Video Supplements: What AcceptU’s New Advice Gets Applicants Thinking About—and What Colleges Require

The new item is commentary, not a policy announcement

AcceptU published a September 8 article about college video essays, emphasizing a student’s own voice and personality over production polish. The post is company-authored guidance. It does not establish that every selective college has introduced a new video requirement this week. AcceptU: Why colleges are asking for video essays.

The relevant applicant question is narrower: does a college on this student’s list accept a video, what is its purpose, and what do the current instructions say? The AO checked Brown and Washington University in St. Louis as concrete examples. Their published guidance supplies the operational details that a general consultant article cannot settle for every school.

Video can make an application feel more personal, but it also introduces another task during a crowded season. Treat that task as part of a college-specific checklist. Before scripting or filming, confirm whether the submission is optional, how it is delivered and whether its deadline differs from the main application. A remembered rule from another college is not a reliable substitute.

Brown: a brief introduction with its own calendar

Brown encourages a video introduction of no more than 90 seconds. Its page says production quality is not evaluated and gives practical instructions including landscape orientation and avoiding sped-up footage. The listed deadlines are November 4 for QuestBridge and Early Decision applicants and January 7 for Regular Decision applicants. Brown Undergraduate Admission: Video introduction.

An introduction should add information rather than recite the activities list in a different format. A student might explain a small project, an everyday responsibility or a question that keeps drawing their attention. The choice should be grounded in the student’s experience. No published instruction establishes that one hobby or presentation style produces a fixed admissions advantage.

A reasonable production plan starts with understandable sound and a clear idea. Watch the entire file before uploading. Check that the beginning is not cut off, the audio is audible and the length fits the instruction. These are practical quality checks, not a claim that professional equipment improves an admissions decision. Leave time to handle an upload problem before the relevant deadline.

WashU: optional means the choice remains with the applicant

WashU describes its supplement as optional and says students are not penalized for declining it. The video can be up to 90 seconds. The page lists November 9 for Early Decision I and Early Action, and January 13 for Early Decision II and Regular Decision. A video does not replace a separate arts portfolio submitted through SlideRoom. WashU Undergraduate Admissions: Optional video supplement.

That last distinction is easy to miss. A general introduction and a portfolio serve different purposes, even when both use digital media. A student applying in an area with separate portfolio instructions should complete that checklist independently. Do not assume one upload will automatically satisfy another requirement because both files contain a performance or artwork.

The AO’s analysis is that students should compare the expected informational value with the time available. If a video offers a clear, personal dimension absent elsewhere, it may be a useful option. If making it would jeopardize required materials, that tradeoff deserves a careful review. The school’s own statement about optional participation should guide the decision, rather than pressure created by commercial advice.

A workflow that preserves the student’s voice

Choose one idea, sketch a few points and record a short practice take. Then ask what the viewer learns that is specific to this student. A trusted adult can flag an inaudible passage or a confusing reference without rewriting the student into a different person. The goal is understandable self-expression, not a performance of what someone imagines an admissions officer wants.

Keep privacy in mind when choosing a setting or discussing other people. A student does not need to reveal a friend’s personal circumstances, show identifying documents or disclose sensitive family details to appear authentic. The story can be meaningful while respecting everyone involved. Consent matters if another person appears on camera, and an uncluttered setting can be entirely adequate.

After recording, return to the official page rather than relying on this comparison alone. Confirm accepted submission methods and the deadline for the actual application round. Save an upload confirmation or portal status when available. If something fails, use the college’s support instructions promptly; do not assume emailing a large attachment to an unrelated office completes the submission.

What this week’s guidance can and cannot tell us

Neither the company article nor these two university pages establishes a universal effect on admission chances. The existence of a video option does not reveal how a particular committee weighs it against coursework, recommendations or writing. A confident numerical promise about the benefit would require evidence beyond the materials reviewed here.

The useful takeaway is a process improvement: separate the new advice from the existing rules, and turn the rules into a manageable task only where they apply. For Brown and WashU applicants, the official pages are linked below. For everyone else, the next step is the relevant college’s own instructions. A video supplement should communicate something true about the student while meeting the requirements of the institution receiving it.