<p>
</p>
<p>This is categorically untrue. </p>
<p>What is true is that there is no upside for elite colleges to make more than a token effort to do this. One only need look at what happened at Yale in the 1960s under Inky Clark to see both the impact of such changes as well as the pushback from the then existing constituents. </p>
<p>Your comments about “self-preservation of the college” are indeed ironic in light of what’s happened since the 1960s, when a revolution took place in admissions in HYP. Back then, the establishment used the same justification for the anti-meritocratic policies then in existence. What happened? these same places increased their endowments many fold and rose in stature globally when they started admitting “less desirable” middle class, public school and jewish students. </p>
<p>A decent web availaboe snapshot of some of the issues can be found here: [Yale</a> Alumni Magazine](<a href=“http://www.yalealumnimagazine.com/issues/99_12/admissions.html]Yale”>http://www.yalealumnimagazine.com/issues/99_12/admissions.html)</p>
<p>Yes, it is ironic how much things change while they stay the same.</p>