It's almost like he's trying to provoke controversy with the NPR crowd.
July 20, 2016 3:38 PM Subscribe
Who's to Blame for Inequality in America? Bowdoin's Awesome Cafeteria. Malcolm Gladwell says that, "The food at Bowdoin is actually a problem, a moral problem,” because every dollar spent towards snazzy cafeteria food to attract wealthy students is a dollar not spent on financial aid.
Bowdoin responds: "Malcolm Gladwell’s podcast “Revisionist History” (aptly named) takes a manipulative and disingenuous shot at Bowdoin College that is filled with false assumptions, anecdotal evidence, and incorrect conclusions."
filled with false assumptions, anecdotal evidence, and incorrect conclusions
Soooo: a typical Gladwell piece then?
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 3:49 PM on July 20, 2016 [89 favorites]
Soooo: a typical Gladwell piece then?
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 3:49 PM on July 20, 2016 [89 favorites]
What a smug little bastard: "In retrospect this week's episode of revisionisthistory.com should have included a trigger warning for Bowdoin grads"
posted by thelonius at 3:53 PM on July 20, 2016 [10 favorites]
posted by thelonius at 3:53 PM on July 20, 2016 [10 favorites]
As someone who works in higher ed, I'd say Gladwell's analysis is equivalent to someone looking at the Ford Pinto and blaming everything on the cigarette lighter. Yes there's problems with enrolling low-income students, but the food costs are trivial. But Gladwell had no interest in doing an analysis, rather focusing on clickbaity statements.
posted by happyroach at 3:54 PM on July 20, 2016 [9 favorites]
posted by happyroach at 3:54 PM on July 20, 2016 [9 favorites]
PSA: there is nothing wrong with revisionist history. It's just history that revises the previous historical consensus. Sometimes it's good scholarship and sometimes it's not, but "revisionist" is a value-neutral concept.
That is all. Now off to read/ listen to the links.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 3:56 PM on July 20, 2016 [18 favorites]
That is all. Now off to read/ listen to the links.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 3:56 PM on July 20, 2016 [18 favorites]
It's literally applying the same logic that Dave Ramsey uses in his debt reduction programs to college finances.
What a hack.
posted by NoxAeternum at 4:00 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
What a hack.
posted by NoxAeternum at 4:00 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
Gladwell has gone full backpfeifengesicht. And you never go full backpfeifengesicht.
posted by Joseph Gurl at 4:01 PM on July 20, 2016 [10 favorites]
posted by Joseph Gurl at 4:01 PM on July 20, 2016 [10 favorites]
Yes, of course. Gladwell is right. College students should be fed gruel, if for no other reason that when the poor, disadvantaged scholarship urchins come to Maine, they'll be eating what to them is comfort food, because it's the only food they've ever known. When they've been lucky enough to know food.
posted by grounded at 4:05 PM on July 20, 2016 [16 favorites]
posted by grounded at 4:05 PM on July 20, 2016 [16 favorites]
It seems incredibly cruel to wish poor food on people.
The cafeterias at the state university I went to did seem to serve a lot of things that I thought of as prestige food. For example, in one cafeteria, there were hand carved turkey and roast beef sandwiches. I'm not sure I ever saw someone buy one. But the roasts were always there on display.
That said, there was also a very good/affordable/busy pasta bar right across from the sandwiches. I'm not sure that it would have been easy to predict which one would be more successful ahead of time.
My nutrition certainly improved while I was in school, and it was far and away better than my current Canadian public university which has abrogated any responsibility to feed its students in favour of a literal mall food court.
posted by ethansr at 4:05 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
The cafeterias at the state university I went to did seem to serve a lot of things that I thought of as prestige food. For example, in one cafeteria, there were hand carved turkey and roast beef sandwiches. I'm not sure I ever saw someone buy one. But the roasts were always there on display.
That said, there was also a very good/affordable/busy pasta bar right across from the sandwiches. I'm not sure that it would have been easy to predict which one would be more successful ahead of time.
My nutrition certainly improved while I was in school, and it was far and away better than my current Canadian public university which has abrogated any responsibility to feed its students in favour of a literal mall food court.
posted by ethansr at 4:05 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
Hard to know what to think of this... I mean on the one hand they're defending themselves against charges that they say are false, but in doing so they say a lot of things that seem disingenuous or like they're kind of clueless about what an actually moral system of higher education would like like.
15% of students are first generation college students...Isn't that a dramatic under-representation of first generation students? 43% of students in the US are first generation students.
Needs blind...needs blind...meet the full need etc. etc. My understanding of the way admissions processes work is that needs-blind admission doesn't mean "we admit whoever and then pay for them" it means "if we don't think we can pay for them, we won't admit them, so we make sure not to admit too many low-income students and we make sure to admit enough high-income students to pay for them." That's not exactly needs-blind.
Furthermore, "needs-blind" is as dumb as "colour-blind." Given various obstacles that some people face in doing what is necessary to appear qualified for university and how these obstacles are often correlated with need, need (or at least the obstacles correlated with it) would ideally be taken into account as a plus, not ignored (as needs-blind implies) or limited (as don't-admit-more-than-we-can-pay-for policies actually work).
So good for you, not having an immoral cafeteria, I guess. But it seems like the best you can say about inclusiveness otherwise is that you're no worse than anyone else and maybe better than some.
Also, how exactly does this cafeteria-pays-for-itself business interact with all those grants? Presumably the low-income students are having their food plans paid for via grants, too, so they can afford them? So when they say the food service is self-sustaining, they mean that what students pay for the food covers the cost of buying and serving the food...but if students get the cost of that food from the grants, then isn't it true that the college is spending grant money on the food and that if less of the grant money went to food more of it could go to admitting more needy students?
So yeah, it sucks that Gladwell besmirched the college's name with poor logic, but its defence of itself doesn't actually make it sound that great, either.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:07 PM on July 20, 2016 [10 favorites]
15% of students are first generation college students...Isn't that a dramatic under-representation of first generation students? 43% of students in the US are first generation students.
Needs blind...needs blind...meet the full need etc. etc. My understanding of the way admissions processes work is that needs-blind admission doesn't mean "we admit whoever and then pay for them" it means "if we don't think we can pay for them, we won't admit them, so we make sure not to admit too many low-income students and we make sure to admit enough high-income students to pay for them." That's not exactly needs-blind.
