HGSE 2020

[Jimmy54]

1 hour ago, Ibn Rushd said:

@JConan @Jimmy54 SSP is not the only one. HGSE is consolidating several of their programs with addition of 'concentrations' as a flexibility mechanism for those who want to pursue individualized curriculum. This will be the last SSP cohort. 2021-onwards, SSP will no longer be a program option. 

Here is a graphic explaining the consolidation; 

https://www.gse.harvard.edu/sites/default/files//HGSE_MastersProgramHistory.pdf

Here's a page explaining the changes;

https://www.gse.harvard.edu/masters2021/faq

Thank you @Rushd for this information. Looks like they are revamping their entire program to make it more flexible, which is good.

And I am not sure if applying to SSP will have any negative impact as a part time student because it will welcome flexible bound students. Then again, it's only my opinion.

Looks like decision will come tomorrow. Need to sleep early tonight so I won't think about it too much.  

 

Edited July 30, 2020 by Jimmy54

[JConan]

I admit that part of the reason I've been tracking my personal website stats is cos of anxiety/curiosity about finding out if they visited it. But at the same time, I am also disappointed/concerned that they didn't. This is because I am a visual arts person - having done a lot of work in film, media, illustration, virtual reality etc. This was a good component of my application proposal - so even from a holistic review perspective, I feel like they wouldn't get a true sense of me without reviewing such important elements of my submission, which are only found on my website/links that they clearly have not visited. 

Is there anyone else on this forum who had links/websites as part of their CV or application, and who has seen/not seen views on it that could be attributed to Harvard? How do you feel about it?

[MBEd]

Just now, JConan said:

I admit that part of the reason I've been tracking my personal website stats is cos of anxiety/curiosity about finding out if they visited it. But at the same time, I am also disappointed/concerned that they didn't. This is because I am a visual arts person - having done a lot of work in film, media, illustration, virtual reality etc. This was a good component of my application proposal - so even from a holistic review perspective, I feel like they wouldn't get a true sense of me without reviewing such important elements of my submission, which are only found on my website/links that they clearly have not visited. 

Is there anyone else on this forum who had links/websites as part of their CV or application, and who has seen/not seen views on it that could be attributed to Harvard? How do you feel about it?

I included links in my resume, but have no expectation for them to be visited at all. Having compassion for the admissions officers, it's a tough job and they do have to make a call on precisely what they see in front of them. I don't think they would have time, per applicant, to go looking elsewhere. Your work will be evident in your resume, accolades, subsequent opportunities, letters of recommendation, and statement of purpose. I imagine that proof document will be the only thing they read, particularly in such a short admissions cycle (just 3 weeks!).

Even just doing some basic pseudo-math, my application is 20 pages. Let's say a modest number apply in this round - 1000 applicants, maybe? That's 20,000 pages... not including LORs. They've had ~15 working days (not including weekends) to review. That's ~1,300 pages per day. Sure, most of those pages are light reading. Perhaps we can halve to 750 pages per day, not including your general admin pages.

I imagine each application will be read by more than one person, and then discussed. That's 70 applicants to discuss, per day (based on that estimate, and that's really just guessing based on prior numbers, but it could go either way - not accounting for GRE blowout). Just putting my teacher hat on, I know for my 150 students I have to have a rhythm and extraneous materials break that pretty quickly.

I wouldn't be disappointed. It's not personal, it's just the process. I'm sure your application - and your referees! - will represent the work you've done and the person you are, even if it's not the full technicolour experience. ?

[Physed14]

7 minutes ago, JConan said:

I admit that part of the reason I've been tracking my personal website stats is cos of anxiety/curiosity about finding out if they visited it. But at the same time, I am also disappointed/concerned that they didn't. This is because I am a visual arts person - having done a lot of work in film, media, illustration, virtual reality etc. This was a good component of my application proposal - so even from a holistic review perspective, I feel like they wouldn't get a true sense of me without reviewing such important elements of my submission, which are only found on my website/links that they clearly have not visited. 

Is there anyone else on this forum who had links/websites as part of their CV or application, and who has seen/not seen views on it that could be attributed to Harvard? How do you feel about it?

Honestly, with the tight turn around and what I'm guessing was a high number of applicants wanting this late opportunity, I'd be surprised if they even read past the opening paragraph on a lot of applications. I just keep imagining applications going into very quick piles-hard yes, no, maybes and then even the yes and maybes there isn't a lot of time to look at things in-depth. I've read in the past that in normal times, most college admissions spend like 12-15 minutes reviewing an application.  With a two week turnaround time and potentially thousands of apps to comb through, it could be even less. So I think decisions are going to be quite unpredictable as a result (coupled with we have no idea how many slots they are trying to fill or how many applicants there are for this summer cycle).

