The buzz about Monday’s Boston Globe article “Wrangling over Applications” continues, as the AP picked up the story and a number of others in the industry weigh in with their opinions. In particular, Inside Higher Ed came out yesterday with an article titled “B-Schools Take on Essay Consultants,” which considers the message of the Globe commentary and includes a few quotes from admissions officers at additional schools to provide a more rounded perspective on the topic. For those schools who have voiced vehement disapproval of the industry, the underlying issue truly seems to be that the schools have a misconception about what admissions consultants do. A few additional quotes from Clear Admit’s Alex Brown are featured in the piece, which help to further clarify. Here’s a sample:

“There’s a myth out there that counseling services help students create a fictitious application that will get them into school,” says Brown, who worked in admissions at Wharton for 7 years prior to joining the firm. “The reality is that we guide people into making good choices and give them plenty of feedback.”

Additionally, yesterday’s Accepted.com blog entry features two great letters to the editor of the Boston Globe explaining the author’s reactions to the original article and further elaborating on the process and aim of admissions consulting. There was also an insightful entry in the MBA Game Plan blog saying a bit more about why the anti-consultant measures proposed by the schools (i.e. multiple interviews, different essays for different applicants, timed and supervised essay writting) might thwart organizations selling ready-made responses, but will not lower – and could very well increase – the demand for the services of legitimate admissions consultants.

It’s great to see so many voices becoming involved in this discussion. Hopefully, this is the first step in a dialogue that will alleviate confusion and promote understanding between admissions consultants and business schools.

As many in the space have already noted, yesterday’s Boston Globe ran an article on business school admissions consultants and the way they’re perceived by the top MBA programs. The article features commentary from Clear Admit’s Alex Brown, who sought to dispel myths about the industry and practices that consultants employ.

“We’re starting to get some recognition by business school admission committees that we exist, that we’re not going away,” noted Alex L. Brown, senior admissions counselor at Clear Admit LLC in Philadelphia, who worries that a small group trafficking in second-hand essays on the Internet is spoiling the image of the rest of the industry. “There are people out there who say, ‘We’ll write your essay for you, or we’ll sell you an essay for Harvard,’ ” he acknowledged. “They give a bad name to those of us who are providing professional feedback.”

While our goal is really to get applicants to think about their goals, consider which programs would represent the best fit, and tell their story in the most compelling way they are able, the article illustrates that as a result of such unreputable vendors, a number of the top programs are concerned with the integrity and authenticity of applications. Brit Dewey of HBS and Derrick Bolton of Stanford are quoted as suggesting a number of measures that could be taken to remedy the perceived issue, such as requiring that essays be completed under supervision, running applicants through multiple interviews and assigning different essay topics to different candidates. A number of applicant bloggers have already weighed in with their thoughts on this matter; Dave points out that proctored essay writing would not be tenable from a financial or personnel perspective, while Kilgore Trout defends the practice of dispensing advice to applicants who want feedback from a well-informed source but are not acquainted with anyone who is familiar with the admissions process.

From our view, there are a few elements of the argument that don’t seem to hold. For instance, it’s not clear how requiring applicants to sit for multiple interviews or answer different essay questions would decrease demand for essay editing or mock interview services. Also questionable is an assertion in the article that admissions offices can tell whether an applicant has used a consultant’s help. Given the high numbers of applicants who use admissions consultants and the success these firms have getting their clients into top MBA programs, it seems that if the schools can tell, they aren’t necessarily holding it against them. Further, such remarks by admissions officers raise the question of whether schools would be willing to sacrifice a stellar student with a very polished or compelling application due to the possibly unfounded assumption that he or she sought outside help.

Not all top programs are as consultant-phobic as those represented in the article. For example, acknowledging the potential of admissions consultants to offer valuable advice to applicants and have a positive impact on the process, Tuck recently invited a number of admissions consultants to visit campus, attend a class, and learn more about the way that particular program’s admissions office works. Additionally, Clear Admit’s Graham Richmond has been invited to sit on a panel (along with Linda at Accepted.com, Maxx Duffy of Maxx Associated and Ricardo Betti of MBA Empresarial) at the annual GMAC conference, an annual forum for admissions officers of business schools all over the globe. Our hope is that this event will clarify the objectives and role of reputable consultants in the space and help business school admissions staff better understand this growing industry.