Recruitment & Communicating with Prospects

Applicants often benefit from insight into what “research fit” means, and how differences in theoretical perspectives and training goals are valued and engaged within your advising practices. However, if the perceived focus of statements about fit is "culture fit," this can create pressure to conform, or discourage applicants from diverse backgrounds. 

Applicants benefit from insight into the different pathways to strong applications and how they can leverage the flexibility afforded by holistic application review:

• What alternatives to “traditional” research experiences could applicants consider when describing their preparation?
• What strategies might an applicant consider for identifying strong recommendation writers if “traditional” faculty recommenders are not available (i.e. student has been out of school for several years)?
• How could applicants emphasize their unique strengths and demonstrate that they can thrive when they have appropriate support and resources? 
• In what situations might an extenuating circumstances statement be appropriate?
   

Guidance on the impact of the July 2023 Supreme Court decision on race-conscious admissions is provided by the Graduate School. All admissions decisions makers must be fully compliant with these requirements for the Fall 2024 cycle and thereafter.

In the context of admissions, verbal and written statements are considered legally binding. Applicants may also interpret some statements as indicators of their chances of admission. It is therefore important to keep discussions hypothetical. For instance:

Qualifying language when offering advice is recommended (i.e., “you may find it helpful…” or “...may strengthen your application”). This can prevent suggestions from being misconstrued as a promise that by following the advice, an offer of admission will follow. 

To preserve the integrity of the admissions process, interactions with prospects should not be used as informal interviews, as all applicants should be evaluated using the same criteria and process. Information obtained about the applicant's identity (particularly race/ethnicity) cannot be factored into admission decisions.

Because our applicant pool is different each year, we cannot comment on any applicant's chances of admission. Please encourage applicants to use their best judgment to determine for themselves if the program is a good fit for their research interests and goals. Our Admissions Guidelines are a resource to help applicants assess whether they would consider themselves to be a competitive applicant.

• UMN Graduate School’s Diversity Recruitment Toolkit
• Equity in Graduate Education Resource Center, Inclusive Graduate Education Network (IGEN)

• General inquiries for information on how to apply can be referred or forwarded to psyapply@umn.edu. 
• When applicants have specific questions about faculty research, advising practices, and similar that staff cannot answer, applicants are advised to contact faculty directly. Please aim for consistency in the amount of time and forms of interaction provided to prospective applicants.