Furthermore, "needs-blind" is as dumb as "colour-blind." Given various obstacles that some people face in doing what is necessary to appear qualified for university and how these obstacles are often correlated with need, need (or at least the obstacles correlated with it) would ideally be taken into account as a plus, not ignored (as needs-blind implies) or limited (as don't-admit-more-than-we-can-pay-for policies actually work).
So good for you, not having an immoral cafeteria, I guess. But it seems like the best you can say about inclusiveness otherwise is that you're no worse than anyone else and maybe better than some.
Also, how exactly does this cafeteria-pays-for-itself business interact with all those grants? Presumably the low-income students are having their food plans paid for via grants, too, so they can afford them? So when they say the food service is self-sustaining, they mean that what students pay for the food covers the cost of buying and serving the food...but if students get the cost of that food from the grants, then isn't it true that the college is spending grant money on the food and that if less of the grant money went to food more of it could go to admitting more needy students?
So yeah, it sucks that Gladwell besmirched the college's name with poor logic, but its defence of itself doesn't actually make it sound that great, either.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:07 PM on July 20, 2016 [10 favorites]
Full disclosure: I didn't listen to the podcast. I did at the stats that accompanied it and read the colleges defence of itself.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:09 PM on July 20, 2016
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:09 PM on July 20, 2016
Gladwell's approach seems just bizarre... It seems like he didn't even bother to inquire about the actual costs of the meal programs at the two institutions. It's pure hunch-work: this school has a reputation for having good food, here's a statistic on low-income enrollment at this school, let's ask students at this other school with better low-income enrollment statistics what they think of their meal program... Oh, they don't like it? The meal program must be responsible for the difference in enrollment statistics! It's like pre-enlightenment thinking.
Also there's this (from the Globe article):
Gladwell isn’t backing down. In an e-mail Friday, he told us Bowdoin is deflecting. “Bowdoin College is a school with a rich and privileged alumni group, over a billion dollars in the bank, a tiny student population, and every conceivable material advantage — that nonetheless ranks 51st nationwide in offering opportunities to low income students. If I am ‘disingenuous’ in pointing out that disgraceful fact, then what is Bowdoin in choosing to deny it?”
I mean, there are a lot of colleges in this country. 51st seems.... not bad?
posted by mr_roboto at 4:11 PM on July 20, 2016 [37 favorites]
Also there's this (from the Globe article):
Gladwell isn’t backing down. In an e-mail Friday, he told us Bowdoin is deflecting. “Bowdoin College is a school with a rich and privileged alumni group, over a billion dollars in the bank, a tiny student population, and every conceivable material advantage — that nonetheless ranks 51st nationwide in offering opportunities to low income students. If I am ‘disingenuous’ in pointing out that disgraceful fact, then what is Bowdoin in choosing to deny it?”
I mean, there are a lot of colleges in this country. 51st seems.... not bad?
posted by mr_roboto at 4:11 PM on July 20, 2016 [37 favorites]
Is Gladwell on a low carb diet? Because in addition to his usual low data, conclusion first pontificating, he seems to have added a weird obsession with what other people are eating.
posted by lumpenprole at 4:14 PM on July 20, 2016 [10 favorites]
posted by lumpenprole at 4:14 PM on July 20, 2016 [10 favorites]
51st seems.... not bad?
Look, there are fifty states, so 51st, that's like Puerto Rico or Guam, I mean, come on!
posted by Ice Cream Socialist at 4:17 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
Look, there are fifty states, so 51st, that's like Puerto Rico or Guam, I mean, come on!
posted by Ice Cream Socialist at 4:17 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
I mean, there are a lot of colleges in this country. 51st seems.... not bad?
I think interpreting rankings is difficult because rankings don't tell you if something is good or bad, just that it's better or worse than something else. If everyone sucks, being #1 just means you suck the least. If everyone is fantastic, then being #9088923 means you're fantastic, though not as fantastic as others. And of course if some people are fantastic and some people suck, you can't tell where the fantastic/less-fantastic/a little sucky/really sucky lines are. Maybe only the first 5 are fantastic. Maybe the first 1000 are fantastic. You can't tell from a ranking whether someone is good or bad at something.
So don't use rankings use actual values. 15% of students there are first generation students. Is that what we would expect to see under a just system?
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:18 PM on July 20, 2016 [8 favorites]
I think interpreting rankings is difficult because rankings don't tell you if something is good or bad, just that it's better or worse than something else. If everyone sucks, being #1 just means you suck the least. If everyone is fantastic, then being #9088923 means you're fantastic, though not as fantastic as others. And of course if some people are fantastic and some people suck, you can't tell where the fantastic/less-fantastic/a little sucky/really sucky lines are. Maybe only the first 5 are fantastic. Maybe the first 1000 are fantastic. You can't tell from a ranking whether someone is good or bad at something.
So don't use rankings use actual values. 15% of students there are first generation students. Is that what we would expect to see under a just system?
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:18 PM on July 20, 2016 [8 favorites]
Look, there are fifty states, so 51st, that's like Puerto Rico or Guam, I mean, come on!
There are 500-ish liberal arts colleges in the US, so 51 would be top 10%. I'm sure they could do better, but "disgraceful" seems a bit much. Then again, this is a completely context-free statistic that Gladwell sent in a email to a Globe reporter, so who knows what it really means.
posted by mr_roboto at 4:19 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
There are 500-ish liberal arts colleges in the US, so 51 would be top 10%. I'm sure they could do better, but "disgraceful" seems a bit much. Then again, this is a completely context-free statistic that Gladwell sent in a email to a Globe reporter, so who knows what it really means.
posted by mr_roboto at 4:19 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
There are 500-ish liberal arts colleges in the US, so 51 would be top 10%. I'm sure they could do better, but "disgraceful" seems a bit much.
...unless they're all disgraceful. Can't tell from a ranking.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:20 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
...unless they're all disgraceful. Can't tell from a ranking.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:20 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
Needs blind...needs blind...meet the full need etc. etc. My understanding of the way admissions processes work is that needs-blind admission doesn't mean "we admit whoever and then pay for them" it means "if we don't think we can pay for them, we won't admit them, so we make sure not to admit too many low-income students and we make sure to admit enough high-income students to pay for them."
What? No. Need-blind admission means that they do not consider the applicant's financial circumstances as part of the admissions process. So, yes, they admit students without any consideration or knowledge of the students' financial circumstances and then they provide outstanding financial support to those students who do turn out to need assistance.
posted by slkinsey at 4:20 PM on July 20, 2016 [24 favorites]
What? No. Need-blind admission means that they do not consider the applicant's financial circumstances as part of the admissions process. So, yes, they admit students without any consideration or knowledge of the students' financial circumstances and then they provide outstanding financial support to those students who do turn out to need assistance.
posted by slkinsey at 4:20 PM on July 20, 2016 [24 favorites]
...unless they're all disgraceful. Can't tell from a ranking.
