Article content continued

Some of the questions are real zingers:

Fast forward 30 years. What would the title of your autobiography be?

You have two choices to travel around the world: A short journey in a fancy jet plane or a very long journey in a small sailboat. Which would you choose?

Not every student can acquire that amazing end-of-Grade 11 internship in New York or Singapore

The trend toward “holistic” admission practices has spawned a growing industry of consultants who promise to help students polish their image on paper and in front of the camera.

But the more subjective admissions criteria are raising concerns that bias could creep into the selection process and that students who are well-off financially, well-connected and naturally gregarious could have an unfair advantage.

“Holistic admissions systems should not be structurally biased against students with limited familial resources and networks,” said Kris Olds, a global higher-education expert in Wisconsin. “For example, not every student can acquire that ‘amazing’ end-of-Grade 11 internship in New York or Singapore, indirectly enabled via his or her mother’s firm.”

Against this backdrop, student journalists at the University of British Columbia, which a few years ago began requiring applicants to answer in writing a series of questions about their activities in and outside the classroom, are putting pressure on school officials to disclose the criteria they use to score those “personal profiles.”

“Keeping (the criteria) under wraps can create a bias in favour of students who are wealthier or have more traditional backgrounds,” said Will McDonald, the Ubyssey newspaper’s coordinating editor. “Students with money can hire people to help them with their essays, and could be more likely to have that fancy internship or trip to Europe to put on their resume.”