Raising the bar

There seems to be some fear that IU's proposed increased admissions standards will prevent it from fully representing the state of Indiana for an exclusive goal. Civil rights attorney and visiting IU professor Alvin Chambliss has noted that increased SAT standards will work against efforts to diversify the university. Tom Mortenson, head of the Postsecondary Education Opportunity research group, complains that the poor's access will be limited by these changes and "(the push for higher standards) denies the talent and the ambition of kids who are born into less-fortunate circumstances." \nWhile these complaints are valid, they ignore the essential conceit of a university. Every university is an inherently elitist institution. IU hands out exams and grades, and if you get enough credits and fulfill certain requirements, you get a little piece of paper that says, "I am more valuable than you, nondegree holder!" \nIt's a selective process, and it makes sense that IU should choose students likely to succeed at the University, especially because IU does not have unlimited resources. Whenever IU chooses between applicants to attend the University, a choice is made about the makeup of the \nUniversity that will produce the best degree-holders. \nTo those who complain that higher standards will prevent IU from accurately and diversely representing Indiana, I would point out that the process of selecting freshmen classes already distorts the makeup of the state. Whether we select students to ensure diversity throughout the campus or whether we select them based on SAT scores, we are artificially creating the environment that best fosters learning. As a result, there is a higher percentage of Asians on campus than in the state or country. But do we start kicking Asians out to best represent the state? Obviously not. Admissions departments should pick the students who they feel will succeed at IU, so the proposal stresses college prep rather than simply test scores.\nTo be fair, I'm lukewarm about using SAT scores as the final word on admissions, but it's well-noted in the proposal that the SAT guideline would be a suggestion, and the proposal takes care to emphasize performance in the classroom in terms of credits and grades rather than simply standardized test scores. Furthermore, the changes are not as drastic as some claim. The top 40 percent of your high school class instead of the top 50 percent? Six semesters of high school science instead of two? These proposed guidelines aren't exactly revolutionary, not to mention the fact that they wouldn't be enacted until 2011, and even then, the change would be gradual. \nResponding to Mortenson, I would say kids born into less-fortunate households do get a raw deal in much of capitalist American society, but having low standards at the state's flagship university doesn't help them succeed. A college degree means something because it is exclusive, and assuming poor kids can't perform well in school and need the bar lowered for them is far more condescending than demanding higher standards. \nWhy not try to raise the test scores and grades of poor children instead? Why not raise the bar instead of \nlowering it?