Which makes Gladwell's use of this ranking as if he's proving some kind of a point all the more disingenuous.
posted by mr_roboto at 4:21 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
Which makes Gladwell's use of this ranking as if he's proving some kind of a point all the more disingenuous.
posted by mr_roboto at 4:21 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
My understanding of the way admissions processes work is that needs-blind admission doesn't mean "we admit whoever and then pay for them" it means "if we don't think we can pay for them, we won't admit them, so we make sure not to admit too many low-income students and we make sure to admit enough high-income students to pay for them." That's not exactly needs-blind.
I am confused by your comment. Are you trying to state what you believe to be the consensus definition of the term, or are you being cynical about the implementation? Because to be clear, the "need-blind" approach to admissions is specifically the thing you say it isn't, and it reflects an effort to combat that second thing, which you allege it to be. Everybody acknowledges that rejecting applicants out of hand if they can't afford college is a problem; need-blind admission is an effort to solve that problem.
If you're just being cynical, well... I guess you might be right but it seems like kind of a drive-by criticism against Bowdoin specifically with zero support. I am sure cynicism is merited sometimes and some "need-blind" programs are better than others but how do you know whether this particular college is at the better or the worse end of the spectrum?
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 4:24 PM on July 20, 2016 [14 favorites]
I am confused by your comment. Are you trying to state what you believe to be the consensus definition of the term, or are you being cynical about the implementation? Because to be clear, the "need-blind" approach to admissions is specifically the thing you say it isn't, and it reflects an effort to combat that second thing, which you allege it to be. Everybody acknowledges that rejecting applicants out of hand if they can't afford college is a problem; need-blind admission is an effort to solve that problem.
If you're just being cynical, well... I guess you might be right but it seems like kind of a drive-by criticism against Bowdoin specifically with zero support. I am sure cynicism is merited sometimes and some "need-blind" programs are better than others but how do you know whether this particular college is at the better or the worse end of the spectrum?
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 4:24 PM on July 20, 2016 [14 favorites]
What? No. Need-blind admission means that they do not consider the applicant's financial circumstances as part of the admissions process. So, yes, they admit students without any consideration or knowledge of the students' financial circumstances and then they provide outstanding financial support to those students who do turn out to need assistance.
The only way this could happen is if they were admitting based on grades or test scores alone, which high-status US universities don't do. If they're actually looking at a file, they can get a sense of a person's financial status from their school, school district, details in essay, and activities. Any time I've read an article or interview about admissions processes at supposedly needs-blind (undergraduate) places, one thing they constantly have on their minds is creating a "balance" which de facto means making sure there are enough rich students who are going to pay full tuition. And even when they're not thinking explicitly about that, the kinds of things they value in choosing students to admit are not needs-blind things. You can't give preference to someone who started a non-profit to teach orphan dolphins to read over someone who worked part-time at Walmart throughout HS and claim to be needs blind.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:27 PM on July 20, 2016 [16 favorites]
The only way this could happen is if they were admitting based on grades or test scores alone, which high-status US universities don't do. If they're actually looking at a file, they can get a sense of a person's financial status from their school, school district, details in essay, and activities. Any time I've read an article or interview about admissions processes at supposedly needs-blind (undergraduate) places, one thing they constantly have on their minds is creating a "balance" which de facto means making sure there are enough rich students who are going to pay full tuition. And even when they're not thinking explicitly about that, the kinds of things they value in choosing students to admit are not needs-blind things. You can't give preference to someone who started a non-profit to teach orphan dolphins to read over someone who worked part-time at Walmart throughout HS and claim to be needs blind.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:27 PM on July 20, 2016 [16 favorites]
This whole "issue" is confusing to me. Bowdoin is an extremely selective, elite, small liberal arts college in Maine that offers majors in things like Arctic Studies, Classics, Gay & Lesbian Studies, Romance Languages & Literatures and Visual Arts in addition to the more usual Chemistry, Economics and the like. How many low income students would have to know about Bowdoin, want to attend Bowdoin, qualify for admission into Bowdoin and decide to attend Bowdoin over the many choices available to them in order to improve their ranking? Considering their need-blind admissions process and generous financial aid (not loan-based!), did it not occur that this might be the reason?
posted by slkinsey at 4:33 PM on July 20, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by slkinsey at 4:33 PM on July 20, 2016 [5 favorites]
My nutrition certainly improved while I was in school, and it was far and away better than my current Canadian public university which has abrogated any responsibility to feed its students in favour of a literal mall food court.
If you can hold a fork, you can go to York! (and eat poutine every day for four years - bc it was still less than $4 but filled you up).
I actually assumed you were talking about my former uni, which is notorious for having shut down the dining halls decades ago in favour of a food court. To be honest, that was also because 90% of the students were commuters.
But nice to know we started a trend.
posted by jb at 4:36 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
If you can hold a fork, you can go to York! (and eat poutine every day for four years - bc it was still less than $4 but filled you up).
I actually assumed you were talking about my former uni, which is notorious for having shut down the dining halls decades ago in favour of a food court. To be honest, that was also because 90% of the students were commuters.
But nice to know we started a trend.
posted by jb at 4:36 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
Need-blind also means that you will not have to leave the college for financial reasons. Like, your parents kicked you out/died/lost their jobs and there's no money for tuition or room and board? You don't have to quit school! They will adjust your financial aid package to make it possible for you to continue. This happened to me my junior year of college at my need-blind school, and I'm grateful to have had that net.
posted by rtha at 4:36 PM on July 20, 2016 [16 favorites]
posted by rtha at 4:36 PM on July 20, 2016 [16 favorites]
Everybody acknowledges that rejecting applicants out of hand if they can't afford college is a problem; need-blind admission is an effort to solve that problem.
I'm not saying needs-blind places are saying "not this guy, he can't pay, we just looked at his financial aid forms!" I believe that they do not have access to those forms when they do admitting. And I believe that need is not a deal-breaker nor is money and automatic in. I will google once I have dinner, but I've read articles with interviews or research on people who do admissions and needs-blind or not they're "building a class." In theory and on the surface it's about diversity, but the group that ends up over-represented is people with money. The idea of what "balance" looks like is influenced by the need to make sure there are enough tuition dollars coming in. It happens at admissions and it happens before admissions. How would low income students become aware and apply? The same way high-income students, do...I mean I assume the college recruits, right? Are they recruiting equally to all income levels and in a ways that are equally likely to reach all income levels?
