Why low Jewish numbers at Princeton?

Colleges and Universities A-Z Princeton University
1

<p>A thread my mother saw on the Parents' Forum provoked a family conversation about Princeton. Despite the fact that it located half-way between NYC and Philly, smack-dab in the middle of the largest concentration of Jews in the United States, it has significantly lower Jewish enrollment than peer schools. My Dad fished up this article he remembered from the NY Times from 10 years ago (Princeton Puzzle: Where Have the Jewish Students Gone?"):</p>

<p>Princeton</a> Puzzle - Where Have Jewish Students Gone? - NYTimes.com</p>

<p>This recent article (mentioned in the Parents' Forum) shows schools with the largest enrollments of Jewish students:</p>

<p><a href="http://reformjudaismmag.org/_kd/Items/actions.cfm?action=Show&item_id=1647&destination=ShowItem%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://reformjudaismmag.org/_kd/Items/actions.cfm?action=Show&item_id=1647&destination=ShowItem&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>All of the ivies except Princeton and Dartmouth are there with Jewish enrollement around 25% of the student body. Since the cutoff for the chart is 800 students, this would suggest that Princeton's Jewish enrollment is 15% or under. Does anyone know the actual numbers?</p>

<p>What are your thoughts on why -- relatively speaking -- so few Jews end up at Princeton? My father says that Princeton had for years a very powerful admissions director who liked jocky WASPS and that Jewish enrollment fell for that reason and has not recovered.</p>

2

<ol>
<li><p>Princeton had for years a very powerful admissions director (Fred Hargadon, who was at Stanford for years before he was at Princeton) who liked jocky WASPS. Not absolutely – plenty of Jews were still admitted to Princeton – but relatively. Ironically, Hargadon was appointed by Princeton’s first (and only) Jewish president, Harold Shapiro.</p></li>
<li><p>It is possible, likely even, that more Jewish students prefer urban environments to suburban or exurban ones, and so tend to apply to or choose places like Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Penn, Brown over Princeton, Dartmouth, Stanford. Again, hardly as an absolute, but relative to other ethnic groups. (Of course, this doesn’t explain Cornell, but there are countervailing factors there.)</p></li>
<li><p>A generation ago, Princeton was the last of the Ivies to drop its Jewish quota. It was particularly obvious when I was applying to college. Harvard and Yale were both about 33% Jewish; Princeton was 15% Jewish. Then Princeton went co-ed, and its first class of women was 33% Jewish – the implication being that they wanted the strongest possible group of women, academically, and thus paid little attention to other factors – while the men were still 15% Jewish. (This was over a decade before Hargadon came to Princeton, by the way.) That attracted negative attention, within and without Princeton, and the disparity magically vanished over the next few years, also due to the presidency of William Bowen. But a lingering consequence is probably that the number of Jewish legacies applying over the past decade was lower than at most of the other Ivies.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>By the way, I think it’s important to note that Hargadon would have been completely offended at the statement that he “liked jocky WASPs”, and with good reason. I think it’s more fair to say that Hargadon valued jocky qualities in ultra-smart students a little more than some other admissions directors, and that Jewish applicants had those qualities somewhat less often than they had the other sorts of qualities that admissions directors might value. It would be wrong to say that Princeton or Hargadon discriminated against Jews during his tenure – they did no such thing. It might not be wrong to say Princeton admitted proportionally more students from a pool that had proportionately fewer Jewish applicants in it than Harvard or Yale did, and perhaps that it got lower yield from the Jewish students it admitted because of their smaller numbers there.</p>

3

<p>Rabbi Julie Roth, the executive director of the Center for Jewish Life (CJL) said, there is no reason to believe that Jewish students have more trouble getting into Princeton than into peer institutions. Rather, she explained, the challenge is getting them to come — or to apply in the first place. </p>

<p>Wilson School professor and former CJL board president Stan Katz said the University’s biggest step in changing this [inaccurate] impression [about Princeton] came with the establishment of the CJL. “It was a powerful statement that Princeton really cared about Jewish students,” he said, noting that the University maintains the building and runs the kosher dining hall. “Very few universities have that level of commitment,” he added. Roth echoed Katz’ sentiment, saying that parents of prospective students who visit the CJL have described the Jewish community as the University’s “best-kept secret.” Though Roth said she would love to see more Jewish students at the University, she noted that, “from a diversity perspective”, 13 percent “is really incredible.” Jews make up roughly 2 percent of the nation’s population, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.</p>

<p>“[Dean of Admission Janet Rapelye] has been working strategically with us to get the word out and encourage more [students] to come,” Roth said, adding, “I found a very willing partner.” Together, they have devised a “multi-year and multi-pronged” recruitment strategy. Among other steps, Roth has traveled to Jewish day schools to promote the University, and Princeton alumni attend Jewish college fairs and donate money to the CJL specifically for recruitment purposes, Roth explained. She also noted that the CJL has updated its recruitment materials and put “more energy” into its Princeton Preview activities. “When people come to campus and see for themselves what it’s like to be Jewish here, they apply,” she said.</p>

