Pomona Dean Trashes Single Choice Early Action

marite · February 23, 2005, 6:07am

Many years ago when I was combing through books on scholarships, I realized how many were so narrowly defined to be indirectly discriminating against particular races. For example, scholarships limited to descendents of particular individuals; members of DAR; residents of overwhelmingly white states, and so forth. So I don’t have any problems with scholarships aimed at some minorities.

I keep in mind that Dartmouth was established specifically to educate Native Americans. It could be said that admitting any student not of that race would be a violation of the school’s charter. I doubt anyone will try to make that case.

Northstarmom · February 23, 2005, 9:33am

Underlining what Marite said: When I applied to college in 1969, I literally don’t remember seeing any URM-based scholarships. What I do recall seeing were lots of scholarships that it was clear to me, an African-American, were for white people.

This particularly was evident when it came to scholarships for legacies or that were designed for people who came from very obscure, overwhelmingly white cities or from states in which the URM population was virtually nil. I also remember some scholarships for people with certain names that were very WASP or otherwise European ethnic. These tended to be for people who probably were descendants of the (white) founders of the colleges.

When it comes to legacy scholarships, it’s important to realize that even in the northern parts of the US, URMs were discriminated against in college admissions. For instance, Princeton didn’t accept black students until about 1945. When former Detroit mayor Coleman Young applied to University of Detroit, he had a stellar h.s. record and got an acceptance. That acceptance, however, was withdrawn when U of D learned he was black.

When it comes to scholarships based on legacies, URMS are at a great disadvantage at probably most mainstream universities in the US.

mini · February 23, 2005, 10:47am

Amherst’s charter and articles of incorporation specifically call for the education of “indigent youth of good moral character”. Seems like they’ve strayed awfully far!

At my college, they had scholarships for white, non-Catholic, non-Jewish people (this was the 1960s.) It has now changed, for which I am thankful.

patuxent · February 23, 2005, 6:57pm

I don’t know that the scholarships have ever been challenged but I think they are rife to be challenged. I see the problem mainly with the institutionally funced scholarships. Those which the scholl pays for out of its own momies. If a fraternal organization, church, or family want to fund a scholarship and limit it to the daughters of Armenian beer vendors from New Brunswick, NJ it is OK with me. Lots of organizations do it and yes I agree it may be de facto discriminatory but the discrimination part wasn’t the principle intent. Further these scholarships generally are not administered by the schools.

And yes I am well aware of the history of discrimination in this country. It would be tough to forget but that isn’t a reason per se to continue it. Black and Hispanic Americans are not the only ones who have been discriminated against even in recent history. Further they are not the only ones to pay a heavy price for the evil of the peculiar institution. 20,000 Americans died in one day at Antietam to put an end to slavery. If you are going to heap the sorrows of mankind up and demand reparations for all the ill that has been done in history…well the ledgers are full all around. It is time to burythe dead and start living in the world we want.

mini · February 23, 2005, 7:04pm

I don’t think they should continue discrimination. I just think they should level the playing field. Six generations of affirmative action for white folks? Six generations for Black folks would be about right. Not discrimination. Just level the playing field.

(Please note - my folks, the Quakers, DID provide reparations to all of their slaves, prior to 1776. It wasn’t so hard to do, it was no great intellectual challenge once they decided to “level the playing field”, and it didn’t have to be a big deal, and it was done voluntarily. No one made ANY demands.)

xiggi · February 23, 2005, 7:26pm

Patuxent, I think that defining a “school’s own money” will shed some light on this issue. I am far from being an expert, but I believe that most of " a school’s money" that is available for financial assistance is subject to the qualifications established by the donors. Harvard may show a 20 billion endowment, but it is more or less an amalgam of 3,000 to 4,000 different funding vehicles with different restrictions. Unless they make huge profits, one could state that they spent their “own money” a few centuries ago.

As far as restrictions, it is quite apparent that the funders establish criteria and seek to do the “most good” with their money. They seem intend to answer the most pressing needs. And as long as minorities continue to trail the population distributions by such a wide margin, you can expect more money to seek to level the playing field.

As far as legal challenges, a quick look at the names of the institutions that are currently funding minorities’ graduate research should stop most legal challengers in their tracks. For instance, here is a link to the scholarships available to Cornell students:

<a href=“404 | CUinfo | Cornell University”>404 | CUinfo | Cornell University;

coureur · February 23, 2005, 7:40pm

Some of them are still there. Last year when D was looking at list of available scholarships, I recall seeing one for the descendents of Confederate Soldiers. Now race wasn’t mentioned at all, but you’ve got to figure that the Confederate army probably wasn’t very integrated.

patuxent · February 23, 2005, 8:25pm

Six generations of affirmative action for which white folks mini - the ones who came as refugees from Bosnia? Jewish Americans who came mostly in the first decades of the 20th century? Armenians from Turkey? B’hais fleeing Iran? And to benefit who? The hundreds of thousands of Black Americans who also emigrated to the USA in the last decade presumably because of the opportunities they see here? More Blacks have emigrated willingly to the United States from Africa and the Carribean than were brought here in slave ships. My ancesters cam here fleeing a potatoe famine, political disenfranchisement, and discrimination every bit as harsh as what any Black sharecropper experienced. It doesn’t mean that Great Britain or the United States owe me anything.

