The New York Times has been critical of President Donald Trump’s recent protests regarding education reform.
The Trump administration is advocating for universities to eliminate race as a factor in admissions processes. Instead, universities could lean more towards standardized test scores and grade point averages. A Times article suggests that parental income significantly impacts students’ chances of gaining admission to elite universities.
Now, the key point here is “impact.” It’s possible to argue that higher enrollment rates coincide with increased parental income, but substantial evidence is necessary to prove that income alone boosts the likelihood of admission.
Interestingly, the Times doesn’t seem to present robust evidence. They even include charts that contradict their own arguments.
These charts show “Enrollment rates at elite colleges among students with the same test scores,” utilizing 2023 data. On one axis, you have parent income rank, and on the other, admission rates that range from “half the chance of being admitted” to “twice the chance.”
The Times contends that wealthy parents spend more on their children’s education, which leads to better qualifications for top universities. One would expect a straightforward correlation between wealth and enrollment rates, but the data suggests otherwise. The charts suggest that the average admission rate for applicants from low-income families is surprisingly lower compared to those from wealthier backgrounds.
It’s worth mentioning that applicants from the highest income brackets are a small fraction of the applicant pool.
Moreover, a study referenced by the Times points out that students in the bottom 40% of the income distribution actually attend Ivy League schools at slightly higher rates than middle-class students with equivalent test scores.
The authors of that study conclude that high-income advantages often stem from legacy admissions, preferences for students from specific high schools, and recruited athletes. Each of these factors can, in its own way, act as indicators of wealth. It’s not inherently problematic, but each carries its own significance. And let’s not forget, not many students fit this rare profile.
The authors also made some leaps in reasoning that might require closer scrutiny. For instance, they suggest that differences in test scores are largely influenced by parental income, citing discrepancies in educational environments for children from affluent versus less affluent families.
That seems like quite the generalization to me.
Recently, it was mentioned that Brown University is the third Ivy League institution to revert to requiring standardized tests for admissions, joining Dartmouth and Yale in this approach.
This indicates that the test scores of applicants can significantly predict their future academic performance.
The ongoing discussion highlights that while wealth can enhance educational opportunities, it also complicates admissions in ways that can seem contradictory and ambiguous.
The author acknowledges that the Trump administration’s push to prioritize test scores might, in theory, create classes prepared for elite education. However, it raises concerns about reinforcing privilege, particularly among wealthy students. The article suggests that admissions processes should consider a range of factors beyond just test scores—personal qualities, athletic skills, and even the student’s background should be taken into account to create a more holistic selection process.
