campuses. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (motto: “Mens et manus,” Latin for “Mind and hand”) now gives applicants the option of submitting a Maker Portfolio to show their “technical creativity.”

為了看看學(xué)生能用自己的雙手做些什么，全球最負盛名的學(xué)校之一也做出了改變。麻省理工學(xué)院(Massachusetts Institute of Technology)的校訓(xùn)是“Mens et manus”，也就是“Mind and hand”(手腦并用)的拉丁文?，F(xiàn)在它給了申請者一個新選擇，可以提交一份“創(chuàng)客檔案”(Maker Portfolio)來展現(xiàn)他們的“技術(shù)創(chuàng)造力”。

Applicants can send images, a short video and a PDF that shed light on a project they’ve undertaken — clothing they’ve made, apps they’ve designed, cakes they’ve baked, furniture they’ve built, chain mail they’ve woven. M.I.T. also asks students to explain what the project meant to them, as well as how much help they got. A panel of faculty members and alumni reviews the portfolios.

申請者可以發(fā)送圖片、短片和PDF文檔，闡明自己參與的一個項目——他們制作的服裝、設(shè)計的應(yīng)用程序、烘焙的蛋糕、制作的家具，或編織的鎖子甲。麻省理工學(xué)院還要求學(xué)生們解釋這個項目對他們的意義，以及他們得到了多少幫助。一個由教職員工和校友組成的小組負責對這份檔案進行評審。

Last year, about 5 percent of applicants submitted a Makers Portfolio. “It gives us a fuller picture of the student,” said Stuart Schmill, dean of admissions and student financial services. “Without this, some applicants might not be able to fully get across how good a fit they are for us.”

去年，約有5%的申請者提交了自己的創(chuàng)客檔案。“它能讓我們更全面地了解某個學(xué)生，”招生和學(xué)生財務(wù)支持部主任斯圖爾特·施米爾(Stuart Schmill)說。“如果沒有這個，有些申請者可能無法全面展示自己多么符合我們的期望。”

M.I.T.’s experiment has sparked discussions among admissions deans, some of whom say they plan to offer similar opportunities for applicants to send evidence of project-based learning. They describe the Makers Portfolio as an intriguing glimpse of how a college might better align its process with its culture and values. The catch: Reviewing all those portfolios takes time, something admissions offices lack. Even a small college like Olin, which welcomed fewer than 100 new students this fall, must scramble to pull off its elaborate evaluations. Larger campuses couldn’t even consider such an approach.

麻省理工學(xué)院的試驗引發(fā)了招生主任們的討論，他們當中有些人表示，打算為申請者提供類似的機會，證明自己通過項目學(xué)到的東西。他們認為，創(chuàng)客檔案生動地反映出，大學(xué)可以更好地將招生過程與自己的文化和價值觀統(tǒng)一起來。問題在于：評審所有這些檔案需要時間，而招生辦公室缺的就是時間。就連奧林工程學(xué)院這種今年秋天只招了不到100名新生的小學(xué)院，也必須匆匆忙忙才能完成復(fù)雜的評估。更大的學(xué)校甚至根本不可能考慮這種方法。

Thorough review has become more challenging over the last decade, with waves of applicants overwhelming big-name colleges, victims of their own popularity. The University of California at Los Angeles received more than 100,000 applications for about 6,000 spots this fall. Stanford got 44,000 for just over 1,700 spots, and M.I.T. juggled more than 20,000 for 1,450 seats.

在過去十年里，全面的評審變得更具挑戰(zhàn)性，名牌大學(xué)受名聲所累，總會收到大量申請。今年秋天，加州大學(xué)洛杉磯分校(The University of California at Los Angeles)收到了10萬多份申請，但它只有約6000個新生名額;斯坦福大學(xué)收到了4.4萬份申請，而名額只有1700多個;麻省理工學(xué)院則需要在兩萬多份申請中挑選1450名學(xué)生。

Most colleges are considering more incremental ways to enhance evaluations. The Coalition for Access, Affordability and Success, with more than 130 prominent campuses as members, recently established an application platform with a feature called a virtual college locker, a private space where students can upload materials, such as videos and written work, that they could later add to their applications. Among its stated goals: to make admissions more personal.

