Higher ed. groups fight federal sway on admissions

Ideas voiced recently by Democrats in the Senate regarding federal interference in admissions policies have drawn criticism from higher education organizations.

The proposal suggests that colleges and universities that utilize early decision policies, use legacy status as an admissions factor or have minority graduation rates at least 10 percentage points less than their standard graduation rates would have to create programs for retention of minority students.

A letter written to Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) by the president of the American Council on Education on behalf of a dozen higher education organizations expressly objects to the proposed admissions policy changes, which are considered part of the reauthorization to the Higher Education Act.

Such a policy would require that the schools "double their financial match to the federal campus-based student aid programs," according to the letter.

It goes on to criticize involving early decision and legacy policies -- the validity of which have been subjects of debate in the world of higher education in the last few years, as some argue that they give an advantage to certain students.

The underlying problem that Democrats appear to be wrestling with and aiming to remedy is that of lower minority graduation rates.

However, according to higher education officials, their problem is not with the goal, but with the means.

"They've hit on an approach that won't really address the problem," said Terry Hartle, senior vice president at the American Council on Education. "There is no connection between early decision, legacy and graduation rates -- they're creating a linkage that does not exist. They have about as much in common as a football, a sewing machine and an umbrella."

Despite the disagreement, officials recognize the importance of addressing the issue of retaining minority students.

"They're most concerned about minority graduation rates, which I underscore is a serious issue and merits attention," Hartle said.

However, the claim that the proposed ideas have nothing to do with the problem of minority graduation rates is not the most fundamental one for most higher education officials.

The problem that truly exists is that "it's not the government's place to affect college admissions processes," Dean of Admissions Lee Stetson said.

Hartle wholeheartedly agreed.

"The most important implication for colleges and universities is that for the first time the federal government would be inserting itself into the college admissions process, and we believe that such a step would get at the heart of the sovereignty of colleges and universities."

Marvin Lazerson, the co-chairman of the Higher Education Division in the Graduate School of Education, echoed these sentiments.

"The best thing Congress can do for admissions is stay out of it."

Hartle explained that, fortunately for the world of higher education, these initial steps were simply ideas and not actual legislation.

Jim Manley, Kennedy's press secretary, said, "The Senator is in the process of making some decisions" about the potential policy, but has not made any final decisions yet.

Officials at the University do not seem concerned, and even contend that discussing it gives the issue more credence than it deserves.

"There's a universal lack of support for the ideas -- it seems to be drawing laughter more than anything," Stetson said.

Despite this, Lazerson still advised that "colleges and universities [may] have to figure out ways to both accommodate the [potential] legislation and get around it."

Among the objections raised in the letter to Kennedy was the question of whether or not potential legislation would be constitutional.

"Just because it's legislation doesn't mean it's constitutional," said Scott Rosner, an attorney and lecturer in the Legal Studies Department.

Students also feel strongly about the government's place in admissions.

"I don't think the government has a right to affect college admissions processes," College sophomore Andrea Schkolne said. "I think early decision is great because it gives an advantage to those who really want to go there -- first priority should go to students who can make that kind of commitment."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.