I work in higher ed admissions, using Slate, which is also used by at least 3 of the 4 schools mentioned. Fortunately or not admissions operations no longer rely on spreadsheets and mailchimp to collate data and score applicants (interest, merit or otherwise), and the software supporting them is getting pretty advanced.
While I agree this tidbit is newsworthy and icky, what's more disturbing to me is the lack of interest demonstrated by those responsible for educating students...faculty. Any university admin can attest to this. The people most qualified to judge an applicant's merits are surprisingly unwilling to do so in a fair, objective and consistent way. Anecdotal evidence, but I've gotten requests from professors of engineering (including CS faculty) not only to print application PDFs but sort spreadsheets by GPA. As if they can't figure out how to do that themselves.
I believe part of this trend is actually a response to that: admin staff look for more tools/metrics to inform admissions decisions. Misguided or not it's a sign of the times.
While I agree this tidbit is newsworthy and icky, what's more disturbing to me is the lack of interest demonstrated by those responsible for educating students...faculty. Any university admin can attest to this. The people most qualified to judge an applicant's merits are surprisingly unwilling to do so in a fair, objective and consistent way. Anecdotal evidence, but I've gotten requests from professors of engineering (including CS faculty) not only to print application PDFs but sort spreadsheets by GPA. As if they can't figure out how to do that themselves.
I believe part of this trend is actually a response to that: admin staff look for more tools/metrics to inform admissions decisions. Misguided or not it's a sign of the times.