- It is a new plan on how to increase economic diversity in a major univeristy
- It references another study that indicates how application fees can keep lower-income students from applying to certain schools
- It recognizes that even though Chicago has more resources than other top universities, they seem to be lacking in categories that help out low-income families
Discussion ideas:
- We know that this plan is a step in the right direction, but is it enough to increase economic diversity in a high level institution?
- Is the reason there is so little economic diversity related to the income inequality/SAT score study that was posted by the WSJ?
- What other steps can University of Chicago do in order to raise diversity?
- Do you see other universities imposing a similar policy/plan?
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/02/upshot/the-university-of-chicago-tries-to-catch-up-on-economic-diversity.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1
TJ, did you know that Kalamazoo has also waived its application fee for this year? It doesn't seem like a big deal for those that can afford it, but applying to 6-7 colleges really adds up if all universities charge for an application. If colleges are serious about attracting low-income students, then I believe that they can do much more than they are now. In the study mentioned about the number of Pell Grants, Kalamazoo College ranks 12th in the nation at recruiting Pell Grant recipients!
ReplyDeleteBut private colleges and universities (like Chicago or K) are still a business, and, sadly, its priority cannot be attracting low-income students. Frankly, this is not financially feasible. A private university must sell a product (an education) and expect to make money on that product. Therefore, there must be a range of income levels, including those that can pay lots and those than can pay very little for their education. But trying to get private universities to completely overhaul their enrollment policies is not realistic, in my mind. The University of Chicago can, however, make a concerted effort to attract low-income students, as they plan to do.
I believe that the real problem lies with public universities, which are chronically under-funded. These institutions really give poorer students a cheap way to move up the social ladder. As we discussed in class, education is one of the best ways to combat inequality. However, recently, public universities have been hit hard by budget cuts. The cost of getting an education is no longer feasible for many low-income students. This, not the University of Chicago, should really be what we're discussing when we talk about reducing inequality through higher education.
I agree with Beth that private colleges and universities are still business and the school's endowment is made up from school's tuition. However, we have to recognize Chicago's real effort to attract more of the nation’s most talented students, regardless of their background. We hope that even though the income gap is not narrowed down, at least the education gap is narrowed in the future.
ReplyDelete