[JConan]

OK - that is fair. And some of you clearly know more about this process than I do. Let me just borrow your insight a little more. Is it common for a faculty member who is an important part of the program I applied to, to in anyway influence this process? In other words, if you have had a positive interaction with them and they think you would be an excellent candidate, would it be common for them to have left a note for this admissions committee to keep an eye out for this application or something like that? Or would that be inappropriate? 

I am assuming here, of course, that the admissions committee is different from faculty. This may be a sign of how little I know about the admissions process, but I thought the people who would review my application were the actual faculty?

[ahbeh]

10 minutes ago, MBEd said:

I included links in my resume, but have no expectation for them to be visited at all. Having compassion for the admissions officers, it's a tough job and they do have to make a call on precisely what they see in front of them. I don't think they would have time, per applicant, to go looking elsewhere. Your work will be evident in your resume, accolades, subsequent opportunities, letters of recommendation, and statement of purpose. I imagine that proof document will be the only thing they read, particularly in such a short admissions cycle (just 3 weeks!).

Even just doing some basic pseudo-math, my application is 20 pages. Let's say a modest number apply in this round - 1000 applicants, maybe? That's 20,000 pages... not including LORs. They've had ~15 working days (not including weekends) to review. That's ~1,300 pages per day. Sure, most of those pages are light reading. Perhaps we can halve to 750 pages per day, not including your general admin pages.

I imagine each application will be read by more than one person, and then discussed. That's 70 applicants to discuss, per day (based on that estimate, and that's really just guessing based on prior numbers, but it could go either way - not accounting for GRE blowout). Just putting my teacher hat on, I know for my 150 students I have to have a rhythm and extraneous materials break that pretty quickly.

I wouldn't be disappointed. It's not personal, it's just the process. I'm sure your application - and your referees! - will represent the work you've done and the person you are, even if it's not the full technicolour experience. ?

FYI, they specified in the Q&A webinar that they will not be visiting any links. 

[MBEd]

Just now, JConan said:

OK - that is fair. And some of you clearly know more about this process than I do. Let me just borrow your insight a little more. Is it common for a faculty member who is an important part of the program I applied to, to in anyway influence this process? In other words, if you have had a positive interaction with them and they think you would be an excellent candidate, would it be common for them to have left a note for this admissions committee to keep an eye out for this application or something like that? Or would that be inappropriate? 

I am assuming here, of course, that the admissions committee is different from faculty. This may be a sign of how little I know about the admissions process, but I thought the people who would review my application were the actual faculty?

A mentor of mine received an extremely lucrative fellowship for his PhD at another Ivy, and he indicated that a lot of the process can be influenced by faculty. Which makes a lot of sense - in postgrad, they're looking for a more complex mix of your ability, and your fit for the program. Fit for the program includes collaborative relationships with faculty and research interests. It's good pedagogy - andragogy - to factor relationships and mutual interests into a decision like this, as that will produce successful research and reputation for the institution at hand.

Of course, there are ethical questions there, as well. "A positive interaction" can mean any number of things I'm sure, and not all of them would be appropriate for consideration. The admissions committee are separate from faculty (as far as I know), but I imagine they will consult closely with each other, particularly given the cohort-style admissions process where applicants are not just evaluated based on their fit for the institution, but with each other, as well.

In short... it might, it might not.

[Physed14]

3 minutes ago, JConan said:

OK - that is fair. And some of you clearly know more about this process than I do. Let me just borrow your insight a little more. Is it common for a faculty member who is an important part of the program I applied to, to in anyway influence this process? In other words, if you have had a positive interaction with them and they think you would be an excellent candidate, would it be common for them to have left a note for this admissions committee to keep an eye out for this application or something like that? Or would that be inappropriate? 

I am assuming here, of course, that the admissions committee is different from faculty. This may be a sign of how little I know about the admissions process, but I thought the people who would review my application were the actual faculty?

Does said faculty member know you are applying? Did you use them as a reference? I doubt highly that the faculty is involved in this process. Perhaps the dean of the program. Maybe a small committee for each program. I find, in my experience in the school I work for, it would be very rare for someone to advocate unsolicited. Even if asked to do so by the candidate, a lot of people don't like to mix their professional work in such a way that involves whom a school admits. If you asked for a formal recommendation from the person, I think that would be different. Otherwise, I think it would be doubtful they would get involved, but I'm just assuming here.

 

Edited July 31, 2020 by Physed14

[JConan]

No they are not a reference, but they did encourage me to apply - I could be considered a colleague because I work in similar circles to them. They said I would be an excellent candidate. I don't know their current status but they at least used to be the director of the program - so let's assume they are an important member. I did assume the people reviewing would be faculty 'cos what I've proposed could be close collaborations with faculty, but I guess that's not the case.  