Anyway that is the last word I have to say on it. Those who cannot let the past go are condemned to live in it. Look at Norther Ireland or the Balkans or the Middle East if you don’t believe me.

concerneddad · February 23, 2005, 9:20pm

First, let me say I firmly believe in affirmative action and leveling the playing field. And, while I certainly understand the hardships people of color have experienced, having grown up the projects of NYC myself, I also know that a lot of the hardships – not all by any means – but a lot, have to do with living in poverty, real poverty.

But, I would not pat ourselves on the back quite yet – even those who made reparations to former slaves – at least not until we face the results of Manifest Destiny and all that has wrought as well. Anyone giving up their land yet?

ariesathena · February 24, 2005, 12:08am

Patuxent: There is a difference between reparations (which seems to imply trying to systematically undo the harm of generations ago by taking funds directly from whites or institutions which benefited from slavery) and minority scholarships. The former is absurd on its face. The latter is, IMO, part of a larger scheme. There are scholarships for National Merit Scholars (largely white, largely Christian or Jewish); scholarships for kids from poor areas; boosts given to kids from geographic areas and scholarships for kids from Alabama; and scholarships for those pursuing certain fields, like teaching. The minority scholarships are a small part of that; when put in context of the rest of the scholarships out there, it is not reverse racism because race is such a small part of it. The entire financial aid system, if you think about it, is weird. Some kids are charged more than the school needs to collect from them so that other students can be charged less; it is the kids from low-income areas, from non-Northeast/West Coast states, and minority kids who disproportionately get these funds (as the types who can afford college are overwhelmingly white or Asian with educated parents and live in certain areas of the country). Bet that most people don’t think of fin. aid as reverse racism or reverse income discrimination.

I’m certainly biased - I loved the fact that my alma mater was like the United Nations. Also, I really think that, had I grown up in poverty or with uneducated parents, or of a different race, that I would not have succeeded as much as I have now. For me, having been so lucky (white, upper-middle class, educated parents who care about me and try to be good parents), I find it hard to complain about minority scholarships. The playing field is not close to level - as a woman who did engineering, I know that discrimination is alive and well in many forms. Cannot begin to imagine what it can be like for other people.

patuxent · February 24, 2005, 12:27am

aries - I am very glad you can assuage your conscience at someone elses expense. Tell the kid in the Community College who is there not because he isn’t bright but because he was the wrong color to apply for merit aid.

yulsie · February 24, 2005, 5:05pm

I’m going to take a polarized view of the colleges’ whining about ED and EA, which can be roughly summarized by the book title “Them and Us: Struggles of a Rank and File Union.” (United Electrical)

It us primarily a power struggle. High school students are not unionized. And it’s many years past “Five to one, baby, one to five now.” (For the most part, they don’t march, or protest, or vote much, or do anything towards engaging in and improving their government, so with a few occasional exceptions, they are NOT doing their part to ensure a better world or a More Perfect Union - but I digress, I really do love my apolitical offspring despite my 60s scorn for the apathy of his generation…)

Moving right along, the students are individuals in thousands of separate unconnected universes, aided only by counselors and supportive parents - like a part-time worker taking on Walmart corporation (apply for a job - no, we don’t want you, or you, or you, or you) - the deck is stacked heavily in favor of the latter. Since it is unlikely that a class action suit “US High School Students vs. College Admission Practices” will ever be filed, IMO it is appropriate for the student to use any honest means whatsoever to gain admission to the college(s) of choice. If that means 20 applications, non-exclusively submitting two EA applications, or other tactics, I applaud the demonstration of industry, determination, and gamesmanship - the Power of One, as the Army would say. Whatever is legal and boosts the power of the puny single student with respect to The Man.

Prior to admission, the private colleges are 99% concerned with their own interests -selecting and arranging the flowers to develop the most beautiful arrangement according to whatever fads may drive them this year. “I’ll take two tulips, three hyacinths, 10 white daffodils, and 20 crocuses for my spring garden, with a color palette of white, yellow, and blue.”

Only when the student is “one of us” do they show their sweet side (“I’ve never been nice, but I’ll try my best to be sweet” - David Carridine, Kill Bill 2 ). The Fat Cat mentality is more prevalent the higher the typical yield rate may be - with an 80% yield, the college can relax, with a 30% yield, they naturally complain about SCEA or any other practice that might reduce their power.

