Unlocking Opportunity or Cementing Privilege? How Elite College Admissions Shape America's Future Leaders
Picture this: a room buzzing with the nation's top CEOs, legislators, and academics. They're discussing policy changes, market trends, the future of America. Now, what if I told you that the majority of them share a common alma mater—places like Harvard, Yale, or Princeton? It's like a secret society, but the secret's out. Elite colleges are churning out a disproportionate number of high-income graduates who often walk into leadership roles. The question is, are these institutions gatekeepers of privilege or potential launchpads for societal change?
You might think this is just another rant about the rich getting richer. But hold on. A recent study led by Raj Chetty and John Friedman sheds new light on this topic. The findings? Both eye-opening and somewhat sobering.
The Numbers Tell a Story
Let's talk about Sarah, a bright student from a middle-class family. She aced her SATs, was the president of her high school debate team, and even volunteered at the local shelter. On paper, she's Ivy League material. But Sarah didn't get in. Why? The study shows that a student from the top 1% income bracket is 2.3 times more likely to secure a seat at an Ivy League school than someone like Sarah with a comparable academic record.
Behind the Admission Letters
It's not that Sarah didn't apply or wasn't good enough. She was up against students who had a 55% higher chance of getting that coveted acceptance letter. How come? Three factors: legacy admissions, athlete recruitments, and the ever-mysterious "subjective non-academic ratings."
Here's the thing. Legacy and athlete admissions often favor the well-off. You can't be a legacy if your parents couldn't afford to go to that college in the first place. And athletic recruitments? Let's just say lacrosse and rowing aren't exactly common sports at underfunded public schools.
The Credentials Paradox
Imagine another student, let's call him Mark. His dad is an alumnus, and he got in through legacy admissions. Mark is more likely to land a high-paying job, not necessarily because he's smarter or more competent, but because of the brand value of his degree. But here's the paradox: the very factors that helped Mark get into an elite college don't predict his success. So, what are we really achieving here?
Time for Change?
This is the silver lining. These elite colleges have the tools to break this cycle. Just by eradicating legacy admissions, each Ivy League school could increase the representation of students from families earning below $240K by nearly 9%. That's around 144 Sarahs getting a fair shot at success.
Final Thoughts: The Choice that Shapes the Future
Elite colleges stand at a crossroads. They can continue to act as privilege factories, or they can make a conscious choice to diversify not just their campuses but also the future leadership of this nation. It's more than tweaking a few policies; it's about reshaping the landscape of opportunities in America.
These colleges have the power to turn the tide, but it's up to them to set the course. And remember, every admission letter they send out is not just shaping a student's future; it's shaping the nation's future as well.
So, what's it going to be? The gatekeepers of privilege or launchpads for change? The ball is in their court. Let's hope they play it right.
source: Diversifying Society’s Leaders? The Determinants and Causal Effects of Admission to Highly Selective Private Colleges
(with David J. Deming and John Friedman), NBER Working Paper No. 31492 (July 2023)