We have been hearing a lot lately about “undermatching” and the role of elite colleges in promoting the academic success of traditionally disadvantaged student groups. But we would like to redirect the conversation and focus on the potential impact of enriching the institutions that traditionally underrepresented students already attend.
While we agree that there is a pool of academically accomplished low-income high-school students that could be served by elite institutions, we believe that there is an even bigger pool of academically promising students left behind by the elite college-application process because of inadequate preparation in high school, students who need more time and the right environment to build their skills and develop their ambitions.
Programs and interventions aiming to usher well-qualified students to competitive colleges are all well and good. However, high school has not prepared many other students for elite college admission, and those students are much more likely to be poor and African-American or Hispanic. What is to become of them? The conversation must be broader, to include the minority-serving institutions, and especially urban public institutions, that promote increased access and accomplishment for low-income students of color.
There is no doubt that elite institutions have access to far greater resources on a per-student basis than do typical minority-serving institutions, and that those resources are used to create programs and services that support student retention. But is further investment in admission to those elite institutions the best use of resources? We believe that improving retention and academic success at colleges that already serve large numbers of minority students would do more to move the equity needle than increasing enrollment of disadvantaged students at elite institutions.
In 2012 the combined enrollment of Hispanic and African-American students at the 20 most selective colleges in the country was 13,769, compared with 140,618 Hispanic and African-American students enrolled at the 20 leading minority-serving institutions across the country. Doubling the enrollment of black and Hispanic students at elite colleges would generate the same increase in degrees as would increasing retention at the top 20 minority-serving colleges by about 8 percent.
Some people might argue that the quality of graduates at the two types of institutions is not comparable, but we have found this is not true. Our institution, John Jay College, has the profile of a typical minority-serving institution: A majority of the students are African-American or Hispanic, come from low-income households, and need to work throughout their studies to support families. We serve many students who got their start at local community colleges. Yet we send students for advanced science and health degrees to institutions like Cornell, Harvard, McGill, and Rutgers, as well as to the State University of New York and the City University of New York.
So there is indeed a ladder into elite institutions for low-income students; some of them just need more steps to get there. If we neglect the public minority-serving institutions and community colleges that feed them, the integrity of that ladder is compromised.
Colleges like ours succeed at what elite colleges do not strive to do—serve a broad range of students, including those who would not be considered strong candidates for undergraduate admission to the most selective colleges or who would not be inclined to attend. We are a commuter campus located in a large urban center, with academic-support services and alternate routes of entry, night and weekend classes for students who are supporting families, and partnerships with local community colleges. That is not the mission of the most selective colleges. Yet we position our students as candidates to elite graduate programs and so onto the very same career ladder being fed by the most selective colleges.
Granted, there are significant differences in retention and graduation rates when one compares the top 20 minority-serving institutions to the top 20 elite institutions. However, those differences are largely the result of differing levels of resources and can be remedied. At John Jay, we began in 2000 to leverage federal funding, including from the U.S. Department of Education, to increase engagement and support for minority students in science. One of the resulting initiatives, a mentored research program, was explicitly designed to develop close relationships. Student researchers work with faculty members for one to three years and participate in a peer research community.
That program and others like it have tripled graduation rates of all students majoring in science, including minority students, and have increased fivefold the number of students moving on to graduate programs, including research-intensive Ph.D. programs at elite institutions, primarily by developing their desire to pursue further education. Students at minority-serving institutions experience that transformation of goals and ambitions in a setting where peers and role models look like them and often have similar stories that contributed to their success.
Many variables factor into a student’s decision to attend a certain institution—preferring a supportive community, staying close to home, saving money. We believe the overtones of tragedy and missed opportunity in the “undermatching” discussion mischaracterize a large portion of the story. Yes, there is a resource disparity between elite colleges and public minority-serving institutions, but it is a consequence of the lack of investment in those institutions.
Perhaps if we began to see them as the launching pads and incubators that they are, we would become committed to pursuing simple, cost-effective solutions in this academic environment as well. Only through an integrated approach can we begin to deal with the problems of diversity in higher education and the professional work force. The undergraduate college-admissions process is one way to launch a student onto the academic fast track, but not the only way. Let us not be content to leave the others behind.
