This essay was assigned to be written from the perspective of a merit matters advocate, and does not necessarily represent the views of the author.
The college admissions process has become increasingly complex in recent decades. The value of a college degree is increasing, creating a bigger demand for students to apply and enroll. Colleges are pressured not only to accept the best and most deserving students, but also to accept students of minority races. This system can become quite unfair to those students who are not in minority races. The admissions process used in the simulation by The College, chose to consider race as a factor (Decision Day). Though the system that the admissions representatives at The College elected to use was done legally, and in accordance with the Constitution; it was not done solely on applicants’ merit. Therefore, it violates color-blind proponents’ values about how race shouldn’t be considered in the process.The financial aid budget of seventy thousand dollars was distributed appropriately based on the need each admitted student had expressed. The admissions officers, instructed to admit the best possible entering class, chose not to weigh race heavily, but because they chose to included it, conflicts with the belief that the admissions process should be judged exclusively on merit.
Merit in the college admissions process means that the applicants is judged on how they performed and excelled as students both in and out of the classroom. This includes, but is not limited to high school GPA, standardized test scores, extracurricular activities, leadership roles, and any academic awards or honors the student may have earned. By viewing the student from a perspective without including their racial identity, it creates an objective view of them and their application. In the simulation of The College, the process was legal, the admissions team factored in race into the applicant-scoring process, creating a color-conscious approach rather than the more favorable merit based and color-blind approach (Decision Day). A race-blind admissions process, especially in 2013, is difficult because colleges want to be able to advertise that they have a diverse campus. The College wants to be able to show potential applicants that they are a community that values diversity. Having a diverse campus can add to the quality of the education not only for students, but also for faculty and staff. However, colleges should not have to sacrifice the quality of their entering class because they are focused on creating a diverse one. In the simulation of The College, race was not a pivotal factor, yet, it did have some impact on the outcome of many of the applicants. On decision day, the number generator spit out numbers of whether the student the admissions officers chose to admit was revealed, the admissions team was left with the hard choice of going down the list of applicants and their rankings. Applicants were skipped over for ones that were lower down on the ratings scale because they were not members of a minority group, or would cost The College too much. For example, Lisa Wu had a higher cumulative admissions score, but The College’s admissions committee chose to pass over her. Instead, the committee chose to admit Daniel Juberi, who had a lower cumulative admissions score than Lisa Wu (Decision Day). This is violating the ideal that the admissions process should be color-blind. By skipping over applicants because they aren’t a minority, or a certain gender, the committee is determining their decision based on personal qualities, not based on their academic and extracurricular profiles.
Applicants to The College should be evaluated based on their academic and extracurricular profiles. It is important that The College accepts students who have academic records and profiles that indicate that they will succeed in college. Applicants’ extra-curricular activities and involvement in the community are a good indicator of whether or not the student will be a successful college student. The quality of the candidate is what should determine the outcome of their admission decision, not their race or ethnicity. In fact, the race and ethnicity of the student shouldn’t be included in the application. Of course, every college wants to have a diverse student body. Yet, does this mean that colleges, specifically The College, should sacrifice the caliber of their admitted students in favor of a campus that is not homogeneous? “The problem is that few students who receive a preference realize that their entering academic credentials are well below the institutional median” (Heriot 453). If colleges accept a minority student that does not necessarily have the best credentials, they are less likely to be successful in their college career. Students who are struggling to keep up with the workload will not get as much out of their college experience. So, it is advantageous for colleges to admit students who are best suited for success not only during their time at the college, but also after they graduate.
Institutions of higher education such as The College need to maintain their reputation of being a selective and elite school. In order to do this, they must admit the best applicants. This idea is flawed and affected somewhat based on applicants who may qualify for financial aid. Applicants to The College who are not a minority and who will cost the college money are not as desirable. As James Jackson argues, affirmative action is intended at helping the minority students, but it just ends up leaving the white applicants at a disadvantage. Jackson feels that the main reasoning and rationalization for affirmative action is to right the wrongs of generations past (Jackson). The admission process should give equal opportunity to everyone, regardless of their race. However, trying to create a campus that is diverse, can cause the admissions team to stray away from the real mission of the admissions team: to create the best possible class. Having the knowledge of a person’s racial or ethnicity could also bring personal biases of admissions officers to the forefront.
There have been Supreme Court cases in recent years that were brought forward by white plaintiffs who feel that they were rejected by that particular institution because of their race. In the 2003 Supreme Court Case “Gratz v. Bollinger”, Jennifer Gratz argued that she was denied admission to the undergraduate school at the University of Michigan because she was white and the point system used to assess the applicants was not fair. The point system gave an automatic twenty points to applicants who were a member of a minority group. The Court decided that race was allowed in the admissions process but that the point system had to be overhauled (Rehnquist). The system that The College used in the admissions simulation was a point system. And although the point scale was much smaller than the one used at the University of Michigan, the fact that any points at all were allotted to minority students is not assessing the applicants on their merit alone (Rehnquist). Just how color-conscious advocates favor allowing race to be a factor and then would therefore agree with the Supreme Court’s decision in the Gratz case, advocates of a merit-based admission would disagree with how the Supreme Court ruled in this controversial and highly scrutinized case in 2003. There are conflicting views about how or if race is included in the college admission process. These conflicting views are not only problematic for students, but also for the administrators who are involved in the admissions process of higher education. Affirmative action is problematic for college administrators because of the constant struggle to give equal educational opportunity to all students, regardless of race.
The admissions simulation of The College brought key issues about race and money to the surface. The admissions officers chose to skip over certain applicants based on their financial need and their race (Decision Day). The financial need of the applicants didn’t have a very large impact on their admission. The budget was large enough and was distributed strategically enough that all applicants received their expressed need. The merit based grant was a bonus, and the admissions committee used it wisely when it was awarded to Jazmine Hope-Martin. The system the admissions officers created and participated in is not a complete merit-based system. Knowledge of the applicants’ races were clearly marked on their application and they were even granted points for being a member of a minority group (Decision Day). Though the points were unsubstantial, they were points nonetheless. Though this is Constitutionally legal, this is contradictory to the beliefs of people who value student academic and extracurricular performance in college admission. The admissions team at The College did not use the best system or methods to admit the three applicants. In the future, The College should not include any points in their point system for race of the applicant. If the race or ethnicity of the student is mention in passing, that is okay, but it should not become a component in the total points. In terms of financial aid, The College did a good job of allocating aid to the applicants based on their expressed need, so I think that this should remain the same in future admissions processes. In all, the class that was admitted, and enrolled was strong; these applicants will be flourishing members of The College community.
#####
Works Cited
Decision Day (from in class simulation), Color & Money seminar at Trinity College, Fall 2013, http://commons.trincoll.edu/colorandmoney.
Gratz Et Al v Bollinger Et Al. The Supreme Court of The United States. 23 June 2003. Google Scholar. N.p., n.d. Web.
Heriot, Gail. “Just Say No to Affirmative Action.” Springerlink.com (2011): 449-53.EBSCOhost. Web.
Jackson, James S. “Affirmative Action and the Illusion of Racial Equality: “Race Traitors or Fools?”” Black Scholar 33.3-4 (2003): 5-8. Web.