[Physed14]

2 minutes ago, JConan said:

No they are not a reference, but they did encourage me to apply - I could be considered a colleague because I work in similar circles to them. They said I would be an excellent candidate. I don't know their current status but they at least used to be the director of the program - so let's assume they are an important member. I did assume the people reviewing would be faculty 'cos what I've proposed could be close collaborations with faculty, but I guess that's not the case.  

Who knows really. Like was mentioned before, it might help, it might not. So much is unknown about all this from our end. I just imagine that the faculty right now is working furiously to convert their courses to the new online format so that their involvement in this process would probably be extremely limited. But again, all this is just guessing on my part. It's a crazy undertaking for Harvard to move entirely online, a crazy undertaking for all of us to turn around an application so fast, and crazy for the admissions team to get through all of it so fast. Just crazy times all around. I'm buckling up and going along for the ride, wherever it may or may not lead me. 

Edited July 31, 2020 by Physed14

[boptillidrop77]

1 hour ago, JConan said:

I admit that part of the reason I've been tracking my personal website stats is cos of anxiety/curiosity about finding out if they visited it. But at the same time, I am also disappointed/concerned that they didn't. This is because I am a visual arts person - having done a lot of work in film, media, illustration, virtual reality etc. This was a good component of my application proposal - so even from a holistic review perspective, I feel like they wouldn't get a true sense of me without reviewing such important elements of my submission, which are only found on my website/links that they clearly have not visited. 

Is there anyone else on this forum who had links/websites as part of their CV or application, and who has seen/not seen views on it that could be attributed to Harvard? How do you feel about it?

I also have a largely visual / film- based portfolio that I put on as a link on my resume. I too have been closely watching the analytics on it and have had no new visitors that would point to the admissions staff. At first, it disappointed me, but I can see why they wouldn’t have enough time to look at links. 

[Oden]

Harvard College undergraduate admissions are very thorough, even though they get about 40,000 applications and only admit approx. 2000. For the the applicants that make it to the final phases of that review process, regional advocates argue why their selectees should be admitted.  These reviewers check and analyze everything - often, with images of the undecided applicant’s narratives on a large screen for all to challenge.  Sometimes, these harvard admission advocates will call the applicant during these final admission’s reviews to gain more insights, so they in turn can make a better case to the committee - a second contact in addition to the interview.  This was the case with my admitted kids.  

 Obviously, Harvard College is undergrad and this is hgse grad school,

But, I bring this all up because I know hgse is normally thorough too. So, I was surprised at their decisions to not interview, not require the GRE, not go to links, and their comments in the webinar that admissions during this cycle are limited because it’s intended to fill an attendance gap due to COVID and aversion to online college.

My fear was that this all meant they are only going to give serious consideration to the most elite in the applicant pool - those that can be admitted absent the normal requirements: the one’s that are a no-brainer decisions, for whatever reason. And since space is limited, many of these elite may not be admitted.

I still applied, because I’m hoping I’m wrong. . . ?

Oden

[boptillidrop77]

I’m hoping you’re wrong too, Oden! ?  I didn’t know they used to have interviews pre-Covid, but yeah, they definitely sound very thorough. 

[Physed14]

I thought HGSE only did interviews for the doctoral candidates and not M.ed candidates (even pre-covid). 

Edited July 31, 2020 by Physed14

[art229]

29 minutes ago, Physed14 said:

I thought HGSE only did interviews for the doctoral candidates and not M.ed candidates (even pre-covid). 

Yes, from my understanding this is true. I'm sure they've said they don't/haven't interviewed Ed.M candidates--in reviewing previous threads people also confirm this. 

 

[MBEd]

On 7/30/2020 at 10:00 PM, Oden said:

Harvard College undergraduate admissions are very thorough, even though they get about 40,000 applications and only admit approx. 2000. For the the applicants that make it to the final phases of that review process, regional advocates argue why their selectees should be admitted.  These reviewers check and analyze everything - often, with images of the undecided applicant’s narratives on a large screen for all to challenge.  Sometimes, these harvard admission advocates will call the applicant during these final admission’s reviews to gain more insights, so they in turn can make a better case to the committee - a second contact in addition to the interview.  This was the case with my admitted kids.  

Obviously, Harvard College is undergrad and this is hgse grad school,

But, I bring this all up because I know hgse is normally thorough too. So, I was surprised at their decisions to not interview, not require the GRE, not go to links, and their comments in the webinar that admissions during this cycle are limited because it’s intended to fill an attendance gap due to COVID and aversion to online college.

My fear was that this all meant they are only going to give serious consideration to the most elite in the applicant pool - those that can be admitted absent the normal requirements: the one’s that are a no-brainer decisions, for whatever reason. And since space is limited, many of these elite may not be admitted.

I still applied, because I’m hoping I’m wrong. . . ?

