The College Admission Scandal: my reactions and hope for an improved system
My reaction in a nutshell was patently unsurprised. When the college admission scandal broke, I was inundated with understandably shocked friends seeking my thoughts, and it saddened me to tell them I glimpsed clues of this stuff my entire career in admission, and was even directly asked to participate in indiscretions.
The college admission industry in the US has favored and perpetuated privilege since its nascence. In the past four decades, colleges have made tremendous strides in extending opportunities to those less-privileged, perhaps most importantly students of color and first-generation college-goers, but is still rife with broken systems that advance the privilege and allow for crazy (illegal!) transactions, as seen in this recent scandal.
Ways privilege was perpetuated
I’m fortunate to have attended the nation’s oldest higher education institution. Harvard was founded in 1636, which, as The Social Network reminds us, is older than the our country itself. Thus began an endemic perpetuation of the upper class and upper-middle class, sustained by the following classist (and thereby racist) circumstances:
2. Lofty references were an essential factor
3. Students of different backgrounds had to work for money in their teens, and certainly in their twenties
4. Prep schools were “feeders”
5. Parents who didn’t attend college didn’t understand the process or embrace the concept
6. Students of different backgrounds would not feel comfortable at colleges, anyway
7. The careers that colleges furnished were not welcoming to them
8. Super-affluent or famous parents were able to finagle or buy their kids’ admission
9. Measurements for admission - grades, test scores, high school quality, co-curricular activities - were skewed towards privileged applicants
10. If and when privileged students under-performed, they had access to support, special attention, tutoring, and systems to ameliorate their records
Essentially, college admission was founded on prejudice. The first African American attended in 1823, facing horrible harassment. The first woman didn’t attend until1840, Jewish students faced intimidation well into the 20th Century, and don’t get me started on the hesitant introduction of non-western international students. I could expound on each item on the above list with a dissertation, but I want to get back to the scandal.
We have come a long way. A sea change began in the late 19th Century, and in the past few decades, drastic efforts have been installed to combat this issue. I applaud two key factors in improving the system: the boom of remarkable funding for and improvement in public institutions (both state schools and community colleges), and affirmative action.
IMHO, the latter is a gods-sent elixir for centuries of prejudice. In the context of the allocation of resources, Google defines affirmative action as “the practice or policy of favoring individuals belonging to groups known to have been discriminated against previously.” Colleges adopted this process several decades ago, giving a relative leg-up to applicants of color or at least African American and Native American students. More recently, colleges have extended the preferential admission to “first generation college goers.”
The topic is rife with nuances and controversy, such as the most famous case of Grutter v. Bollinger and the University of Michigan, and the topic remains highly contested, but in my professional opinion, affirmative action in the allocating resources is seemingly the only way for to affect staggering discrepancies as quickly as possible, and I stand by my statement.
Moreover, and only from what I can tell, which may be inaccurate, there has been less wheeling and dealing of affluent parents and elite prep schools “buying” their kids’ admission. But then again, check the news recently.
We have come a long way since the endemic problems I listed above, but I see still see the following as remaining problematic:
2. Students of different backgrounds might have to work for money in their teens, and certainly in their twenties
3. Parents who didn’t attend college don’t understand the process or necessarily embrace the concept
4. The careers and industries that colleges furnish may be skewed towards the more affluent
5. Super-affluent or famous parents are obviously able to finagle or buy their kids’ admission
6. Measurements for admission - grades, test scores, high school quality, co-curricular activities - are still skewed towards privileged applicants
7. If and when privileged students under-perform, they have access to support, special attention, tutoring, and systems to ameliorate their records
8. Merit awards, not to be confused with financial aid, are granted more heavily to affluent applicants
You’ll notice only a few subtractions from the above list, but did you also notice one major addition at the end? That’s right: although merit awards and financial aid help a fraction of needy students, awards are showered more heavily upon the affluent as reputable colleges channel funds from their endowments to woo “full-pay” families. Thus, privileged students are more apt to attend private institutions that may lead to more successful outcomes, thus perpetuating class status.
Of course, the most alarming problem above is #5. When this recent scandal broke, people were shocked. Were you? I was not, but I’m in the industry. That this recent litany of tragic unfairness was able to occur is proof that the college admission industry still needs major fixing.
I don’t mean to be so negatron! Indeed, my frustration with the system is one of the reasons I left admission to work on the proverbial “other side of the desk.” I truly want to make a difference in the new age of college admission. Fortunately, I have three chief glimmers of hope:
1. State programs - crazy cool things are happening at public institutions!
a) Honors Colleges alá the University of Oregon Clark Honors College offer tremendously high-quality and challenging academics, as well as specialized student life programming. That they take diversity into account in admission and funding means hosts of under-privileged students can get a world-class education for free. Awesome.
b) State schools in general have tons of opportunities for scholarships for needy students. If a student is a high-achiever, is willing to stay in state, and applies early enough to be considered for scholarships, it’s very possible to get a full ride, or at least to graduate debt-free.
c) Community Colleges might offer four year degrees. The Oregon State Senate Committee on Education will soon be considering Bill 3, transitioning some Community Colleges to to Bachelor degree institutions. This potential is so exciting to me because transferring out of Community Colleges is actually rare despite intentions going in, especially since it’s way harder to get financial aid as a transfer.
2. This scandal - although I am not surprised, I am pleased to see these recent infractions come to light, and so virally. Much like the #METOO movement, I hope this scandal incites further whistle-blowing, exposure, monitoring, and a general movement towards buttressing the system from illegal shenanigans.
3. The “kids” - I know, they’re not kids, but our current bastion of college students won’t stand for their colleges’ infractions. It’s not fair to them, and they’re protesting. On March 11th, students at Sarah Lawrence who call themselves the Diaspora Coalition, occupied part of campus to protest against “injustices imposed on people of color by this institution on a daily basis.” I protested at my boarding school, college, and my graduate school (don’t ask me the causes as I am actually a little fuzzy on those deets). Tianamen Square, Kent State, the Anti-Apartheid movement, the Greensboro sit-ins...all of these protests actually led to change.
In summary, the recent scandal didn’t even make me flinch since I wasn’t surprised in the slightest. It did serve as an effective reminder to me, however, of why I am a college counselor. I honestly want to affect change by helping my students with integrity, and to always work pro bono with at least one “first-gen” college-seeking student. I also need to continue to contribute to the larger convention among my colleagues by attending conferences and meeting frequently with my buddies in admission. The scandal also reminded me to champion the above three glimmers of hope, ignoring the ineffectual noise of the media in the spirit of remembering that it’s all about the kids.
