|
The Christian Science Monitor / October
11, 2002
With so much of our economy and society depending on
educated men and women, what justifies the cutthroat competition among elite institutions
for students?
While many in higher education have criticized such
rankings as those published by U.S. News & World Report, colleges and universities
still play the game, competing on measures like average SAT scores and class rank
that lead to higher placement. In doing so, they give credence to a pair of harmful
falsehoods: 1). A limited number of elite institutions offer a uniquely valuable
education and, 2.) excellent students are a scarce commodity.
Even higher education's own analysts perpetuate the
scarcity myth. One economist argues that higher education can best be understood
as an arms race, in which schools compete for highly qualified students in order
to better their relative position. Another claims that higher education is the quintessential
winner-take-all market, in which only a few of many players win disproportionate
rewards.
Understanding college admission in win/lose terms depends
on the belief that there is a limited number of excellent students who can add unique
value to the quality of education a college or university offers. That's a difficult
proposition in today's market, where an unprecedented number of students now go to
college.
In the past 30 years, college enrollments have almost
doubled, from 6.9 million students enrolled in 1969, to 12.7 million in 1999, the
result both of a growth in population and an increase in students going to college.
Are students today less qualified, less bright, less creative than students were
three decades ago? That hardly seems likely. If we assume that the relative distribution
of intelligence and creativity in the population remains constant, an increase in
population should yield more highly qualified students than ever before.
The scarcity myth does more than fuel parents' and
students' already heightened anxieties. It permeates schools' missions in subtle
ways. It motivates colleges and universities to spend financial aid dollars not on
the neediest students but on those it judges most meritorious. It motivates unnecessary
spending on ancillary programs and facilities to attract students, spending that
drives up tuition. Worst of all, it leads some faculty members to think less well
of the worthy students right in front of them.
Higher education is not an arms race, and it is not
a winner-take-all market. The breadth, number, and variety of colleges and universities
in this country are a unique strength, providing wide access to the higher education
that promotes economic development and social mobility.
All of us, not only educators, students, and their
families, but employers, businesses, and society as a whole will benefit from thinking
about educational opportunity as a widely distributed resource that nurtures extraordinary
talent in many settings. Millions of excellent students have excellent choices, and
the only real scarcity these days is a fitting appreciation of their talents and
gifts.
Carol T. Christ is the president of Smith College. |
