This week, The New York Times published an opinion essay about the growing importance of the “disagreement question” in the college admissions process amidst the fraught political landscape of higher ed. This type of supplemental essay prompt requires students to reflect on their response to a disagreement they have had—Harvard’s question, for instance, reads: “Describe a time when you strongly disagreed with someone about an idea or issue. How did you communicate or engage with this person? What did you learn from this experience?” The author of the article, a current sophomore at Harvard University, claims that the question “isn’t built for honesty;” rather, it allows admissions officers to “screen out incivility at the gate” by requiring students “to script the ideal disagreement” as a means of proving that they can delicately and moderately respond to opposing views.
The piece rightly notes that the question is open-ended and that students should take a strategic approach to answering it; however, the writer’s critique of the question—and the misguided strategies that students take in answering it—betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the question’s intent.
“Admissions officers are not posing this question solely as a test of a student’s civility,” says Erin Cao, Senior Mentor at Command Education and former Columbia University admissions officer. “They genuinely want to see students’ values, perspectives, and contributions to discourse. Most importantly, they want to know that a student will be open-minded and willing to challenge themselves to think critically about their beliefs and opinions—college is, after all, an opportunity for students to grow personally and intellectually.”
From in-class discussions to gatherings on the quad and in the dorms, students will be confronted with a diverse array of opinions, perspectives, and backgrounds throughout their collegiate years. Admissions officers want to see that students will contribute meaningfully to discourse on campus. Rather than subtly asking whether an applicant is humble, courteous, and a good listener, this question’s first purpose is gleaning what a student truly cares about. In other words, the question is first and foremost asking: “What matters to you? Are you capable of reflecting about how your background and experiences have led you to hold those values?” Showcasing a clear sense of conviction and well-reasoned perspective on an issue demonstrates a student’s readiness to add their voice to the conversations happening on a college campus.
At the same time, these conversations are also an opportunity to learn and grow; admissions officers want to see that applicants are teachable and willing to challenge their own beliefs or opinions—that they will benefit from the rigorous and diverse intellectual community that awaits them in college. Rather than feigned civility or spineless compromise, a strong response to this prompt will show that a student has integrity and conviction, but is willing to grow and interrogate their ideas through engagement with others.
Because of this, students should note that the topic of the disagreement matters far less than how the disagreement illuminates the student’s capacity for reflection, listening, and growth. Some of the best disagreements to write about are not necessarily those that concern hot-button political topics or that align with what students assume an admissions officer wants to see, but instead those that lend insight into a student’s unique background, perspective, and core values—whether that’s it’s climate policy, cafeteria food, or the best way to divide labor for a group project. The Times writer suggests that a strategic approach to the prompt will strive for balance and moderateness: “Be humble; don’t make yourself look too right. But you can’t choose a time when you were entirely wrong, either. Or should you tailor your responses by geography, betting that, say, a Southern admissions officer would be more likely to appreciate a conservative-leaning anecdote?” But far from performing or posturing, this prompt requires students to be radically honest, introspective, and authentic. Students should consider what they are truly passionate about and reflect upon experiences of disagreement or clashes of opinion that have evoked strong emotions in them—not that they think will arouse strong feelings in admissions readers. For instance, applicants might write about navigating cultural clashes in their community, grappling with religious institutions and ideas, or changing a long-held belief after getting involved in a particular organization or community.
“Admissions officers would absolutely prefer to read a story about how a student confidently and respectfully committed to their point of view or radically changed their mind about an issue, rather than a bland account where a student had a safe opinion and emphasized how he or she could civilly converse with someone else,” says Cao.
Finally, this prompt underscores the importance of pursuing authentic passions and developing core values throughout high school. A student cannot craft a compelling response to this prompt if they have not had meaningful opportunities to engage with perspectives that differ from their own. Students who have spent their high school years engaging in extracurricular activities, working or volunteering in their community, and spearheading an independent initiative will have an array of genuine experiences of disagreements and clashes of perspectives to recount in their supplemental essays.
Ultimately, like all of their other application materials, this question calls for students to be authentic, introspective, and curious. Rather than imposing new “requirements” for students to game the system, this prompt is an opportunity for students to share more about themselves to top schools.