The Debacle of Higher Education in the United States

I just watched a two hour episode on 20 - 20, the ABC television magazine. This is not an habitual behavior I find these "investigative" programs somewhat depressing. Their "exposés" are often accurate, genuinely exposing much of the worst side of our culture. That is information that saddens, particularly when there is nothing I can do about the inequities exposed. Not infrequently, they are a bit off in their attacks and that is even more saddening. I watched tonight to see a friend of mine who exposed the favored treatment of athletes at a major university attached to a major football team. He was interviewed for the program. As it turned out, the program documented the completely outrageous benefits in every aspect of life that the 'moneyed' and famous enjoy, including in the courtrooms of our land. But I already knew that; everybody did. Perhaps the extent is greater than I imagined, but I was not particularly surprised --except for one aspect that hit me where I lived.

Several high school students were interviewed who had been turned down for admission to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford. These students had impeccable academic records and outstanding test scores, for example 2400 on the SAT, the highest possible score. Perfect academic performance, perfect test scores, and perfect citizenship were not enough for admission to these schools. OK, perhaps there were too many "perfect" applicants, creating, essentially, a lottery. But no, this was most assuredly not the case. In fact the majority of the students that were accepted at these august institutions could not come close to comparing their applications to the credentials of the rejects. Many were like GWB, who was admitted to Yale with credentials that would not have qualified him for any private institution with self respect. His performance once matriculated, of course, was equally undistinguished (to be kind). He was a "legacy." But this sad example was certainly not alone, perhaps the most extreme absurdity, but assuredly not alone. I think what stimulated my need to write this article were the words of a dean at Duke University. Apparently in defense of Duke's admission's criteria, this gentleman bragged that fully half of Duke's students were there because of strong, academically outstanding, applications. Half. This was presented as a good record for the institution. Half. And he was smiling when he said it. "Some students are just more financially rewarding than others."

How did these admission's officers respond to the obvious questions? They responded with a single voice, a voice that yelled, "endowments," money to the schools. The plaintive cry was that they had to do it because everybody else did and they would not remain competitive if they did not.

I have watched the deterioration of our educational system for many years. I have speculated about the reasons. I saw a straight 'A' undergraduate from Harvard (I think most of them are) come very close to flunking out of a graduate program for which I was a professor because she had no idea how to study. Evidently it was not necessary at Harvard because, after all, if you were admitted to Harvard you must be good, obviating the need for strict evaluation criteria. I watched students enter graduate and professional programs for many years, steadily deteriorating in preparation and quality, year after year. The schools that have been considered our 'best,' our flagship universities have reduced admission (and exit) criteria, or rather, substituted non academic criteria for academic decisions. How could we not be falling? And how can we stop it?

To be honest, I don't think we can.