Duke Doesn’t Need “Economic Diversity”. Progressive mudslinging misses what college should be for.

James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal ^ | November 27, 2023 | David Randall

[karpov]

The New York Times is on a tear about “economic diversity.” It’s got a naughty-and-nice list, defined by the number of students with Pell Grants, and it’s stapled a scarlet A (for Affluent) to Duke University, which hasn’t managed to buy as many Pell mascots as its peers. The Times has sent out the memo: Get on the economic-diversity bandwagon now!

The call for “economic diversity” is yet another sign of colleges abandoning the pursuit of educational excellence. But even if you do think colleges should serve an economic purpose—and public universities, at the very least, ought to provide taxpayers a decent economic return on their investment—“economic diversity” misses the point.

The phrase now refers to gold-plated tuition with a set-aside for some number of the poor, who are carefully selected to meet race quotas and presumably wish to secure membership in an increasingly parasitic elite. Instead, public universities should aim to confer “economic self-sufficiency” by providing a solid education at a reasonable price for everyone who aspires to be part of the productive middle class.

There’s no end of reasons to think the current concern with “economic diversity” is nonsense on stilts. They’re all true, although they don’t all share the same premises about the proper purpose of education.

[AndyJackson]

“The Times is the company newsletter for the useless in all walks of American life.”

[God luvs America]

“defined by the number of students with Pell Grants,”

Meanwhile Duke’s endowment = $11.6 billion

[Brian Griffin]

There is a lot of retail and office space available.

Low cost universities could be created to put it to good use.

[ladyjane]

David Randall writes well. It’s a blessed relief from the usual newspaper articles.

[econjack]

I was a prof at a university you would all recognize and served for two years on the University Admissions Committee. Our charge was to review the admission applications of students who were "at the margin" of meeting the minimum admissions standards. Back then, the standards were mainly: SAT/ACT scores, their grades in high school, and "outside" activities. There was no published quota numbers, but it was clearly assumed that we were expected to review minority applications under a different microscope.

I argued that, in many cases, the student had no chance of making it past the first year and that we were just taking their money and wasting their time. Privately, I tracked those who I said we should not admit, but was overruled by the rest of the committee. As I recall, just under 95% of those who I thought wouldn't make it through the first year didn't. Most were minority students. At the end of my term, I presented the stats of our record for the previous two years confirming my suspicion that we were deluding too many students with our "false" acceptance.

To my knowledge, the university did not change its policy standards.

[FamiliarFace]

Good thing for me that my Pell grant likely wasn’t based on my race rather than my economics and achievements in HS.

[Hatteras]

Too many Asians I guess. Real diversity should look like the basketball team, right NYT?

[FamiliarFace]

It wasn’t to Duke either.

[moovova]

"At the end of my term, I presented the stats of our record for the previous two years confirming my suspicion that we were deluding too many students with our "false" acceptance."

You're lucky you kept your job. The man behind the green curtain does not like to be mocked.

[BuchananBrigadeTrumpFan]

MAN?!!! You misogynistic, sexist, #!#$%%^!!...

[econjack]

Perhaps. Two factors affected your supposition: 1) I was tenured, so it would have been very difficult to fire me, and 2) I was part of the Committee that made the recommendations, but was outvoted.

BTW, I've never been a fan of tenure. If you're an asset to the institution, they shouldn't want to fire you in the first place.