<p>"What happens when the gods of high finance dump a gigantic pile of gold on the richest university in the world?</p>
<p>"It sounds like the kind of hypothetical one might pose in a smoke-addled dorm room at 2 a.m. But it is, of course, what actually happened to Harvard University, along with a few of its elite competitors, over the last 20 years.</p>
<p>"The answer is that the university reveals its true self. It shows the world what it cares aboutand what it doesn't."</p>
<p>Absolutely true. It’s not just Harvard that’s at fault. It’s the general trend with higher education. Schools have become so enamored with obtaining name “prestige” and selectivity that they have lost sight of their true mission: to educate and pursue knowledge.</p>
<p>Very interesting piece. I have long wondered two things: Why does Harvard not admit more students? And why does Harvard not bestow free tuition to all?</p>
<p>It certainly had - and still has - the wealth to do both of these things if it made them a priority.</p>
<p>I can’t answer your second question, but the first answer is fairly obvious: part of the Ivy League experience is being in a relatively small learning community where professors can get to know students and students can get to know each other. Harvard with 20,000 students instead of 5,500 or whatever it has now just wouldn’t be Harvard.</p>
<p>I work at a public university with a capped enrollment about the size of Harvard College’s. It’s very popular - the freshman-to-sophomore retention percentage is in the high 80s and well over half of those admitted choose to attend. Folks are always suggesting that since we’ve been so successful, we should grow, and grow, and grow. I can assure you that there’d be no quicker way to make the school’s educational experience indistinctive and derail its success.</p>