Abstract
Most institutions of higher education apply some criteria for admission and the most elite institutions use individual merit-based criteria to select from among large numbers of applicants for admission. Since institutions of higher education are publicly subsidized almost without exception, and higher education offers significant social and financial benefits, we should question the system of distribution of these benefits. In this essay I ask whether the individual merit standard for university admissions is a fair and just system. I argue that it is not but that does not mean that we should abandon the whole idea of pursuing excellence. Rather I shall argue that a different conception of collective merit that suggests a different filter for university admissions would better meet the social goals we have for higher education.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The US federal government subsidies to institutions of higher education through student aid, research grants, and contracts total over $1 trillion according to DataLab (2019) and this funding goes to every university and college, including so-called private ones, though to varying degrees. For example, Harvard University received $1.18 billion in federal funding in 2018 according to DataLab (2019). State and local governmental support for higher education, which varies greatly from state to state, totals over $100 billion (see Whitford 2021) and also supports both public and private universities and colleges. There may be a few rare, small institutions that accept no public funding and are not 501c3 nonprofits, but the vast majority receive significant funding and are subsidized by tax benefits that accrue to students who pay tuition and donors.
- 2.
Consider the “Varsity Blues” admissions scandal, in which a private college counselor bribed athletics coaches and found ways to cheat on SAT exams in order to sell positions in elite institutions for wealthy students who would not otherwise have gained admission to them. See Jaschik (2019). Or consider the fact that many of the most elite universities practice “legacy admissions,” which prioritizes children of alumni in admissions. Some universities will also prioritize children of high dollar donors.
- 3.
Legacy status, athletic talent, and direct donations by an applicant’s family sometimes circumvents the merit system, allowing students who would otherwise fall below the cutoff for admissions to be pre-emptively offered admission. I am ignoring these cases for now in the interest of addressing the more common means of gaining entrance to most universities. However, in some very elite universities these pre-emptions of merit admissions form a very significant proportion, if not quite a majority, of the admitted class.
- 4.
The most optimistic think that test scores plus high school gpa correlates with college grades at.35 level (Sackett and Kuncel 2018), which is significant but still leaves plenty of room for error.
- 5.
See Reeves and Halikias (2017).
- 6.
See Hurley (2020).
- 7.
See Petrilli and Enamorado (2020) for evidence.
- 8.
This is a point emphasized throughout Sandel (2020).
- 9.
See Dweck (2006).
- 10.
See Page (2018).
- 11.
Not all creative or innovative achievements are made by groups, but few individuals can achieve breakthroughs at high levels without the support of others who serve as critics, confidantes, sounding boards, collaborators, or mentors.
- 12.
See Fox Keller (1983).
- 13.
References
DataLab (2019) Federal Investment in Higher Education. https://datalab.usaspending.gov/colleges-and-universities/
Dweck C (2006) Mindset: The new psychology of success. Ballantine Books, New York
Fox Keller E (1983) A feeling for the organism, the life and work of Barbara McClintock. Henry Holt, New York
Guinier L (2015) The Tyranny of the meritocracy: democratizing higher education in America. Beacon Press, Boston
Hurley K (2020) College Admission Anxiety: How to Navigate It in the Wake of the Scandal. https://www.psycom.net/college-admission-anxiety-scandal
Jaschik S (2019) Massive Admissions Scandal. Inside Higher Ed, March 13. https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2019/03/13/dozens-indicted-allegedmassive-case-admissions-fraud
Page S (2018) The diversity bonus. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Petrilli M, Enamorado P (2020) Yes, it really is harder to get into highly selective colleges today comparison of SAT scores over time tells a story. EducationNext.org, 24 March 2020
Reeves R, Halikias D (2017) Race gaps in SAT scores highlight inequality and hinder upward mobility. Brookings Social Mobility Papers. https://www.brookings.edu/research/race-gaps-in sat-scores-highlight-inequality-and-hinder-upward-mobility/
Sackett P, Kuncel N (2018) Eight myths about standardized admissions testing. In: Buckley J, Letukas L, Wildavsky B (eds) Measuring success: testing, grades, and the future of college admissions. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 13–39
Sandel M (2020) The Tyranny of Merit. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York
Steele C (2010) Whistling Vivaldi and other clues to how stereotypes affect us. WW Norton & Company, New York
Whitford E (2021) State Higher Ed Funding Increases for 8th Straight Year. Inside Higher Ed, May 26, 2021. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/05/26/state-higher-ed-funding increased-29-last-year
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cudd, A.E. (2022). “Merit” in University Admissions. In: McGregor, J., Navin, M.C. (eds) Education, Inclusion, and Justice. AMINTAPHIL: The Philosophical Foundations of Law and Justice, vol 11. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04013-9_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04013-9_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-04012-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-04013-9
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)