In light of the latest college admissions scandal (now almost old news), I wrote something on how a simple but radical reform can improve not just the process at selective universities, but ripple down to make our world a better place (admittedly, in the larger scheme of things only a very slightly better place, but still….). It was just published in in Inside Hiigher Ed. The core of the argument:
I believe that there is a simple adjustment that we can make to the admissions process that could make a profound impact, not just advancing the goal of providing equal opportunity but also reforming several aspects of our higher educational system. In short, I propose that the admissions office focus solely on the question of whether a student would or would not thrive at the given college.
Many admissions officers have told me that even at the most selective colleges they could see 30 to 45 percent of the applicant pool meeting this standard. Simply going over this bar could put a student into the admissions pool. The pool can then be tested, and slightly adjusted, according to the demographic character of the college; criteria used for testing, and exactly how the pool was adjusted, should be publicly released each year. Actual admits are then determined by lottery.
For the entire piece, click here.
The general idea is not new, and has recently received some push-back here (unfortunately behind a paywall) in an opinion in the Chronicle.