So I guess it's 1 part what I've read, but interpreted through a lens of cynicism.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:36 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm not saying needs-blind places are saying "not this guy, he can't pay, we just looked at his financial aid forms!" I believe that they do not have access to those forms when they do admitting. And I believe that need is not a deal-breaker nor is money and automatic in. I will google once I have dinner, but I've read articles with interviews or research on people who do admissions and needs-blind or not they're "building a class." In theory and on the surface it's about diversity, but the group that ends up over-represented is people with money. The idea of what "balance" looks like is influenced by the need to make sure there are enough tuition dollars coming in. It happens at admissions and it happens before admissions. How would low income students become aware and apply? The same way high-income students, do...I mean I assume the college recruits, right? Are they recruiting equally to all income levels and in a ways that are equally likely to reach all income levels?
So I guess it's 1 part what I've read, but interpreted through a lens of cynicism.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:36 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
Any time I've read an article or interview about admissions processes at supposedly needs-blind (undergraduate) places, one thing they constantly have on their minds is creating a "balance" which de facto means making sure there are enough rich students who are going to pay full tuition.
Having grown up surrounded by high-level academics at monied universities, I'm going to call bullshit on this for institutions of higher learning with huge endowments. Maybe something like this happens at cash-poor institutions, but Bowdoin has a 1.4 billion dollar endowment and a very small student body. They are ranked 23rd nationwide in endowment per student and simply don't need to do this kind of balancing act. No college or university with a huge endowment needs tuition dollars to pay the bills. The endowment is grown through contributions from the wealthy alumni the school produces and others attracted to the school's prestige. Only low-endowment schools need to consider how much tuition money they are bringing in.
posted by slkinsey at 4:40 PM on July 20, 2016 [17 favorites]
Having grown up surrounded by high-level academics at monied universities, I'm going to call bullshit on this for institutions of higher learning with huge endowments. Maybe something like this happens at cash-poor institutions, but Bowdoin has a 1.4 billion dollar endowment and a very small student body. They are ranked 23rd nationwide in endowment per student and simply don't need to do this kind of balancing act. No college or university with a huge endowment needs tuition dollars to pay the bills. The endowment is grown through contributions from the wealthy alumni the school produces and others attracted to the school's prestige. Only low-endowment schools need to consider how much tuition money they are bringing in.
posted by slkinsey at 4:40 PM on July 20, 2016 [17 favorites]
As a Batesie, I have to say part of Bowdoin's problem is that it's Bowdoin. Not that Bates is without its share of super-privileged rich kids, but Bowdoin has always seemed, to me and my friends, filled with snobby rich kids. There's a self-selection process that happens among those considering between Bates/Bowdoin/Colby, and as a lower-middle class kid on copious amounts of financial aid, I felt like there would be no place for me at Bowdoin, so I didn't even apply. I literally have no idea why anyone chooses to go to college in Waterville, Maine, but Colby students did seem pretty nice.
posted by banjo_and_the_pork at 4:50 PM on July 20, 2016 [6 favorites]
posted by banjo_and_the_pork at 4:50 PM on July 20, 2016 [6 favorites]
You know, I have googled looking for things I had read and instead read other things that convince that I'm wrong on this needs-blind schools actually work to create balance which means tuition money. Maybe I was reading about the older policies of guaranteeing funding, that weren't necessarily needs-blind. I was wrong. I take back that part.
I don't take back the part about how they are de-facto not needs blind given how qualification for admission is defined. I just looked up their admissions. They do interviews for chrissakes!
The endowment is grown through contributions from the wealthy alumni the school produces and others attracted to the school's prestige.
Now there was definitely an article in the Atlantic (i think about Princeton) and this. The point being that the school admissions would try to select students whom they thought would eventually donate money to the school. I remember a line about not choosing who they though would be the best students, but choosing the best graduates. It was a justification used for admitting legacies, who were thought to be especially likely to eventually give money. The other side of this was that they couldn't change the character of the school too much because it upset the donor alumni.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:52 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
I don't take back the part about how they are de-facto not needs blind given how qualification for admission is defined. I just looked up their admissions. They do interviews for chrissakes!
The endowment is grown through contributions from the wealthy alumni the school produces and others attracted to the school's prestige.
Now there was definitely an article in the Atlantic (i think about Princeton) and this. The point being that the school admissions would try to select students whom they thought would eventually donate money to the school. I remember a line about not choosing who they though would be the best students, but choosing the best graduates. It was a justification used for admitting legacies, who were thought to be especially likely to eventually give money. The other side of this was that they couldn't change the character of the school too much because it upset the donor alumni.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:52 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
I have a cousin who I havent seen in about 30 years who I heard went to Bowdoin.
posted by jonmc at 4:57 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by jonmc at 4:57 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
I've listened to this episode and it's really sad because he brings up a lot of really valid arguments and discussions about higher ed funding and then just starts hammering on the food which is just a part of his larger argument but it just really undermines the entire episode.
But hey. He's getting press for his new podcast and ears on the other issues discussed, so that's a plus.
This episode is also part of a small arc in the podcast; there's another episode that focuses on a "genius" kid from a poor neighborhood who lucks out and gets this amazingly huge champion in the form of a very involved non for profit. And he's still not likely to go to college and it talks about where inequality starts.
posted by mayonnaises at 4:58 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
But hey. He's getting press for his new podcast and ears on the other issues discussed, so that's a plus.
This episode is also part of a small arc in the podcast; there's another episode that focuses on a "genius" kid from a poor neighborhood who lucks out and gets this amazingly huge champion in the form of a very involved non for profit. And he's still not likely to go to college and it talks about where inequality starts.
posted by mayonnaises at 4:58 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
When my children toured colleges, they all advertised how good the food was. (Except Swarthmore, but my daughter never complained.) Exactly why Gladwell should pick on Bowdoin, I don't know.
I will say that Bowdoin's relatively remote location has always been a problem obtaining diversity, as has the low minority population in Maine. Most students go to a college within 200 miles of home and black kids from NYC tend not to consider Brunswick, ME an attractive home-away-from-home.
