I’m just a messenger, @1NJParent
I don’t make the policy, but the reality is that while low-SES is a kind of universal or cross-cultural phenomenon, challenges of being an under-represented racial minority include distinct challenges not reserved to SES. For example, there’s a lot of complaining on CC about middle class and high income black students, but the truth is that the latter are not seen as “equal” necessarily among other groups of equal income levels, especially by individuals and groups which have been somewhat insulated from encounters with URM’s of any SES. And one of the points of college is to expose students to a wide range of backgrounds rather than continuing a relatively homogeneous experience if they’ve had one pre-college.
The second point is about representation and opportunity. These are concepts particular to this land and which are not valued as highly, necessarily, by other countries. For example, there can be a great deal of racism among educated people in some European countries, but the institutions of those countries, founded on different principles than the U.S. was founded on and has practiced since its founding, do not correspond to values cherished by American colleges, representing this culture and not some other culture.
As it relates to replacing race with SES, exclusively using SES is a new can of worms, although I don’t disagree that it many cases it may help the people that need the boost more. But exactly how would you do it? Would it be just on neighborhood? School system? Income tax return? How do you treat a poor kid that lives in a rich town (we had this conversation a few pages ago)? How about a poor kid who gets a free ride to Andover? If we use income, do we use assets? How would this impact need blind admissions? There are always going to be people getting the boost that shouldn’t and vice versa.
The same way these colleges are doing it now. SES can be inferred from qualification for federal assistances, fee waiver qualification, parents’ occupations, essays/personal statements, the types of EC activities, and yes, schools/neighborhoods, but not on any of these factors alone.
I agree that the URM status and SES in many cases don’t accomplish the same goal. You may not get the diversity you want this way, and even rich URM’s bring a different perspective to campuses.
Technically, everyone brings a different perspective to a campus, but a college can’t accommodate everyone. Does a rich URM bring a better perspective than a poor non-URM? Does s/he need more of an admission boost than the poor non-URM?
Yes, those are the cans of worms…how do you justify one over the other? Not sure we can or that the government can either. This is why I feel the colleges should have some autonomy with this. It’s very complicated and no matter how you slice it, there are winners and losers.
One of the reasons that they don’t replace racial diversity with low SES is that the benefits of the two are different. There is a real benefit for a college student to meet and interact with people from different cultures, nationalities, religions and races. There are kids from very insular private schools or homogenous small towns who have never had a chance to get to know people of color. When I went to school, I ran into many people who had never met a Jewish person before. The opportunity to mix this way at college is good for individual students and good for socieity at large.
Obviously the two are not identical and won’t achieve the same results. An SES-based policy would achieve MORE socioeconomic diversity, MORE geographical diversity, AND retain MOST, but not all, racial/ethnic diversity. To me, that’s a better outcome.
@gallentjill I had the exact same experience. I grew up in a diverse community and had many Jewish friends, as I do today. My college was filled with amazing people that I would never describe as prejudiced, but they had grown up in bubbles…and there was one girl on my floor who was Jewish and I remember hearing people whisper that there was a Jewish girl on the floor. Blew my mind. I do agree that it is good for “society at large” as you put it to have people from all different backgrounds mix. And college campuses are a great place to start.
Remember that the motivations of Harvard and similar colleges may not be what people here may be assuming (possibly based on their own preferences), with respect to SES mix and ethnic mix. Considering the college’s own motivations with respect to its marketability to others, it responds to the preferences of others to some degree as well as its own constraints (e.g. financial). For example, in terms of prioritizing racial/ethnic diversity versus SES diversity:
Greater SES diversity costs more financial aid money than greater racial/ethnic diversity of predominantly high SES students. It also goes counter to preferences for other preferred groups like legacy, athletes, and development admits.
Relatively few outsiders are that interested in SES diversity beyond a nominal level (which is apparently about 10-20% from the lower half of the income distribution in the US). The low representation of low and middle SES students at the most selective private universities (and even more so the most selective private LACs) is rarely seen as a drawback (and some posters even make claims about how well the colleges are doing, because the few low and middle SES students there do get very good FA packages).
However, those who apparently do care (e.g. elitist employers like management consulting and investment banking) apparently prefer that Harvard and such be predominantly high SES environments. In such environments, small numbers of low or middle SES students get socialized to high SES norms over four years, so they become acceptable to these constituencies.
Most other people who care about these types of things notice and get more riled up about what they see as unfairness, underrepresentation, etc. of their racial/ethnic group, or just do not feel comfortable attending a college where their own racial/ethnic group is not sufficiently numerous.
I doubt it is just homogeneous small towns or insular private schools. Some cities and suburbs tend to be highly racially segregated (Chicago metro being a common example). Indeed, racist stereotyping may be worse if the nearby area with people of color is a lower SES area. Or there may be racial resentment if the nearby area with people of color is a higher SES area.
“There is a real benefit for a college student to meet and interact with people from different cultures, nationalities, religions and races.”