Oden

That's so awesome to hear. I think you can be thorough with a 'less is more' attitude, too. Sometimes, being able to represent yourself succinctly/in fewer words/examples/less evidence is a skill in and of itself that might be considered important in this context. After all, from the postgraduate research I've done already, being able to convey complex ideas in a simple and persuasive way is key. What better test than to convey a something as complex as our entire lives and being in 20 or so pages?

Congratulations on your kids being admitted, that's incredible!

Either way, with all this conjecture, all it comes down to is the chips falling where they may for any of us. I think we are all worthy of this opportunity and there are so many factors playing into it that are outside the realm of whether we are 'good enough'. Hope you're all resting easy and prepared for whatever is ahead. 

[ladybug1234]

Few more hours to go!

Edited July 31, 2020 by dangelykarla

[RachelRachelBoBachel]

15 hours ago, hgsegogogo said:

Hello Rachel!! Another TIE applicant!!!! Did you apply for full time or part time?

I took a deep breath and went for full time. The program probably means I'd have to give up my visa for the country I'm in, so investing so much into it I figure I may as well just go all in. I'm nervous about cost, but hoping financial aid can help carry me for the year if I'm admitted!

[RachelRachelBoBachel]

8 hours ago, JConan said:

I admit that part of the reason I've been tracking my personal website stats is cos of anxiety/curiosity about finding out if they visited it. But at the same time, I am also disappointed/concerned that they didn't. This is because I am a visual arts person - having done a lot of work in film, media, illustration, virtual reality etc. This was a good component of my application proposal - so even from a holistic review perspective, I feel like they wouldn't get a true sense of me without reviewing such important elements of my submission, which are only found on my website/links that they clearly have not visited. 

Is there anyone else on this forum who had links/websites as part of their CV or application, and who has seen/not seen views on it that could be attributed to Harvard? How do you feel about it?

I didn't see any new bumps on my LinkedIn or YouTube channels that look like HGSE. Usually it's pretty clear when my application is being reviewed seriously because my views go from a few private students to massive bumps at a weird time (I'm in Europe). Maybe they leaned heavily on the essays for summer since the turnaround was so quick?

[ponomoc]

Home stretch guys  Super nervous atm but regardless of the result, I’m super proud of us pulling an application together so last minute. Good luck everyone!!

[Jimmy54]

7 hours ago, Oden said:

Harvard College admissions are very thorough, even though they get about 40,000 applications and only admit approx. 2000. For the the applicants that make it to the final phases of that review process, regional advocates argue why their selectees should be admitted.  These reviewers check and analyze everything - often, with images of the undecided applicant’s narratives on a large screen for all to challenge.  Sometimes, these harvard admission advocates will call the applicant during these final admission’s reviews to gain more insights, so they in turn can make a better case to the committee - a second contact in addition to the interview.  This was the case with my admitted kids.  

Reviewing about 40,000 apps in three months may be comparable to our hgse app numbers being reviewed over the past three weeks. Obviously, Harvard College is undergrad and this is hgse grad school,

But, I bring this all up because I know hgse is normally thorough too. So, I was surprised at their decisions to not interview, not require the GRE, not go to links, and their comments in the webinar that admissions during this cycle are limited because it’s intended to fill an attendance gap due to COVID and aversion to online college.

My fear was that this all meant they are only going to give serious consideration to the most elite in the applicant pool - those that can be admitted absent the normal requirements: the one’s that are a no-brainer decisions, for whatever reason. And since space is limited, many of these elite may not be admitted.

I still applied, because I’m hoping I’m wrong. . . ?

Oden

Hello Oden,

Thanks for your insights. Are both of your kids admitted this year and you are applying there as a parent? That's amazing.

[Jleighski123]

Good luck to everyone today! I am cheering you all on from afar. No matter the result, we did a fantastic job of getting an application in speedily and during a pandemic, no less. Kudos to all of us for daring to dream BIG.  

[hlang]

when does everyone think decisions come out today?

[Oden]

2 hours ago, Jimmy54 said:

Hello Oden,

Thanks for your insights. Are both of your kids admitted this year and you are applying there as a parent? That's amazing.

Ya - they are in their sophomore/junior years.  They are a lot smarter and better credentialed than me. . .  

I double-checked on Ed.M. interviews, and I have to admit that the hgse has never done them for the master’s program.  So, that hopefully unravels the rest of my conspiracy theory ? 

We’re down to a matter of hours!  YAY!

Oden

[Jimmy54]

24 minutes ago, Oden said:

Ya - they are in their sophomore/junior years.  They are a lot smarter and better credentialed than me. . .  

I double-checked on Ed.M. interviews, and I have to admit that the hgse has never done them for the master’s program.  So, that hopefully unravels the rest of my conspiracy theory ? 

We’re down to a matter of hours!  YAY!

Oden

How awesome to have you graduate with your kids! My dream is to attend the graduation with my three little kids. Kudos to you for sending them both to Harvard. If you don't mind, I will PM you through here.