Bowdoin's need-blind admissions policies are explained here: https://www.bowdoin.edu/studentaid/prospective-students/need-blind-full-need.shtml
Here is an new release from 2008 announcing that Bowdoin would no longer require loans as part of a student aid package: http://www.bowdoin.edu/news/archives/1bowdoincampus/004745.shtml
Bowdoin, class of '68.
posted by SemiSalt at 5:03 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
I will say that Bowdoin's relatively remote location has always been a problem obtaining diversity, as has the low minority population in Maine. Most students go to a college within 200 miles of home and black kids from NYC tend not to consider Brunswick, ME an attractive home-away-from-home.
Bowdoin's need-blind admissions policies are explained here: https://www.bowdoin.edu/studentaid/prospective-students/need-blind-full-need.shtml
Here is an new release from 2008 announcing that Bowdoin would no longer require loans as part of a student aid package: http://www.bowdoin.edu/news/archives/1bowdoincampus/004745.shtml
Bowdoin, class of '68.
posted by SemiSalt at 5:03 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
Yeah, I'm about half-way through the podcast, and the food thing seems to be a bit of a red herring. The real issue has to do with the endowment: Vassar spends a lot of the income from their endowment on financial aid, and other schools reinvest it back into the endowment. Right now, it seems like that makes Vassar the good guys and Bowdoin the bad guys, because Vassar has a lot more low-income students and a much smaller endowment. But if that turns out to be the wrong gamble, and Vassar ends up broke while Bowdoin still has a nice, comfy endowment, then it'll look different sometime in the future.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:04 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:04 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
I'm kinda surprised how fixated people are on the food.
Sure, it was the framing device for the podcast, but the substance of his argument is that the huge tax subsidy colleges like Bowdoin receive isn't justified when they're privilege factories using amenities to lure the rich alumni of the future.
Personally I find high flying need blind rhetoric from colleges that use holistic admission measures to admit a window dressing minority of poor students nearly as disgusting as the for profit universities that actually prey on the poor.
posted by zymil at 5:07 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
Sure, it was the framing device for the podcast, but the substance of his argument is that the huge tax subsidy colleges like Bowdoin receive isn't justified when they're privilege factories using amenities to lure the rich alumni of the future.
Personally I find high flying need blind rhetoric from colleges that use holistic admission measures to admit a window dressing minority of poor students nearly as disgusting as the for profit universities that actually prey on the poor.
posted by zymil at 5:07 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
For what it's worth, I went to one of Bowdoin's peer institutions (Haverford, for those keeping score) and visited Bowdoin for some events. Bowdoin's food was waaaaay better than ours, or Bryn Mawr's, or Swarthmore's (which was extra terrible).
/anecdote
posted by Itaxpica at 5:11 PM on July 20, 2016
/anecdote
posted by Itaxpica at 5:11 PM on July 20, 2016
There are poor people in Maine. I don't know how remote this place is, but I'm betting there are poor people within 200 miles of this place. And I suspect they're under-represented, even if we only consider college students.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 5:13 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 5:13 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
People used to talk about Gladwell as a science writer, but I don't think about him that way any more. I think it might have been someone here at MeFi that said if there aren't any numbers, beware, it's likely not science you're reading. His books are great stories, and they feel true at the time. But all too often they break down on closer inspection. Isn't that truthiness? Haven't listened to the podcast yet, but I'm suspicious of him from past bad experiences.
posted by Ambient Echo at 5:14 PM on July 20, 2016 [7 favorites]
posted by Ambient Echo at 5:14 PM on July 20, 2016 [7 favorites]
So I guess I'll be the one obnoxious contrarian who defends Malcolm Gladwell.
The literal argument he makes—that Bowdoin's spending on cafeteria food reduces its ability to act as an agent for positive change in the world—is patently absurd. And that Vassar has less fancy food has no broader meaning.
He's absolutely wrong in the particulars. And he's always been wrong in the particulars.
But on a more symbolic level, I don't think that he's totally wrong. Some elite liberal schools actually are more concerned (on an institutional level) with attracting well-heeled students than they are with serving the greater good.
The fact that endowments have exploded in recent decades—and how that alters institutional behavior—is important. And if we have to frame that idea around the silly concept of one particular school's dining options vs another for people to talk about it, then so be it.
Gladwell is obviously poison to a lot of people on Metafilter, but I often feel like this is a community of biologists hating on the forester for not considering the mitochondria.
posted by graphnerd at 5:15 PM on July 20, 2016 [19 favorites]
The literal argument he makes—that Bowdoin's spending on cafeteria food reduces its ability to act as an agent for positive change in the world—is patently absurd. And that Vassar has less fancy food has no broader meaning.
He's absolutely wrong in the particulars. And he's always been wrong in the particulars.
But on a more symbolic level, I don't think that he's totally wrong. Some elite liberal schools actually are more concerned (on an institutional level) with attracting well-heeled students than they are with serving the greater good.
The fact that endowments have exploded in recent decades—and how that alters institutional behavior—is important. And if we have to frame that idea around the silly concept of one particular school's dining options vs another for people to talk about it, then so be it.
Gladwell is obviously poison to a lot of people on Metafilter, but I often feel like this is a community of biologists hating on the forester for not considering the mitochondria.
posted by graphnerd at 5:15 PM on July 20, 2016 [19 favorites]
I do think it's funny that the podcast ends with a Vassar student saying that the terrible food isn't a big deal, because you can get the minimum meal plan and eat out every night if it really bothers you. And that does make me wonder if the rich kids at Vassar are eating at restaurants every night, and the terrible dining hall is just for the poors, which would be its own kind of non-ideal situation.
Anyway, I think the whole "don't go to Bowdoin! Go to Vassar instead to make a statement about your priorities!" thing is kind of dumb. Are there really a lot of students choosing between Bowdoin and Vassar? They seem like they don't really attract the same kids.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:17 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
Anyway, I think the whole "don't go to Bowdoin! Go to Vassar instead to make a statement about your priorities!" thing is kind of dumb. Are there really a lot of students choosing between Bowdoin and Vassar? They seem like they don't really attract the same kids.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:17 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
The fact that endowments have exploded in recent decades—and how that alters institutional behavior—is important. And if we have to frame that idea around the silly concept of one particular school's dining options vs another for people to talk about it, then so be it.Ok, but do you actually have to do that? I don't really understand what the podcast gains from the food hook.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:19 PM on July 20, 2016
"I don't really understand what the podcast gains from the food hook."
Well, it's a hook, at least. I can't think of a better one myself.
Can you?
[edit] sorry that's so snarky, but I do stand by the idea, if not the sentiment.
posted by graphnerd at 5:26 PM on July 20, 2016
Well, it's a hook, at least. I can't think of a better one myself.
Can you?
