There's No Shame in Being Common

Contrary to the staff position, we believe Harvard's adoption of the "common" application is a step forward. Rather than demeaning Harvard's venerable traditions, the common application will make the College more accessible to students from less privileged backgrounds.

The staff seems to suggest that the hardest part about Harvard is getting in, and that the application is therefore what makes us unique. We disagree. Harvard's history of excellence goes well beyond a mere application; it includes its faculty, its traditions, and the excellence of its student body, none of which will be affected by this change. Accepting the common application won't hurt Harvard's ability to select the finest applicants because both the new and old applications ask similarly broad questions.

The diversity of the applicant pool may not increase greatly, but few could argue that adopting the common application would decrease diversity. We, both as a school and as individuals, pride ourselves on our efficiency; the switch makes the college application process a much more efficient, less time-consuming project for prospective first-years. Why should we require them to jump through another hoop just for the sake of "Harvard"?

Finally, the proliferation of many unique applications gives well-to-do students an unfair advantage. These are the students with access to highly-paid counselors who can guide them through each and every individualized application. For less privileged students who lack such resources, the common application levels the playing field, enabling them too to demonstrate their true worth as scholars.