Editor's Note Appended
Correction Appended
No student really understands all the intricacies of how admissions officers in West College will create of the Class of 2013. There are some well-known factors that play a role - SAT scores, high school GPA and the much-discussed college essay are good examples. These may very well be good tools for evaluating students. Yet, admissions officers themselves don't know if they were because they don't check how students perform once they walk through FitzRandolph Gate.
Dean of Admission Janet Repelye recently told The Daily Princetonian in an e-mail that, "We do not formally follow up on students to see how they have chosen to spend their time." This policy is a little like hiring a plumber to repair your house and then never checking to see if they actually did a good job. If admissions officers never follow up to see whether the students they admit are successful, how do they know that they are admitting the right people?
Of course, it is difficult to define the term "the right people." The reality of the admissions process is that there are many more qualified applicants than spaces in any given class. That there are hundreds of kids placed on the waitlist every year suggests as much. (If you are qualified for the waitlist, you are, by definition, qualified to attend.) Even though we like to rag on Harvard and Yale students, they were probably qualified to attend Princeton and probably applied here, too. Just as there are students here who were not admitted to one or both of these schools, there are similar cases at both our rivals to the North. So Princeton is certainly rejecting or waitlisting thousands of students who "deserved" to be Tigers.
What, then, is setting apart those students who do actually become Tigers from those who don't? I trust the admissions office is not simply throwing darts against a wall. There must be a set of criteria that matter a great deal.
As any undergraduate can tell you, and recent surveys have shown, students from underserved communities or underprivileged backgrounds are dramatically under-represented at Princeton. According to the most recent data from 2005, roughly 12 percent of Americans live below the poverty line, which is defined as living on a $22,200 income for a family of four in the year 2007. Yet, the number of Princeton students who are Pell-Grant eligible, which means that they come from families with an income of $40,000 or less, hovers at around 10 percent. Moreover, a full 45 percent of the Class of 2012 is too wealthy to qualify for financial aid. This is staggering, considering that even some families making more than $200,000 qualify for aid. According to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2006 statistics, only 3.4 percent of households earn $200,000 or more. In essence, the current method for admitting people has fed into a system of the rich continuing to gain disproportionate access to elite schools while the poor are disproportionately shut out.
There may be some good reasons why this is occurring. The elite can go to better high schools so they do better on all the indicators that matter to the Admission Office. They can afford an SAT tutor so that their scores will be better. A college counselor may provide help on the college essay or aspects of the application process.
Yet, we don't know whether any of these criteria are indicators of future success at Princeton. While some national surveys suggest that the indicators Princeton uses do correlate with success at college, perhaps there is something unique about Princeton's culture - such as the eating club system and the social pressures it creates - that changes the equation. Indeed, according to the recent Committee on Background and Opportunity survey, wealthier students are more likely to party at the Street and join eating clubs in general and bicker clubs in particular.
I do not claim to know that any of these possibilities reflect reality. By the same token, students who claim that a privileged background and elite education obviously lead to future success at Princeton cannot be sure that their assumptions reflect reality, either.
What is clear is that if they are wrong, then Princeton is unnecessarily creating a system where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Fortunately, there is a simple way to settle the argument: The Admissions Office should start tracking all the students they admit to see who turns into the type of Tiger that they value. Princeton's success in helping create a better world may depend on the results.
Adam Bradlow is a sophomore from Potomac, Md., and a member of Wilson College. He can be reached at abradlow@princeton.edu.
Editor's Note
An earlier version of this column included a paragraph suggesting that high school may also play a role in admission decisions and observing that a large number of students come from a handful of high schools. This paragraph was added into the column during the editing process and was not part of the columnist's final draft. It does not reflect the argument the columnist was attempting to make and has accordingly been removed.
Correction
An earlier version of this column stated that the poverty line for a family of four is $14,000. It is $22,200; $14,000 is the poverty line for a family of two. The Daily Princetonian regrets the error.
Read More
Why can’t lecturers win the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching?
Jerry ZhuLet’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Let’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Princeton’s administration of justice is Trumpian
Frances BroganThe disparity between the University’s approach to Giberson and its approach to pro-Palestinian protestors reflects a concerning trend of appeasing an increasingly emboldened right rather than resisting the threat it poses to academic freedom and the wellbeing of Princeton students.
Secular Opening Exercises? Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water
Frank StrasburgerThe secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
The secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
