If higher education is the path that leads to economic and social advancement, college admissions standards should adopt economic affirmative action.
So declares a new report from the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation.
In “True Merit,” Drs. Jennifer Giancola and Richard Kahlenberg analyze highly selective colleges and find large disparities that favor the rich and well-connected.
“High-achieving, students from the bottom socioeconomic quartile are only one-third as likely to enroll in selective colleges and universities compared to those from the top socioeconomic quartile. In short, we are relegating our brightest minds from low-income families to attend institutions with fewer resources, lower graduation rates, lower paying employment prospects, and reduced access to the upper echelons of leadership and commerce,” they write.
They found a high degree of uniformity in the admissions process, which resulted in it “reduced to a series of preferences.”
The problem is two-fold: high-achieving students from low-income families are less likely apply to those schools, and their chances of gaining acceptance are lower.
Economic diversity is separate from racial diversity as well. “Even preferences meant to increase racial diversity don’t usually lead to economic diversity: 86 [percent] of black students at competitive colleges come from the middle or upper class,” Money notes.
As a solution, the report proposes removing preferences for wealthy students, expanding definitions of merit, expand outreach strategies, and increase financial aid to help high-achieving students afford an exclusive college. A “poverty preference,” they write, is “a necessary correction.”
This is not a situation where low-income students enter college, accumulate debt, but don’t complete a degree. High-achieving students from low-income families can thrive, but their access isn’t as great. For less-selective colleges, that’s a golden opportunity. If they attract those students overlooked by highly selective colleges, prestige and academic quality could increase.
College admissions, however, can be highly political. Private colleges have more independence to design their admissions process, but that allows them to favor students based on alumni, geographic area, or certain extracurricular activities. Public colleges have to follow state laws that can dictate admissions processes.
“High-achieving students who attend more selective schools graduate at higher rates, earn higher incomes, and are more likely to pursue a graduate degree,” Giancola and Kahlenberg write. Given the difficulty and reluctance of highly selective colleges to change the culture or economic tendencies of their student bodies, however, reforming those colleges could be a struggle.