4

<p>Here’s a more recent article from the Daily Princetonian on the issue. I think more instructive than the article itself are the 125 student comments posted after it.</p>

<p>[Choosing</a> the chosen people - The Daily Princetonian](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/10/23/24251/]Choosing”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/10/23/24251/)</p>

5

<p>I thought all the Jews went to Yale.</p>

6

<p>15% is still greater than the percentage of the overall US population, so it doesn’t sound like there’s a lot of discrimination.</p>

7

<p>Some of the non-student comments on that article are pretty horrific.</p>

8

<p>^^maybe that’s a reflection of the climate and an interesting explanation as to why the numbers are as they are…</p>

<p>.interesting thread; had no idea that this was an issue at Princeton or even a discussion among the administration (ever)…</p>

9

<p>Ah, but then there’s always this, in terms of prominent Princeton Jewish alumni: </p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/princeton-university/974411-elena-kagan-81-confirmed-supreme-court-justice-news-item.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/princeton-university/974411-elena-kagan-81-confirmed-supreme-court-justice-news-item.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Seriously, I’m afraid that the history of the treatment of Jewish applicants at all of the Ivies is disheartening. The era of such discrimination is long over but Harvard, Princeton and Yale were among the worst. The story is told by Jerome Karabel in his book “The Chosen”. </p>

<p>"In 1922, Lowell [president of Harvard] was reckless enough to think that he could solve “the Jew problem,” as he was wont to call it, with a straightforward quota. This provoked a mighty uproar among faculty members and outsiders with more tender consciences; instead, Lowell agreed to limit the size of the entering class and to institute recommendation letters and personal interviews. Yale and Princeton followed suit; and soon came the whole panoply familiar to this day: lengthy applications, personal essays, descriptions of extracurricular activities. This cumbersome and expensive process served two central functions. It allowed the universities to select for an attribute the disfavored class was thought to lack—i.e., "character"—and it shrouded the admissions process in impenetrable layers of subjectivity and opacity, thus rendering it effectively impervious to criticism. The swift drop in admission of Jews could thus be explained as the byproduct of the application of neutral principles—just as could the increase of minority students, 60 years later, in institutions seeking greater “diversity.”</p>

<p>The willingness of these universities to suffer real harms rather than admit more Jews is astonishing. </p>

<p>Having long distinguished itself as a “national” and “democratic” institution, Yale by 1930 had become more insular, more parochial, and less intellectual as a consequence of the new admissions system. During World War II, with the size of the entering class size seriously depleted, Yale turned away qualified Jewish students rather than increase the proportion of Jews. “Yale judged its symbolic capital to be even more precious than its academic capital,” as Karabel dryly puts it. Or, to put it more contemporary terms, Yale understood the imperative to protect its brand. "</p>

<p>[Jerome</a> Karabel’s The Chosen. - By James Traub - Slate Magazine](<a href=“http://www.slate.com/id/2128377]Jerome”>Jerome Karabel's The Chosen.)</p>

<hr>

<p>It would not be until the 1960s and 1970s that this anti-Semitism began to subside at all three schools. None of the schools officially admitted to a change in policy but it’s generally thought that Harvard began to open up more in the late 50s with Yale and Princeton following in the 60s. </p>

<p>Our Yale alumni visitors Mancune and JHS are quick to jump on Princeton here, but there is plenty of work to do throughout society, including at Yale. </p>

<p>[Disturbing</a> anti-semitic incident at Yale: What’s happened to tolerance on campus? the Sam Jackson College Experience](<a href=“http://www.samjackson.org/college/2008/02/24/disturbing-anti-semitic-incident-at-yale-whats-happened-to-tolerance-on-campus/]Disturbing”>http://www.samjackson.org/college/2008/02/24/disturbing-anti-semitic-incident-at-yale-whats-happened-to-tolerance-on-campus/)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Despite its sordid history of anti-Semitism (similar to Harvard’s and Yale’s), Princeton actually had a Jewish president before either Yale or Harvard. Princeton’s Harold Shapiro took office in 1987. Yale’s first Jewish leader is its current president, Rick Levin (who took office in 1993, six years later), and Harvard’s first was Larry Summers, (who took office in 2001, fourteen years after Shapiro). It’s odd that you would emphasize the words “and only” in reference to Princeton as none of the three schools has had more than one Jewish president each.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree and it seems likely that a significant number of those are from readers with no association with Princeton. The Daily Princetonian has a completely open policy on comments, posting them immediately with no screening and rarely moderating them, unlike both the Yale Daily News and the Crimson which keep much tighter control over their boards. The result is that its comments section frequently becomes a playground for those with no Princeton connection or experience. That sometimes happens on the Yale Daily News and Crimson sites as well, though far less frequently, due to their more restrictive policies.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>No. It’s much more a reflection on the policy that the Daily Princetonian has on managing its comments boards allowing posters to misrepresent themselves. While it’s true that Princeton has a smaller total percentage of Jewish students than its peers, the best explanation these days is certainly not discrimination. The Jewish community is thriving at Princeton. I think that some of the factors that JHS cited are the more likely explanations including the preference of many Jewish students for more urban campuses.</p>

