Four questions to ask when faced with an unfamiliar admissions system

One of the biggest lessons I have learned since moving from US university admissions counselling into international school counselling is that knowing an admissions system’s requirements is not the same as understanding how it works.

Before moving to Germany to work in an international school, I spent nearly 20 years working in the US higher education system. I was comfortable explaining holistic review, extracurricular involvement, essays, letters of recommendation and the many factors that contribute to a US admissions decision. When I moved, much of that expertise remained useful. But some of the assumptions behind it did not travel as well.

My students apply to universities across a wide range of countries, each with its own qualifications, timelines and selection approaches. I cannot realistically know everything about every system. What I can do is ask better questions.

Here are four questions I return to when advising a student about an admissions system I’m unfamiliar with.

1. What is this institution actually trying to assess?

Before advising a student on how to present themselves, I want to understand what the institution is trying to learn about them. A UK personal statement, for example, focuses on a student’s interest in and preparation for a particular subject.

US applications generally provide more space for students to communicate a broader picture of themselves: their experiences, interests, activities, challenges and potential contributions to a university community.

Neither approach is inherently better. They are designed to answer different questions. It is easy to assume that an application component serves the same purpose simply because it looks familiar. When I am navigating an unfamiliar system, I step back and ask: what does this institution need to learn about my student, and why?

2. What is the difference between eligibility and competitiveness?

This distinction has become particularly important in my work with students applying to selective European programmes. I have encountered families who assume that meeting a university’s published entry requirements means that a student is likely to receive an offer. In reality, those requirements may establish eligibility rather than competitiveness.

When a programme has limited places and a large pool of highly qualified applicants, admitted students may have academic profiles well above the published minimum.

Our job goes beyond knowing the requirements. We need to understand what happens after a student meets them. Are places in that course limited? Is there a ranking or selection process? Are additional assessments involved? When should they be scheduled? These questions help us to advise students and families without turning a minimum requirement into an unintended promise of admission.

3. What evidence does this system value, and why?

This question matters when students’ educational and cultural experiences differ from what an admissions system assumes. Many of my students have completed IGCSE and International Baccalaureate (IB) curricula in environments where secondary education does not necessarily expect extensive extracurricular involvement. When they apply to US universities, they should not manufacture an American-style extracurricular profile.

Instead, I help students communicate their actual experiences, responsibilities, intellectual curiosity and contributions, within their own context. Evidence might include academic preparation, subject engagement, internship experience, interviews, portfolios, written applications or recommendations.

The key question isn’t simply what evidence a university asks for, but why it matters. Understanding that helps us to advise students thoughtfully rather than encouraging them to collect experiences because they seem desirable.

4. How can my student demonstrate those qualities authentically, in their own context?

This brings the first three questions together. International counselling often requires us to act as translators: helping an institution to understand a student’s educational and cultural context without asking the student to shape their lived experiences to fit an admissions model.

This is where I have to look beyond the application itself. A student may not have a long list of extracurricular activities, but that doesn’t mean they lack initiative, curiosity or a sense of responsibility. I need to understand what they have actually done, what opportunities were available to them and what those experiences reveal. Just as importantly, I need to resist the temptation to tell a student what they think a university wants to hear.

Moving from US admissions into an international school setting has made me more comfortable saying “I don’t know yet” and then figuring out where to find the answer. Sometimes I need to consult an admissions representative, talk with a colleague or do a little more research. That is part of the job, too. Professional development, university engagement and learning from colleagues around the world have all helped – and I have been fortunate to have mentors who encouraged me to keep learning.

We don’t need to be familiar with every admissions system. We do need to ask questions, find reliable answers and help our students and their families make sense of those findings.

Whenever I encounter an unfamiliar system, I return to these four questions: What is the institution assessing? How do eligibility and competitiveness differ? What evidence does the institution value, and why? And how can my student demonstrate those qualities authentically?

For me, that is at the heart of international university counselling: understanding what each system is asking and helping students communicate the value of their experiences in that context.