If I had a wand to wave, I would establish RD as the single admissions method for all colleges, move the notification date up to March 1 and the candidates reply date to April 1, to give the waterfall wait lists time to sort out. This would put the financial aid applicants on an equal footing across the board. I would also legislate merit-based admissions for a minimum of 70% of an entering class to ensure a more direct correlation between performance and rewards, require the colleges to state in the admissions letter upon what basis a student was admitted and require them to publish the collective percentages in a public forum. (Preparing for the eventual class action suit, heh heh heh). An American tradition - Fair Play.

patuxent · February 24, 2005, 11:44pm

In keeping with yulsie’s the the power of the institution over the individual is best exemplified by the fact that nobody knows what the real price of the product is. In fact it is set individually based on what the university feels it can extract without actually killing the customer. Even in the “need blind” institution that claims it will “fully meet” all “demonstrated” need, how that need is met for two families in identical circumstances varies. The school can “fully meet” your need with $100,000 in loans or $100,000 in grant in aid. Or define “demonstrated need” to suit their own purposes.

jamimom · February 25, 2005, 12:19am

ED is indeed wonderful. For those who get into a first choice ED school and are happy with it, ED saves an enormous amount of trouble. I like ED too. I would be very happy if all of my kids applied early and were done by mid December. This is certainly not a process that I like having prolonged, and with my kid, December was even a very long time and we had some stressful scenes.

It is also true that many things in this capitalistic country cost money. This is not a perfect process at all and does not pretend to be. We have our kids considered adults for just about all purposes, and then are told that they are locked into their family’s financial situation until age 24 (yes, there are some exceptions) for college financing. So nearly all kids are stuck with how their parents feel about providing financial info and paying for college according to what the government and colleges feel they should pay. To make things even less fair, if your folks can pay the whole tab, you can apply and find out nearly 4 months earlier than those who need to figure out the finances. It also gives a better chance at getting into a number of schools to go to the head of the line like this. I don’t see why this situation should exist. Want to have an early program, do early action or single choice early action. That way whoever gets the app in early, no money involved here, gets first crack with the adcoms and you get to know ahead of time. Love the answer, you are done. If the money, or other aspects of the college bother you, then you’ve got some more college apps to complete. Yeah, some kids trophy hunt, but if that’s the way they want to spend their money and time over the holidays, that is their privilige. Some will do it, but seeing how hard senioritus is hitting S and his friends, I don’t see too many kids filling out these apps just to see who else will take them. I was so glad I had S get his stuff done over the summer, as I don’t know how the heck he would have gotten them done once school started, and by the time December arrived, he was done as far as any apps or anything else goes. I think that quality of those apps done as the ball drops down on Time Square are not the best work kids could do. Of course that single early app would be of better quality. So, really single choice EA and RD are the only fair choices as they do not depend on having the finances to go to college, and yet the EA allows kids to signify to a college that it is its first choice. You lose on your early gamble, you fill out the rest of the apps. I also think it is only fair that colleges release all of their decisions on the same day, instead of playing games about when the decision is released, and doing the acceptances before the denials and other such things that stain their credibility when “it just ain’t so”. You want to maintain some integrity in this process, how about telling the truth about some of the things that you can control. No reason you cannot drop all of the decisions in the mail at the same time in thin envelopes at the post office. Just hold them until you’ve got them all. Send out the fat packs the next day. That way all of the decisions except for inevitable strays and mistakes are all out on even footing instead of this business of stressing the kids out as to whether they are in or not. This is not “American Idol”.

sempitern555 · February 25, 2005, 12:31am

lol. I think the cynicism stems from the hypercompetitive atmosphere that is prevalent currently

jamimom · February 25, 2005, 12:50am

There are inherent unfairnesses in the college process. Given the selectivity of certain schools, things can get very tense. It is at the selective school level that all the advantages can make a very big difference in admissions, since the chances of getting in are just so small. So, yes ,the competitive atmosphere does drive a lot of the criticisms.

But there are aspects of admissions, even at this level that can be made more fair, more open without that much effect to the colleges, and would raise the level of trust regarding the admissions process. I am pointing out some of those practices. Adcoms love to say how sacrosanct they are and how fair, and honest they try to make the process, but then turn around and lie about some of the most basic things, or they have some unfair practices that can be very easily remedied. I am not talking about that occaisional elite athlete or the URM situation or the developement admit, but the fair treatment of the vast majority of applicants. This business of posting the outcomes a day or two before the announced day, or not getting the stuff out on the promised day is ridiculous. That is part of their job, and this is a job that many businesses routinely have to do. They can stick to their one deadline-the notification date, by having it all ready a good week before it is simply released. With all of this technology, I don’t see why not.

Personally, this did not effect me. My girls applied primarily to non selective schools, my boys heard early. This year, we knew in December. But I see what this is doing to a lot of the other kids, and it is cruel, playing on emotion and expectation that way. No reason for it. I don’t think I am cynical about the process. I am critisizing a small aspect of the admissions process that is easily changeable.

Pomona Dean Trashes Single Choice Early Action

CONNECT WITH US