by Frances Simon

Created on: September 19, 2008   Last Updated: September 09, 2010

Do current admissions strategies result in the top colleges choosing the best and the brightest?

In deciding whether or not current college admissions strategies result in the top colleges choosing the best and the brightest, it is essential to determine some basics. What do we mean by "the best and the brightest?" What criteria should be used to determine who the best and the brightest are? And what strategies are colleges currently using?

Let me start out by saying that this article is not sour grapes about not being able to attend a top notch college. This is about how colleges have reverted to the decision strategies of old, where it was not who would make the most of their education, who could best use it to make an impact on the world, but who would do the most for their school.

Currently, colleges rely heavily on three factors in making admissions decisions: SAT scores, fame and legacies. While colleges justify these factors, I'm not convinced. SAT scores are the best predictors of success at school they say, fame shows achievement, and legacy well so many students present equal records so how else are they supposed to decide?

It should go without saying that celebrity status and being born with a silver spoon in your mouth are not good ways to determine who is the best and the brightest. The problem with using SAT scores to choose the best and the brightest is not so obvious.

In a multiple choice world, SAT's do equate with success. Perhaps not so unfortunately, the decisions and understandings we must make on a daily basis are not so black and white. SAT tests are great predictors of how students perform on SAT tests and nothing more.

Colleges counter this by stating that SAT scores equate with success in college. If this is so perhaps we should question the curriculum. If SAT tests measure a student's ability to think about something identically to test makers, then success at our very best schools is determined by a student's ability to think identically to his instructors. Is this what we really need to make advances in sciences, humanities, political science and economics, or do we need people who are innovative thinkers?

Should we be seeking people who come up with the same answers, or people who have the ability to build on these and go beyond? College admission policies at our top schools determine who will receive the best possible education. Who is best qualified to receive this education? Those who are skilled at following in other people's footsteps, or those who have the ability to carve out new and innovative directions?

I'm sure by now it is obvious where I stand on this issue.

Learn more about this author, Frances Simon.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.