George,?
Thanks for the response.
One other item that attracted my attention in the Money article was the amount of time and money spent recruiting “elite” students. Ms. Wang discusses the fancy dorms, dining areas, and other amenities added on college campuses in recent years.
My first reaction: Why do these colleges feel the need to compete for the top students?
We know that the high-profile athletic programs compete for talent because that talent means the difference between winning and losing.
But isn’t the university’s academic function different? Isn’t the idea to take students who are adequately prepared and teach them? As long as your incoming students meet some well-constructed minimum standards, shouldn’t the faculty be able to address the educational needs of every qualified student??
At least some portion of this competition must be tied to the chase for favorable U.S. News rankings, which are based to some degree on inputs (entering students’ SAT scores, the school’s acceptance rate, etc.).
Could there also be a recognition that the higher the quality of student admitted (the input into the higher education process), the harder it is for anyone to spot flaws in the education process itself?
I equate this to the fellow trying to earn a living restoring cars. Wouldn’t he rather start with a Bentley or Porsche than a Dodge Dart?