10

<p>I will fully agree that Yale’s history of Antisemitism was similar to Princeton, although by the time I was applying to college in the 70s there was a significant, albeit diminishing, difference between the two. As for Harvard, I think the story was very different. Harvard was admitting Russian Jews 90 years ago. My grandmother, all three of her brothers, and one of her brothers-in-law all went to college there, and they weren’t the only ones. (Any Jews at Yale or Princeton would have been German or Sephardic until the 50s.) I’m sure Harvard had its quota, but it was more open to Jews than Yale or Princeton.</p>

<p>As for non-student comments on the Prince, I sincerely doubt that people with no connection to Princeton are signing on as “Nassau '95” and reminiscing about their time in college there.</p>

11

<p>Harvard, according to Karabel, was a leader both in creating the quotas AND in dismantling them. I think you’re probably about right in your characterization and I do think Princeton lagged Yale a bit in correcting these injustices. I also think the point is that institutional anti-Semitism no longer exists at any of these schools although individual acts of anti-Semitism will never be stopped (note the Yale swastika incidents from last year).</p>

<p>I should also note (as has been extensively discussed on the parents forum thread referenced by the OP) that the reported numbers of Jewish students at each university are very unreliable. The schools do not gather or report this information themselves (with relatively few exceptions) and the numbers reproduced in this old listing are apparently ‘estimates’ given by Hillel staff at each school. They are far from reliable. One poster in that thread has pointed out, for instance, that if Harvard’s numbers are being accurately reported, then approximately 50% of all white students at Harvard are Jewish. This is possible but doesn’t seem likely. </p>

<p>As for the Daily Princetonian, the comments sections are, in fact, filled with imposters. I have no idea why people would waste their time doing this and most are probably high school students or current students at other schools. This is certainly not to say that real students and alumni don’t post there as well (I have), and many of them have real and serious complaints about some aspect of Princeton (I do), but the liberal policy that allows instant and unmonitored comments has attracted a group of imposters. If you are a regular reader of those comments sections, you’ll see the same posters using different names but remaining identifiable based on their phrasing, styles and complaints.</p>

<p>The off-putting comments of some posters on the Prince boards self-identifying as Princeton students or alums are about as likely to have a Princeton association as the arrogant and offensive comments of posters on the Yale Daily News board self-identifying as Yale students in articles such as the recent one on life at Quinnipiac College near Yale. In both cases they are not always, but often, likely to be, in College Confidential terminology, “■■■■■■”.</p>

12

<p>I don’t see what the big deal is here, or for that matter how Jewish numbers are low at Princeton - put simply, if Jews form less than 2% of the US population, how is having a 13% admit rate not enough?</p>

<p>Wanting to increase the number to 20%, just b/c other Ivy’s have it there, is ridiculous.</p>

13

<p>More important in my opinion is this;</p>

<p>30% of America’s population are either African American or Hispanic, yet they comprise less than 15% of Princeton’s population - surely this is a more important matter to handle with regards to diversity and outreach, than what is already an over-represented Jewish population at the university :rolleyes:</p>

14

<p>

</p>

<p>Precisely why “diversity” is a ridiculous primary goal for an academic institution. What part of being a college requires that you ensure a student population that reflects the general population? Social responsibility? There’s no compelling argument for this, only political correctness gone mad and perpetuated by you and your types.</p>

15

<p>@screwitlah</p>

<p>“You and your types”; stop being such an imbecile old chap. </p>

<p>A diverse student population is an important educational resource that enhances the environment for learning and as institutions for education, yes they do have some social responsibility - enhancing social mobility is one.</p>

<p>Note I say social mobility here and by that I primarily mean it is important to give opportunities to individuals who otherwise wouldn’t have access to them. In my opinion, this means those from low-income households primarily, who tend to traditionally and quite heavily be those from under-represented minorities. </p>

<p>You and your type need to gain a wider and less hyperbolic focus.</p>

16

<p>

</p>

<p>Blah Blah Blah… and yet you still can’t explain why the responsibility falls on colleges. It takes no brains to repeat bleeding heart mantras you heard elsewhere, my friend, just ctrl-c and ctrl-v.</p>

17

<p>@ Scewitlah</p>

<p>Typical moronic response; any sentence which contains a few words out of your limited vocabulary and/or English comprehension, its deemed as a “bleeding heart mantra” blah blah blah. </p>

<p>Such a shame you have so limited a focus, to not be able to comprehend and be afraid of a change in the status quo :)</p>

18

<p>The responsibility falls on colleges because colleges have rushed to embrace it. They are the most (or at least one of the most) important mechanism to created social mobility, and their governing bodies – trustees, faculty – have been wildly enthusiastic about engaging in that kind of social engineering. </p>

<p>If you don’t like that, then you have a problem with the whole American system of higher education, or at least with the mainstream of it that certainly includes Princeton. Feel free to look elsewhere for institutions you respect more.</p>

19

<p>In other words, colleges only do it because they choose to, and they are otherwise not obliged to help. We can all stop pretending that they are. Thank you very much.</p>

20

<p>Who pretends otherwise? That hasn’t been part of the debate in decades.</p>