[edit] sorry that's so snarky, but I do stand by the idea, if not the sentiment.
posted by graphnerd at 5:26 PM on July 20, 2016
If they really cared about the greater good, they could simply dissolve themselves and give the endowment money to people who need it.
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 5:31 PM on July 20, 2016
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 5:31 PM on July 20, 2016
"There are poor people in Maine."
Certainly. It's been a while since I had any contact with the Bowdoin Admissions office, but when I did, they talked of the "Maine Commitment" which, summarized in my own words, meant they were especially open to accepting kids from Maine who could do the work and who were unlikely to get accepted at a good school elsewhere.
posted by SemiSalt at 5:31 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
Certainly. It's been a while since I had any contact with the Bowdoin Admissions office, but when I did, they talked of the "Maine Commitment" which, summarized in my own words, meant they were especially open to accepting kids from Maine who could do the work and who were unlikely to get accepted at a good school elsewhere.
posted by SemiSalt at 5:31 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
If you can't dispense with the hook, I would make it a much, much smaller part of the podcast, make it clear that it's symbolic rather than the real issue, and introduce the larger themes earlier on. And I would leave off the interview with the kid who was really enthusiastic about eggplant parmesan pancakes, because what was the point of that other than to mock some 19-year-old for liking food too much?
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:33 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:33 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
Gladwell almost always needs a better editor than Gladwell.
posted by nfalkner at 5:44 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by nfalkner at 5:44 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
"If you can't dispense with the hook, I would make it a much, much smaller part of the podcast, make it clear that it's symbolic rather than the real issue, and introduce the larger themes earlier on."
Yeah, I hear ya. There's a weird pseudo-populist thread undergirding all of it, which is particularly unfair to the kid.
That said, users of Metafilter are absolutely not Gladwell's audience. And he's not trying to convince us of anything. Nor is he trying to make a rock-solid, beanplate-proof Argument.
He's a storyteller who takes a lot of liberties in reaching at some kind of underlying, compelling truth. And doing that necessitates having a hook that people who don't think about these issues all the time will understand, think about, and potentially repeat.
I guess my point is that focusing on whether or not The Hook is reasonable, or if it needs to be The Hook is mistaking the forest for the trees. Good is just shorthand for some upper-class affectation—shorthand meant to represent the deeper point that (at least according to him) these universities are privilege factories.
And that may be true, and it may be false, but I think we should focus on his meaning rather than his words.
posted by graphnerd at 5:46 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
Yeah, I hear ya. There's a weird pseudo-populist thread undergirding all of it, which is particularly unfair to the kid.
That said, users of Metafilter are absolutely not Gladwell's audience. And he's not trying to convince us of anything. Nor is he trying to make a rock-solid, beanplate-proof Argument.
He's a storyteller who takes a lot of liberties in reaching at some kind of underlying, compelling truth. And doing that necessitates having a hook that people who don't think about these issues all the time will understand, think about, and potentially repeat.
I guess my point is that focusing on whether or not The Hook is reasonable, or if it needs to be The Hook is mistaking the forest for the trees. Good is just shorthand for some upper-class affectation—shorthand meant to represent the deeper point that (at least according to him) these universities are privilege factories.
And that may be true, and it may be false, but I think we should focus on his meaning rather than his words.
posted by graphnerd at 5:46 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
I don't really understand what the podcast gains from the food hook.
Much of Gladwell's approach is "You think [thing] is good, but it's actually bad" (or vice-versa). So since most people wouldn't start off by saying "College cafeterias shouldn't have good food", he can turn it around to say "Well, maybe there are hidden downsides to this thing that seems good in and of itself."
But yeah, it didn't really work well here.
posted by Etrigan at 5:46 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
Much of Gladwell's approach is "You think [thing] is good, but it's actually bad" (or vice-versa). So since most people wouldn't start off by saying "College cafeterias shouldn't have good food", he can turn it around to say "Well, maybe there are hidden downsides to this thing that seems good in and of itself."
But yeah, it didn't really work well here.
posted by Etrigan at 5:46 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
"...every dollar spent towards snazzy cafeteria food to attract wealthy students is a dollar not spent on financial aid" -Malcolm Gladwell === This about sums up the world economy, methinks.
posted by Monkey0nCrack at 5:50 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Monkey0nCrack at 5:50 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
Personally I find high flying need blind rhetoric from colleges that use holistic admission measures to admit a window dressing minority of poor students nearly as disgusting as the for profit universities that actually prey on the poor.
At every need-blind college or university aware of - and there are not many - some huge percentage of students get some form of aid. Most of them don't get a full ride, but a significant number do. It was cheaper for me to go to my SLAC than it would have been to go to my state university. It isn't just rhetoric, and for those of us who have been able to take advantage of it, it can make an incalculable difference.
posted by rtha at 5:54 PM on July 20, 2016 [9 favorites]
At every need-blind college or university aware of - and there are not many - some huge percentage of students get some form of aid. Most of them don't get a full ride, but a significant number do. It was cheaper for me to go to my SLAC than it would have been to go to my state university. It isn't just rhetoric, and for those of us who have been able to take advantage of it, it can make an incalculable difference.
posted by rtha at 5:54 PM on July 20, 2016 [9 favorites]
"There are poor people in Maine."
One of the ways that elite liberal arts colleges (and elite schools in general) establish and maintain their identities and rankings is by not having too large a percentage of local students (rich or poor). Part of being an elite college is pulling from a national (and increasingly international) pool of applicants, rather than local or regional. So there is often a tension between diversity goals (economic, racial, etc) that might be most easily solved locally, and institutional advancement goals which are focused on the metrics that keep a school high in the rankings.
Not all schools are equally cynical in how they approach this, but it's a tension at many schools. All of the elite schools I can think of have poverty adjacent or close, so pretty much all of them get faced with that question.
It was cheaper for me to go to my SLAC than it would have been to go to my state university.
This was my experience as well. For non-rich students with strong academics (eg grades, test scores, etc), it can often be a lot cheaper to apply to elite schools with strong endowments, because those schools have the resources to meet full financial need for all students and increasingly don't include any loans.
posted by Dip Flash at 5:59 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
One of the ways that elite liberal arts colleges (and elite schools in general) establish and maintain their identities and rankings is by not having too large a percentage of local students (rich or poor). Part of being an elite college is pulling from a national (and increasingly international) pool of applicants, rather than local or regional. So there is often a tension between diversity goals (economic, racial, etc) that might be most easily solved locally, and institutional advancement goals which are focused on the metrics that keep a school high in the rankings.
