The real college admissions scandal
The college admissions process has never been fair
Eric Boose / Opinion Editor / The USD Vista
Last Tuesday, 33 parents were indicted on charges of fraud and racketeering in connection with a cheating scheme to help their children gain acceptance to elite private universities, including the University of San Diego. These parents unfairly utilized their wealth to make their children’s path to higher education easier. Perhaps the worst part of this scandal is that thousands of parents utilize their wealth to make their children’s path to college easier every year, and they do so legally.
Since the foundation of the first colleges and universities, the admissions process has never been fair. Those with money have always had easier access to higher education than those without it. In the early days of higher education, only white, property-owning men could attend colleges and universities. In the time since then, wealth discrimination in college admissions has not decreased, but has instead become much less overt.
On Friday, The New York Times brought one of the darkest secrets in college admissions to light.
“A small number of people in the 1 percent have always been able to buy a building for a campus, and with it a spot for their child,” The New York Times’ Ron Lieber wrote. “And now we know that a few others in the lower rungs of the 1 percent might be tempted to break a law or two with a well-placed bribe to a coach or a test proctor.”
However, as Lieber revealed, the wealthy have yet another, legal, advantage: the ability to pay full price. Some private colleges are more likely to admit students who are able to pay for much or all of their cost of attending out of pocket. The practice is known as “need-aware” or “need-sensitive” admissions, and it further shatters the notion that the college admissions process is based on merit alone. Nearly all of the universities that do practice need-aware admissions do not publicize that they do, likely because they do not like spreading the message that wealth partially determines an applicant’s value in their eyes.
Within the idea of the American Dream is the assumption that we live in a meritocracy, where people earn their success on merit alone. The message to student has been that students who get good grades, take rigorous classes, score well on tests, and participate in extracurricular activities earn their way into college. However, wealthy students have a leg up every step of the way. The system is broken.
If we truly lived in a meritocracy, the quality of a high school education would be the same, or at least of similar quality, in any two neighborhoods. However, in public school systems, schools in higher-income neighborhoods often receive more funding and attract better teachers, while schools in low-income neighborhoods are often overlooked and underfunded. This difference creates an assumption that students at schools in those low-income areas somehow have less inherent academic merit. However, there is no reason that a student from a low-income area cannot be as academically strong as one from a higher-income neighborhood.
If that argument seems like a stretch, look at the cost of standardized tests. The SAT is almost universally accepted as the measuring stick for academic talent, yet some students have the privilege to get measured multiple times. While school districts make efforts to give all students a chance to take the SAT once at no cost, second attempts cost $50, $65 with an essay component. For some students, that is more than they can afford. Students who can afford it have multiple chances to put their best foot forward, while those who cannot have one shot to prove themselves.
Of course, the SAT is not the only standardized test considered in college admissions anymore. Most schools consider the ACT in their admissions decisions along with the SAT, a benefit to students for whom the ACT’s style is more conducive to displaying their academic abilities. However, fewer school districts offer their students a free chance to take the ACT, meaning students who wish to try both tests need to pony up at least $46. The fees continue to add up for Advanced Placement (AP) tests. Each individual AP test costs $94 dollars, and it is not unusual for a high-performing student to take multiple tests in a year.
Under the narrative that test scores can make or break a student’s college application, it makes sense that students would want to be as prepared as possible before they take their tests. For students who can afford it, test prep books, classes, and tutors offer opportunities to practice before the test, or at the very least to know what to expect on test day. For students who cannot afford this training, sometimes the most they can do is hope that they get lucky and that the test is kind to them. Performing at the highest possible academic level is currently not a right, but a privilege.
While this specific scandal is the story of the moment, it will fade into the history books, and the privileges that exist in the current system will still exist. In addressing this scandal and fixing a broken system, remember these things. When we talk about the college admissions scandal, remember that these parents are all wealthy. Their children had every advantage available to them, and these parents still chose to cheat to give their children a further leg up. When I talk about the advantages granted to upper class, even middle class students, I do not mean to minimize the severity of this scandal. A federal crime was committed. In some cases, these parents may have quite literally stolen admission from a more qualified student.
When it comes to fixing a broken system, many of us will have to acknowledge that while we were not harmed by it, that does not make it any less of a problem. As college students, it is easy to feel that solutions to problems like this are beyond our abilities to address. If you look at the rise of student activists in recent years, you will realize that this thinking is outdated. One of the most powerful choices someone with privilege can make is to advocate for those without such privilege.