Elite Colleges Don’t Understand Which Business They’re In

Applying to College
21

Last night, when I first read & commented on this article, I was exhausted. I apologize for writing an unnecessarily negative comment in post #16 above. Nevertheless, after rereading the article this morning, I still agree with my above comments. Although I would like to add that the article is written beautifully by one who writes well.

To me, the most interesting aspect of the article is the title “Elite Colleges Don’t Understand Which Business They’re In”. I think that elite colleges & universities, both public & private, understand very well which businesses that they are in. But it is important to recognize the distinction between public & private educational institutions as well as to recognize the various ways used to accomplish their respective goals.

Elite private colleges & universities are as much in the endowment building business as they are in the educating business.

Elite publics–all national research universities–are in the business of educating their residents while also attracting research dollars in furtherance of that mission.

The author fails to define “merit”, but does make a brief attempt to distinguish between “merit” and “talent”.

In part of this disjointed article, the author, a Yale law school professor, questions the inclusivity of elite schools in America. I wonder if this writer realizes that Harvard has only 40% white students and Yale 45% ?

With respect to educating the best based on merit and morals, the author offers no real insights or solutions. If the English or Chinese systems are better because they are based on academic knowledge of a subject area & on testing, then why aren’t students from around the world targeting British & Chinese universities to the same extent that they do American universities ? Perhaps it is simply a supply & demand argument, or perhaps because the world realizes the tremendous value and opportunities offered by an education at an elite American college or university.

Elite colleges and universities in the US are in a complex business that cannot be accomplished simply by purely numerical entrance standards such as standardized test scores & high GPAs.

I wish that this article had offered more insight, analysis & proposed solutions to the posed non-existent problem.

22

SES inclusivity or lack thereof is less visible. For example, Yale has 48% of undergraduates paying list price (probably means top 3% or so family income) but only 14% on Pell grants (approximates bottom half family income).

23

Different types of diversity. No school is perfect. I understand your perspective. Yale is not Berkeley.

Also, sometimes successful people are intelligent & well qualified.

P.S. @ucbalumnus : From a purely UCal-Berkeley viewpoint, what are you thoughts about the author’s assertions as they would apply to Berkeley ?

24

What did the author say about Berkeley?

25

The author did not reference Berkeley. My thoughts are that Cal-Berkeley might satisfy the author’s seeming desire for a school which admits good people based on merit. I was just curious about your thoughts.( One of my reaction’s to the article was that the author failed to distinguish between private & public elites.)

26

One of the missions of the California public universities is to extend opportunity widely. Hence the aristocratic legacy preference is not used. Also, the large community college transfer pathway (target of 1/3 of graduates) is another way to extend opportunity widely, by offering another route for late bloomers and those who take non-traditional paths to college (note that private USC has a relatively high rate of community college transfers among private universities). In-state financial aid is better than in many other states, and uses FAFSA only (i.e. students with divorced parents still fighting their divorce are not locked out).

However, the UCs did lazily use check-box URM preference that resulted in the Proposition 209 backlash in the late 1990s. Current policies in UC holistic admissions do consider overcoming obstacles and adversity (commonly encountered by those from lower SES families) rather significantly, both to extend opportunity and probably under the idea that achievement despite obstacles is more meritous than achievement starting from advantage. Based on its own research, UCs do emphasize HS GPA more than test scores, which sometimes unpleasantly surprises those who are “test score heavy”.

But the recession funding squeeze resulting in fewer in-state (subsidized) seats and increased enrollment of international students paying list price resulted in another backlash a few years ago.

Not everything in frosh admissions is as transparent as it should be. For example, some divisions or majors can be significantly more selective than others on the same campus, but public information about frosh admissions does not show such differences. Transparency in this respect is actually better for transfer students (unlike the usual case where there is very little information available for transfer students to know reach/match/likely/safety), as shown at https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/infocenter/transfers-major .

The UCs may be somewhat unusual even among public universities. Some other public flagships have policies more similar to private universities, like considering legacy, requiring both divorced parents’ financials for financial aid, having poor in-state financial aid, and/or not having good articulation agreements with in-state community colleges.

27

I bet at least as many kids dream of Tsinghua University as dream of Yale. The US doesn’t have a monopoly on top tier colleges.

28

Deleted

29

@roethlisburger : I think that your statement is reasonable & likely accurate. My thoughts are that US universities are more inclusive because standardized test scores & GPA are just two factors in the admission process and, therefore, open to a much larger group of applicants. Apparently students from around the world appreciate the breadth of an American university education more so than the narrow specializations offered elsewhere.

30

Lots of kids I know target British universities.

31

Even more target Chinese universities.

32

I’m not convinced that the majority of international students necessarily target US schools for the “breadth” of the education as opposed to the prestige and the desire to live (and perhaps eventually work) in the US.

In countries like Singapore and Hong Kong that have close historic links to the UK, the educational system values specialization (i.e. the standard is A levels). But given a choice between the UK and the US, many students and parents feel the US is more appealing. And it’s harder to get in when the educational system doesn’t emphasize ECs, adding to the prestige of admission.

33

Yes, other countries have many excellent universities, but as far as I know (and I might be wrong), top universities in most countries don’t practice holistic admissions to the extent that elite schools do in the US; correspondingly, students spend far less time focusing on “fit,” and the process is more straightforward. There are also far fewer private universities in, say, the UK and China compared to the US.

I don’t know. As much as I dislike some aspects of the current system, it does have some positives. If American universities moved towards an entirely academics-based system, I think that would diminish most schools’ individual characters, ultimately giving students less choice. Many students also benefit from holistic admissions, such as those who apply to test-optional schools. And despite wishing admissions were a little more meritocratic overall, I personally don’t want to be treated as simply a cog in an “idea factory.” There’s more to it than that.

The American system is more subjective, but I think the lack of transparency is the true issue for many people. I agree with @oldschooldad’s previous post that colleges are balancing “impossible compromises [of] conflicting missions.” Tough issues!

34

Top American universities are appealing to international students not because of, but despite of holistic admission. America, the country, is the beacon to so many.