THE IRONY OF COLLEGE ADMISSION DECISIONS
- The lower the percentage of admitted applicants, the more prestige assigned to the institution;
- Prestige attracts yet more applicants, like flies to the flame.
What a great business model. Attract more applicants so you can turn them away. The evil genius can, could, might be at work here and at many institutions. HPuck35 has a point. This is a choice many admissions committees have to make at a wide variety of schools. The question remains: Did they?
Without naming names, we know ALL BUSINESSES have ethical decisions to make in their planning. This decisions are not always so easy and obvious when you sit in the managers chair. In this factitious discussion:
Practical Business (PB) argues:
" We can’t afford them and they can’t afford us. The kindest thing to do is to turn them down."
Impractical Dreamer (ID) rebuts:
" These excellent student deserves to know they are as fast as the winning horses. Let them decide, but explain . . we simply ran out of funds. It is not right for us to make the expenditure decision for them."
PB:
“If we admit with no FA they will tell the world that we have no FA and not to waste their time applying. They will
say this even though we have spent millions of dollars on FA.”
ID:
“Well, it still is not right to out and out reject them because they could not afford us.”
Welcome to admissions! On old comic strip has the answer: “We have met the enemy and he is us!” (For the younger folks see https://www.google.com/search?q=pogo+i+have+met+the+enemy+and+he+is+us&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1). That’s right, this is a self inflicted wound largely brought on by our own limited definition of prestige. If we allow ourselves the time to judge school outcomes instead of rejection rates, we will discover a much broader playing field of realistic possibilities. You can probably go anywhere in the top 100, but… what about 101??