Not all schools are equally cynical in how they approach this, but it's a tension at many schools. All of the elite schools I can think of have poverty adjacent or close, so pretty much all of them get faced with that question.
It was cheaper for me to go to my SLAC than it would have been to go to my state university.
This was my experience as well. For non-rich students with strong academics (eg grades, test scores, etc), it can often be a lot cheaper to apply to elite schools with strong endowments, because those schools have the resources to meet full financial need for all students and increasingly don't include any loans.
posted by Dip Flash at 5:59 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
Also, is it just me or is 'need-blind' the exact same thing as the "Stephen Colbert" character's "inability to see race"?
posted by graphnerd at 6:01 PM on July 20, 2016
posted by graphnerd at 6:01 PM on July 20, 2016
There are poor people very near Bowdoin - I have relatives who live nearby who are pretty hardscrabble and a distant relative who works there. You can even - get this! - be employed by Bowdoin and be poor at the same time, because they do not always dish out the wages with a lavish hand.
I am not, personally, sure that Bowdoin is the best school to point to - my relative's kids went there on tuition waver, it's a weird little town with more diversity than you think, etc. I suppose it has the advantage for Gladwell that most people haven't heard of it, so have no positive associations to combat.
I mean, I could bike five miles and be at an intensely privileged school with all kinds of class and race issues, or drive for an hour and be at the wealthy liberal arts college to which I was admitted but did not go because literally while we were getting the campus tour, students made fun of my parents' clothes [for being cheap and unstylish}. That was it for me, they were right off my list. I've regretted it a bit since, because I'm sure that school would have steered me to a professional career, but at the time I could not abide it.
posted by Frowner at 6:07 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
I am not, personally, sure that Bowdoin is the best school to point to - my relative's kids went there on tuition waver, it's a weird little town with more diversity than you think, etc. I suppose it has the advantage for Gladwell that most people haven't heard of it, so have no positive associations to combat.
I mean, I could bike five miles and be at an intensely privileged school with all kinds of class and race issues, or drive for an hour and be at the wealthy liberal arts college to which I was admitted but did not go because literally while we were getting the campus tour, students made fun of my parents' clothes [for being cheap and unstylish}. That was it for me, they were right off my list. I've regretted it a bit since, because I'm sure that school would have steered me to a professional career, but at the time I could not abide it.
posted by Frowner at 6:07 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
I do think it's funny that the podcast ends with a Vassar student saying that the terrible food isn't a big deal, because you can get the minimum meal plan and eat out every night if it really bothers you. And that does make me wonder if the rich kids at Vassar are eating at restaurants every night, and the terrible dining hall is just for the poors, which would be its own kind of non-ideal situation.
Circumstances must vary from school to school, but, yes, if you're a low-income student at a school that calculates your board costs based on the meal plan they offer (which is not an unreasonable thing to do), you're going to be in the cafeteria every meal. The richer students can opt out if they want. As a lower-income student at such a school years ago, having the (mandatory) full meal plan was my guarantee of not starving. When I would stay at school over the longer breaks (not being able to afford to come home), it was actually a bit of a strain for my parents to send me some cash to cover those meals.
Given this circumstance, there's actually a decent argument for making the food attractive: you want the students to eat together as much as possible, not to segregate out by social class.
posted by praemunire at 6:07 PM on July 20, 2016 [12 favorites]
Circumstances must vary from school to school, but, yes, if you're a low-income student at a school that calculates your board costs based on the meal plan they offer (which is not an unreasonable thing to do), you're going to be in the cafeteria every meal. The richer students can opt out if they want. As a lower-income student at such a school years ago, having the (mandatory) full meal plan was my guarantee of not starving. When I would stay at school over the longer breaks (not being able to afford to come home), it was actually a bit of a strain for my parents to send me some cash to cover those meals.
Given this circumstance, there's actually a decent argument for making the food attractive: you want the students to eat together as much as possible, not to segregate out by social class.
posted by praemunire at 6:07 PM on July 20, 2016 [12 favorites]
But on a more symbolic level, I don't think that he's totally wrong.
But isn't his over-all argument that we wouldn't have inequality if everyone could go to Bowdoin?
He's a storyteller who takes a lot of liberties...
He's a PR hack and shill pretending to be a journalist.
posted by ennui.bz at 6:17 PM on July 20, 2016 [23 favorites]
But isn't his over-all argument that we wouldn't have inequality if everyone could go to Bowdoin?
He's a storyteller who takes a lot of liberties...
He's a PR hack and shill pretending to be a journalist.
During college, Gladwell received journalism training at the National Journalism Center, an outfit that worked with the tobacco industry “to train budding journalists . . . to get across our side of the story," according to an internal Philip Morris document.etc. ad infinitum. Gladwell is human scum.
...
In 1990, a Gladwell article in the Washington Post warned that laws banning cigarettes could “put a serious strain on the nation’s Social Security and Medicare programs.” For evidence, Gladwell cited an old “study” churned out by a thinktank with known connections to Big Tobacco.
...
In his book The Tipping Point, Gladwell blamed children for getting themselves addicted to tobacco and absolved tobacco industry advertising campaigns of guilt. However, confidential Philip Morris documents bragged, “Marlboro’s phenomenal growth rate in the past has been attributable in large part to our high market penetration among young smokers . . . 15 to 19 years old.”
...
A confidential Philip Morris document from the mid-1990s named Malcolm Gladwell as one of the tobacco industry’s top covert media assets. This roster of “Third Party Advocates” was a who's who list of known corporate shills, including Bush press secretary/Fox News anchor Tony Snow, Grover Norquist, Milton Friedman and Ed Feulner, head of the Heritage Foundation. In journalism terms, a “Third Party Advocate” means “fraud.”
...
In 2004, Gladwell was forced to end a business partnership he had formed with a market research company after David Carr of the New York Timesexposed the relationship and criticized "Mr. Gladwell's dual career as both a marketer and a writer . . ."
...
In 2005, Gladwell was paid to speak at a Philip Morris recruitment event. The company described the gig in its "highly confidential" 2005 performance summary: "Our efforts to develop world-class leaders remain a priority. PM USA continued to enhance its leadership development efforts by introducing new sales training programs..."
posted by ennui.bz at 6:17 PM on July 20, 2016 [23 favorites]
My impression of rural Maine was that people, if they were lucky, were cobbling together a living from a combination of lobster traps, fixing boat engines etc, cutting firewood, caretaking work for rich people's vacation houses, and whatever else they could find. There seemed to be no shortage of poverty.
posted by thelonius at 6:19 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by thelonius at 6:19 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
I used to defend Gladwell but this is fucking stupid.