Again, I’ve brought this up before, who actually thinks it’s a benefit? Anecdotal stores about meeting different kinds of people should not form the basis of admissions. Students who select a college do not rank diversity high on their list, in fact if you did deeper, as ucbalumnus has pointed out, they prefer to see people of their own race/ethnicity.
And for STEM, it’s highly overrated, if not irrelevant, if you have a Calculus study group where someone says where I grew up, dividing by zero is allowed, your study group is in big, big trouble.
Diversity is for the college admins and some (emphasis some) people in society to feel good about themselves, not the students.
@ucbalumnus Maybe we’re still living in a bubble, but pretending it was a big tent…
Anyway, Harvard, besides its educational goals, is in the business of maintaining its network of influential people. IBs and management consulting firms are in the same business. That’s why Harvard is a leading feeder to these firms. Low SES students tend not to have the social connections they all look for.
“It’s got to be not only uncommon, but very very rare, for anyone to get into those 3 in the first place, no? S has like a 3-4% admit rate, MIT and CT not that much more. Aren’t we talking about .01% of the app class here?”
You right, we’re talking about maybe 200 or so kids, maybe a 1,000 if you stretch it as some of the applicants may won these international and national awards in any grade in high school.
Actually, the college admins are thinking about student preferences when dealing with diversity issues. They realize that, in order for the college to be maximally marketable, each racial/ethnic group has to be present in sufficient numbers that students from that racial/ethnic group are willing to apply and attend (the threshold number can vary – for example, @Hanna has written that white students prefer to be in the majority, which would be an unrealistic expectation for most non-white students at most colleges). For SES diversity, it appears that a nominal representation of 10-20% from the lower half SES is sufficient for highly selective colleges to avoid being seen as too much of a “playground for the rich kids”, or that image is not a sufficient deterrent for applicants and matriculants.
As far as actual benefits to students goes, even if the students did not consider them as benefits before attending college, more social contact with people of other race/ethnicity could reduce racism among those who had grown up in highly segregated environments and have thus acquired unfriendly inaccurate stereotypes about other race/ethnicity people. (Of course, less racism being beneficial is a matter of opinion that is not universally shared.)
Yes, those few low SES students who get into Harvard benefit from four years of high SES socialization and connections for future employment at these elitist employers. However, these employers’ preference for Harvard is probably based partly on the students being predominantly high SES with plenty of connections. If Harvard changed the SES mix of its students to be more reflective of the US overall, or of college students overall, its desirability to these employers would likely fall greatly.
Basically, if you think of these elitist employers and the colleges that feed them as semi-aristocracies of the top end of SES (although the next generation still needs to show a high enough level of merit to take advantage of the express lanes to get there, etc.), while allowing small numbers of the bottom 95% to join them (after showing exceptional levels of merit), you would not be too far off.
“Again, I’ve brought this up before, who actually thinks it’s a benefit? Anecdotal stores [sic] about meeting different kinds of people should not form the basis of admissions. Students who select a college do not rank diversity high on their list, in fact if you did deeper, as ucbalumnus has pointed out, they prefer to see people of their own race/ethnicity.”
I do, for one. When my son was deciding between two college finalists, the diversity of racial AND SES student composition was a significant factor in deciding one over the other. Why is diversity important on college campuses? The following article provides succinct yet cogent reasons why:
@theloniusmonk I don’t agree with this statement at all and find it very pessimistic:
“Diversity is for the college admins and some (emphasis some) people in society to feel good about themselves, not the students.”
With all that is going on right now, I think most people, especially EDUCATED people would see both the clear benefit to students and society for diversity on our college campuses. Yes, maybe some kids prefer to be around kids that look more like them, but I know of just as many kids that are turned off by homogeneous campuses that they perceive as being “bubbles”. And parents that feel the same way.
I realize there are some very good “business” reasons for the admissions people to want to diversify and that it isn’t purely out of altruism, but there are good reasons for the “demand” in diverse campuses/workplaces. We all benefit, in my opinion. I feel sorry for those that don’t see it that way, honestly.
I, as a parent, think its important. It was important for me as a college student and its an experience I would like my kids to have. My D also thinks its important. It is not the highest priority on her list, but a school definately rises in her estimation when she sees a diverse student body on campus.
These things are not inconsistant. My D wants to make sure there are other people like her on campus, but it doesn’t have to be a majority. She also wants to meet and get to know other kinds of people.
…building on reply #3090 from @ucbalumnus
In the last 6 years alone, I have taught and been the admissions consultant for many a student of 100% Asian student bodies in particular high schools. Without exaggeration, they have had no contact with any URM’s in their existence to date. As an example, when it comes to understanding, let alone appreciating, the history of racial conflict in this country (such as when it comes up during US History classes), they have no context. On a personal level, some of them have voiced to me discomfort, and the most honest ones have admitted their ignorance. In at least one high school I’m acquainted with, things have gotten so bad that one (white) English teacher has taken it upon himself to scrap all of the standard American literature curriculum and replace it with black literature. I don’t think he added anything from the Hispanic cluster – probably because the students may have at least minimal acquaintance with and awareness of that segment of culture.