I seem to be pretty good at coming up with things to say on the Issues of The Day, roughly a week after the fact, and this is no different.<\/p>\n
There\u2019s an element of affirmative action-based admissions to highly-selective universities that no one\u2019s really discussing: the \u201cwhy\u201d of it. What\u2019s the benefit, to a student, of gaining admission to the University of Michigan by means of \u201cplus\u201d factors, rather than attending, say, my alma mater Michigan State University*, also a perfectly respectable school?<\/p>\n
My feeling is that a substantial part of the motivation is the belief that getting into a highly-selective university is like winning the lottery; students and prospective students believe that, solely by virtue of attending that university, due to the ability to put that university\u2019s name on their resume, they\u2019ll improve their future career prospects. On top of this, there\u2019s also a certain \u201cbrand name\u201d\/status component to it.<\/p>\n
And if that\u2019s all there was, it would not be unreasonable to demand some affirmative action-type measures. If the benefits are somewhat arbitrary, and in their own way, \u201cunfair,\u201d then maybe it\u2019s appropriate to say they be doled out in proportion to each group\u2019s population.<\/p>\n
Perhaps there\u2019s also a more immediate financial benefit. Tuition and fees U of M is $13,142 (for freshmen), plus another $9,996 for room and board. Charges at MSU are nearly identical \u2013 $12,908 tuition and fees and $8,856 room and board. That\u2019s in-state: out of state it\u2019s $40,392 at U of M and $33,796 at MSU \u2013 which I imagine means that there\u2019s a supply-and-demand difference here, and U of M charges significantly more for out-of-state students relative to MSU because they can do so without any loss of out-of-state applicants. In any case, it surprises me that in-state tuition is so nearly-identical; I had remembered U of M being significantly more expensive \u2013 so perhaps the revenue from out of state students at U of M (and their proportion of the student body has grown considerably since I was in college) helps them hold town tuition for in-state students.<\/p>\n
The U of M website is snazzier than MSU\u2019s in promoting its message that they dole out massive quantities of institutional financial aid, and they even provide a comparison of \u201caverage net price for 2011-2012\u201d on their site<\/a>. (http:\/\/www.admissions.umich.edu\/affordable\/images\/finaidchart.png), and, according to this, their average net price is somewhat higher than MSU\u2019s, $14,490 vs. $13,836, but both of these are lower than the lower-priced Western Michigan. \u00a0Even so, U of M claims that they are the only public university to meet 100% of a student\u2019s demonstrated need, so it\u2019s possible, that the demographics of U of M and MSU mean that U of M draws relatively more upper-middle-class students who don\u2019t qualify for aid, so that a higher average number masks a greater subsidy level for poor\/lower-class students, due to the practice of using a portion of the tuition money from the full-pay students on subsidies for others. \u00a0(\u201cTuition set-asides<\/a>\u201d \u2014 a gripe of mine as a future parent of college students who saves enough that I know we\u2019ll be the subsidizers, not the recipients.)<\/p>\n So in a way that feels like a fair gripe \u2014 that a student could pay less to go to the more prestigious school than the less prestigious school. \u00a0And beyond this, the revenue from the greater proportion of out-of-state students presumably means that U of M students, on average, get more value for the money, if the university plows that money into enhanced programs.<\/p>\n All of which is pretty far afield from the real purpose of selectivity: \u00a0that, in principle, the U of M ought to offer greater rigor and enhanced learning opportunities (such as the opportunity to work with professors more closely), so that they should limit admissions to those students who can succeed despite the increased rigor, and for the good of the state, should prioritize those students who can best take advantage of the greater opportunities, to help build up the state\u2019s economy after graduation. <\/p>\n To argue for affirmative action is to say that U of M doesn\u2019t have a level of rigor that\u2019s distinctly different from other universities, and that students with a measurably lower academic ability can do just fine, and that the opportunities offered there provide benefits whether or not you\u2019re top caliber. \u00a0But if that\u2019s true, what\u2019s the point of being selective? \u00a0Why not just admit based on a lottery?<\/p>\n And that\u2019s what I have to say about that.<\/p>\n (* Don\u2019t get me started on the attitude of U of M and U of M-bound students towards Michigan State. \u00a0If I had a nickel for every time I was asked why I was going to MSU rather than U of M, even by people who knew I had a major scholarship I\u2019d have been a fool to turn down . . . \u00a0Besides, MSU treasured its top students and offered us access to, not just Honors classes but priority registration.)<\/p>\n UPDATE: \u00a0thinking about this some more. \u00a0The out of state students (and in-state financial aid-ineligible students) are profitable for the university, and more than cover their costs. \u00a0If there\u2019s not an intrinsic reason to accept only the most qualified (due to a high degree of rigor or special programs that provide relatively greater benefit for the most talented), then admissions would seem to be driven by the business case: \u00a0if kids who are not the top talents are admitted, it dilutes the brand; on the other hand, if the full-pay kids are looking for lots of \u201cdiversity\u201d then the admissions office should pursue that.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I seem to be pretty good at coming up with things to say on the Issues of The Day, roughly a week after the fact, and this is no different. There\u2019s an element of affirmative action-based admissions to highly-selective universities that no one\u2019s really discussing: the \u201cwhy\u201d of it. What\u2019s the benefit, to a student, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2209,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-524","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n