Although top universities aim to choose exceptional students from diverse social backgrounds, the holistic admissions process is inherently subjective. Despite its noble intentions, this process is inevitably mixed with random chance and, at times, underlying stereotypes. 

This reminded me of “American Fiction,” a 2023 Oscar-winning movie. In the movie, an African American professor from an affluent doctors’ family struggles to sell his novel because publishers and many readers consider it “not black enough.” Even though his book is not about racial issues, it is automatically categorized under “African American studies” in bookstores. Frustrated, he made up a satirical story filled with stereotypes about Black families, such as gang violence and drugs. Ironically, this novel becomes a bestseller, winning awards and being adapted into a film.

College admissions often fall into a similar trap. In their quest to build diverse classes, admissions officers risk replacing one set of stereotypes with another. Let’s look at some interesting patterns commonly found in successful college essays.

For instance, if I were an African American student, I would feel obliged to write about how I endured visible or invisible racial discrimination or bullying, which then would have motivated me to create an advocacy club or a commitment to social justice. On the contrary, if I wrote about my middle-class experience or my passion for astronomy, that essay would probably be considered not compelling, or “not black” enough.

For another example, if I were an Asian American student, it would probably be considered too stereotypical if I wrote about my hard-working immigrant parents who sacrificed themselves for my future. Yet, a rebellious Asian child who rejected his parent’s expectation to pursue theatre, instead of medicine or engineering, is often the story that catches the attention of admission officers. 

Such examples are numerous. A female student who is interested in literature feels compelled to write about breaking gender norms in sports and STEM.

These patterns are paradoxical and satirical, somewhat like the movie “American Fiction.” Top universities work hard to identify and admit outstanding students who transcend stereotypes, but their admissions process itself often creates a new type of stereotyping. Those that seek to break stereotypes can become enablers of new ones.

This paradox is not the fault of admissions officers. Faced with piles of applications, they rely on stories to understand applicants beyond their GPAs and activity lists.

For parents and students struggling to write impressive essays to get into top universities, there seem to be two options. We can choose to build a persona to fit into the implicit “stereotypes,” or we can choose to tell a truthful story through self-discovery, even if it is risky. There is hardly a third choice. So, which option should we choose?

Perhaps, this is not a question for students and parents. It is a question for our society at large.

尽管知名大学希望从不同社会背景中挑选出色的学生，所谓的“全面评估”录取过程却始终带有主观性。尽管初衷是好的，这个过程却不可避免地夹杂了随机因素，甚至带有某些潜在的刻板印象。

这让我想起了2023年奥斯卡获奖电影《美国小说》。电影里，一位非裔教授成长于富裕医生家庭，他写的小说很难畅销、甚至出版，原因是出版商和多数读者认为他的小说故事“不够像黑人”。他的作品尽管与种族问题无关，但在书店里自动被归类为“非裔研究”。沮丧之下，他写了一本充满对非裔家庭刻板印象的讽刺小说，内容涉及帮派暴力和毒品。讽刺的是，这本书成了畅销书，不仅获奖，还被改编成了电影。

大学的录取过程往往陷入类似的困境。为了构建多元化的学生群体，招生官很容易用一种刻板印象替代另一种刻板印象。让我们看几个常用的成功申请文书套路，你会发现一些耐人寻味的规律。

比如说，如果我是一名非裔学生，我可能会觉得有必要写自己如何经历了有形或无形的种族歧视或霸凌，然后我如何由此创办了一个倡导反歧视的学生俱乐部，或者由此走上了致力于社会正义的道路。如果我只是写我的中产阶层生活，或者我对天文学的热爱，这样的故事可能会被认为“不够吸引人”或者“不够黑人”。

再比如，如果我是一名亚裔学生，写我的移民父母如何辛勤工作，为我的未来付出一切，这可能会被看作是“老套”的文书。而如果我写自己如何叛逆，违背父母的期望，未来想学舞台剧，而不是传统的医学或者工程方向，这样的文书反而更容易吸引招生官。

类似的例子不胜枚数。一个女生原本真正喜欢文学，但可能会选择写自己如何在体育或理工科领域打破性别天花板，她觉得这样的文书对招生官更有吸引力。

这些套路看起来既矛盾又讽刺，有点像电影《美国小说》的剧情。知名大学试图寻找能超越“刻板印象”的优秀学生，但录取过程本身却常常在不经意间创造了另一种“刻板印象”。那些想打破“刻板印象”的精英大学，反而可能成了新的“刻板印象”的推手。

如此“假作真时真亦假”的现状，并不能完全归咎于招生官。在面对成千上万份大学申请时，他们不能依赖GPA和活动列表，他们别无选择，只能通过故事去了解学生的独特性。

对于那些努力想写出令人印象深刻的大学申请文书的学生和家长来说，选择似乎只有两条路。要么去塑造一个完美“人设”，迎合这种隐形的“刻板印象”；要么冒着风险，通过自我探索，向招生官讲述一个完全真实的自己。几乎没有第三种选择。那么，我们该怎么选呢？

或许，这并不是学生和家长需要回答的问题。这是留待整个社会需要回答的问题。