大部分大學(xué)正在考慮采用更具增值效果的方法改進評估。前不久，逾130所著名大學(xué)加入的“入學(xué)、可負擔和成功聯(lián)盟”(The Coalition for Access, Affordability and Success)建立了一個名為“虛擬大學(xué)儲物柜”的應(yīng)用平臺，學(xué)生們可以往這個私人空間里上傳視頻和書面作業(yè)等材料，之后可以把它們添加到自己的申請里。它宣稱的目標之一是：讓招生更個性化。

So far, most of its members aren’t asking applicants to send anything different than before. But that could change. A handful of colleges are planning experiments using alternative ways to measure student potential. One hopes to enable applicants to demonstrate their “emotional intelligence,” or E.Q., to showcase their ability to work with others, according to Annie Reznik, the coalition’s executive director. Another seeks a way for prospective students to display their “fire” for learning.

到目前為止，它的大多數(shù)成員還沒有要求申請者發(fā)送與以往不同的東西。但情況可能會改變。少數(shù)幾所大學(xué)正在計劃試驗用其他方法來衡量學(xué)生的潛力。據(jù)該聯(lián)盟的執(zhí)行董事安妮·雷茲尼克(Annie Reznik)稱，有一所大學(xué)希望能讓申請者展示自己的“情商”，展示他們與他人合作的能力。另一所大學(xué)在設(shè)法讓申請者展示自己的學(xué)習(xí)“激情”。

“We want better inputs,” said Jeremiah Quinlan, dean of undergraduate admissions and financial aid at Yale. “The inputs we have predict success academically. Now, we have the ability to get to know a student better, from a different type of submission.”

“我們想要更好的申請內(nèi)容，”耶魯大學(xué)的本科生招生和財務(wù)援助部主任杰里邁亞·昆蘭(Jeremiah Quinlan)說。“我們目前看到的內(nèi)容能預(yù)測學(xué)術(shù)方面的成功?，F(xiàn)在，我們可以通過一種不同的申請更好地了解一名學(xué)生。”

Like many deans, Mr. Quinlan has grown wary of polished personal essays in which applicants describe their achievements. “They feel like they have to show off, because we’re so selective,” he said, “and it’s completely understandable.” Technology, he believes, can help colleges get to know the student beneath the surface of a résumé, to gain a better sense of their passions, the kind of community member the applicant might be.

和很多招生主任一樣，昆蘭也越來越警惕那些經(jīng)過精心修飾，描述個人成就的申請信。“他們覺得自己必須炫耀，因為我們太挑剔了，”他說，“這是完全可以理解的。”他認為，科技可以幫助大學(xué)了解簡歷背后的學(xué)生，更清楚申請者的激情所在，以及他們可能融入哪種群體。

Last year, Yale allowed students using the coalition’s application to submit a document, image, audio file or video in response to a prompt (they also had to reflect, in 250 words or less, on their submission). When Justin Aubin heard about that option last fall, he thought, “Cool!”

去年，耶魯大學(xué)允許學(xué)生使用該聯(lián)盟的應(yīng)用程序，根據(jù)提示提交一份文件、一張圖片、一段音頻或視頻(他們還必須用一段250個單詞以內(nèi)的話概括自己的申請)。去年秋天，賈斯汀·奧賓(Justin Aubin)聽說有這個選項后心想：“酷!”

Mr. Aubin, from Oak Lawn, Ill., was then a high school senior hoping to attend Yale. The following prompt caught his eye: “A community to which you belong and the footprint you have left.” He submitted a short video documenting his Eagle Scout project, for which he oversaw the construction of a monument honoring veterans. Even a well-written essay, he figured, couldn’t capture his experience as well as four minutes of footage, shot by his older brother.

來自伊利諾伊州奧克朗的奧賓當時是一名想上耶魯?shù)母呷龑W(xué)生。下面這段提示引起了他的注意：“你所在的社區(qū)和你留下的足跡。”他提交了一段短視頻，記錄了他的鷹級童子軍(Eagle Scout)項目——他監(jiān)督建造了一個紀念退伍老兵的紀念碑。他認為，哪怕是一篇寫得很好的文章，也不可能像他哥哥拍攝的這個四分鐘視頻那樣展示他的經(jīng)歷。

The content of the video impressed Yale’s admissions committee. “People sat up in their chairs,” Mr. Quinlan said. “You could see how he handled his leadership role, and we felt like we got a good sense of him in a way that we didn’t get from recommendations.”

這段視頻的內(nèi)容打動了耶魯大學(xué)的招生委員會。“人們從椅子上坐直了身體，”昆蘭說。“你能看到他如何發(fā)揮自己的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)作用，我們覺得我們對他的了解是難以從推薦信上獲得的。”

Mr. Aubin is now a freshman at Yale.

奧賓現(xiàn)在是耶魯大學(xué)的大一學(xué)生。

Did the video tip the scales? “That was a difference-maker,” Mr. Quinlan said.

這段視頻起作用了嗎?“它是決定性因素，”昆蘭說。