Fri 3 Nov 2017
Pell Grant, 5
Posted by David Dudley Field '25 under Socio-ec Admissions, Will Dudley '89 at 6:55 am
Whitney Wilson ’90 points out this Washington Post article (and chart) about the rise in the percentage of Pell Grant recipients at elite schools like Williams. For background information on this topic, read this, this and our ten (!) part series from 2014. Let’s spend a week on this topic. Today is Day 5.
The lowest Pell share on the list belonged to Washington and Lee University — 6 percent. Will Dudley, who this year became president of the private Virginia liberal arts school, said the share rose to 11 percent this fall and he wants to lift it further. Dudley said he raised the issue of socioeconomic diversity at Washington and Lee when he was interviewing for the job. Previously, he was provost at Williams College, which had a far higher Pell share in 2015 — 22 percent. “If they didn’t want to make progress, they wouldn’t have hired me,” Dudley said.
…
Washington and Lee President Will Dudley said the university’s share grew to 11 percent this fall and he wants it to rise further.
“We’re moving in the right direction,” he said. “I don’t want to be a school that is near the bottom of the pack.”
EphBlog loves Will Dudley ’89, but this sort of prattle makes me less unhappy that he won’t be the next president of Williams.
First, admissions are, largely, a zero-sum game. Every high quality low-income student that Dudley brings to Washington and Lee is one less high quality low-income student who goes to school X. Does that really make the world a better place? I have my doubts.
Second, Washington and Lee is #10 on US News. Not bad, of course, but nowhere near the first tier, mainly because the quality of the student body is so much worse than at places like Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore.
A better president would devote his energy toward improving the overall quality of the student body (which is not an easy thing to do!) rather than parading his virtue to the readers of the Washington Post.
Third, if I were a Washington and Lee trustee, I would challenge Dudley about his focus on Pell Grants as a meaningful measure of socio-economic diversity. It is not a bad measure, but, as we have discussed all week, it is not a particularly good measure because a) it changes over time via Congressional whim and b) it is too dependent on one specific point in the income distribution. If all Dudley has done in the last year is to replace a bunch of applicants from families who make $70,000 with other applicants whose families make $50,000 — and who would have been rejected in the past because their credentials were worse — because the latter are Pell-eligible), then he has accomplished very little, and certainly has no business bragging about it to the Post.


« Veterans in the Academy: POSSE Veterans of the Global War. Ephblog favorite Alum and Vassar President Cappy Hill has action, not words. | Professor Matt Carter on Best College, 1 » |
3 Responses to “Pell Grant, 5”
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post
If a comment you submitted does not show up, please email us at eph at ephblog dot com. Please note that commenters are required to use a valid email address when submitting comments.
abl says:
I suspect that a lot of the low-income “stealing” that happens is from state schools–a lot of these students would be going to large public universities (some of which are excellent) were it not for programs like Questbridge. To me, that seems like a much clearer “win” than if W&L was simply stealing students from Davidson: besides the academic advantages of going to a school like Williams or W&L (which I think are most substantial for students like these, who might otherwise be at a greater risk of falling between the cracks at a large school), the total COA for wealthy private LACs is usually less than the total COA for attending large state schools for the poorest students.
November 3rd, 2017 at 11:39 amDavid Dudley Field '25 says:
abl: Fair point. Also, there is an argument, made by, among others, former Eph Mike McPherson, that graduation rates are so much higher at schools like W&L (especially for low income students?) that society is better off if more such students go to places like W&L and not to, say, Virginia Tech.
November 3rd, 2017 at 12:21 pmPTC says:
abl- I think Williams is a cut above the schools mentioned. How is that measured? Not sure…
Does it matter? Well… to what degree?
Should Williams admit a local with below average scores who’s dad is an alum? A great athlete? A local that people care about? That depends on why and what else that applicant has to offer I would suspect?
But to be obnoxious about it… to talk down to a person- well, that is on the admissions department, not on the applicant.
November 5th, 2017 at 6:57 pm