Recently, This American Life played a segment from his Revisionist History on underhanded free throws. It was interesting, presenting a story I never would have heard and featuring compelling interviews. In brief, basketball players would score way better if they would free throw underhanded. But almost no basketball players use this technique. Interesting! Tell me more!
But his conclusion was, to me, actively stupid and willfully ignoring of the most obvious, occam's razor level conclusion - a conclusion that would have forced him to acknowledge sexism.
At no point did he name homophobia or masculine gender roles in any way, even though the actual basketball players he interviewed named fear of being labeled as sissies as their motivation for avoiding this technique. He clearly chose to ignore the people who he is supposedly interested in, in favor of supporting some boring conclusion which he had pre-determined.
posted by latkes at 6:20 PM on July 20, 2016 [7 favorites]
Recently, This American Life played a segment from his Revisionist History on underhanded free throws. It was interesting, presenting a story I never would have heard and featuring compelling interviews. In brief, basketball players would score way better if they would free throw underhanded. But almost no basketball players use this technique. Interesting! Tell me more!
But his conclusion was, to me, actively stupid and willfully ignoring of the most obvious, occam's razor level conclusion - a conclusion that would have forced him to acknowledge sexism.
At no point did he name homophobia or masculine gender roles in any way, even though the actual basketball players he interviewed named fear of being labeled as sissies as their motivation for avoiding this technique. He clearly chose to ignore the people who he is supposedly interested in, in favor of supporting some boring conclusion which he had pre-determined.
posted by latkes at 6:20 PM on July 20, 2016 [7 favorites]
if there aren't any numbers, beware, it's likely not science you're reading
Corollary: if the only numbers are big and round, it's likely not science either.
posted by BungaDunga at 6:23 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
Corollary: if the only numbers are big and round, it's likely not science either.
posted by BungaDunga at 6:23 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
He clearly chose to ignore the people who he is supposedly interested in, in favor of supporting some boring conclusion which he had pre-determined.
Did you listen to his whole podcast? His boring conclusion was that players think it makes them look like sissies.
(Also, women shoot free throws overhand too.)
posted by Etrigan at 6:27 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
Did you listen to his whole podcast? His boring conclusion was that players think it makes them look like sissies.
(Also, women shoot free throws overhand too.)
posted by Etrigan at 6:27 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
Also, is it just me or is 'need-blind' the exact same thing as the "Stephen Colbert" character's "inability to see race"?
I think it's just you. The point of the Colbert claim is to challenge the idea that racism shapes that way people of color are judged. "Need-blind" admissions is not based on the notion that many college students don't actually need financial aid; it's a policy that their need for such aid shouldn't be considered as a factor in deciding which students to admit.
posted by layceepee at 6:29 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
I think it's just you. The point of the Colbert claim is to challenge the idea that racism shapes that way people of color are judged. "Need-blind" admissions is not based on the notion that many college students don't actually need financial aid; it's a policy that their need for such aid shouldn't be considered as a factor in deciding which students to admit.
posted by layceepee at 6:29 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
The point of the Colbert claim is to challenge the idea that racism shapes that way people of color are judged.
And the point* I and others have made is that class affects the way students seeking admission are judged and that things that are either facilitated by having money (like particular activities, experiences, and schooling background) and things that are associated with having money (like presenting yourself in a particular way in an interview) are the basis of admissions. In other words, class-based preferences and judgement affect the way students seeking admission are judged.
*OK, I made two points and retracted one, this is the one I stand by.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 6:35 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
And the point* I and others have made is that class affects the way students seeking admission are judged and that things that are either facilitated by having money (like particular activities, experiences, and schooling background) and things that are associated with having money (like presenting yourself in a particular way in an interview) are the basis of admissions. In other words, class-based preferences and judgement affect the way students seeking admission are judged.
*OK, I made two points and retracted one, this is the one I stand by.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 6:35 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
In other words, class-based preferences and judgement affect the way students seeking admission are judged.
Yes, but there is still a meaningful difference in admissions between schools that will take you if you meet their assuredly class-influenced standards, regardless of your ability to pay, and schools that will simply turn you down if they think you are going to cost them money. Maybe the first isn't perfect, but it made it possible for me to attend a very good school which would have been closed to me had it followed the second practice.
posted by praemunire at 6:39 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
Yes, but there is still a meaningful difference in admissions between schools that will take you if you meet their assuredly class-influenced standards, regardless of your ability to pay, and schools that will simply turn you down if they think you are going to cost them money. Maybe the first isn't perfect, but it made it possible for me to attend a very good school which would have been closed to me had it followed the second practice.
posted by praemunire at 6:39 PM on July 20, 2016 [3 favorites]
Yeah, I admitted I was probably wrong on that point. Though I wasn't arguing they wouldn't admit anyone who couldn't pay, only that they would seek to ensure they didn't admit too many people who couldn't pay.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 6:41 PM on July 20, 2016
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 6:41 PM on July 20, 2016
The thing about "need-blind" admissions is that most colleges practice "need-aware" admissions, where they explicitly favor students who are able to pay full tuition. Increasingly, they're also more likely to favor those rich students when they hand out financial aid, because the data suggests that rich students are more likely to be attracted to a school by a generous financial aid package than poor or middle-class students are. It's not really Colbert-esque, because it exists in opposition to a system that practices overt discrimination. There are obviously lots of other factors that favor rich kids in college admissions, but that's a little different from having a system that takes into account your ability to pay when it makes admissions decisions, which is how most schools operate.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 6:42 PM on July 20, 2016 [6 favorites]
Given this circumstance, there's actually a decent argument for making the food attractive: you want the students to eat together as much as possible, not to segregate out by social class.At a lot of public colleges, private companies are putting up special luxury "dorms" right off campus for wealthy students, many of whom come from out of state and are paying much higher tuition than the average student. They often have separate dining halls, gyms, study spaces, etc., and sometimes they have their own shuttle bus services. Middle-class and below kids live in the official dorms or in ordinary apartments, and rich kids live in special rich-people private dorms. It's kind of a fucked-up dynamic, and it makes me think that the fancy dining halls aren't necessarily the worst thing in the world.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 6:42 PM on July 20, 2016 [6 favorites]
Did you listen to his whole podcast? His boring conclusion was that players think it makes them look like sissies.
I had a totally different understanding of his conclusion, based on the version I heard which was on This American Life. Perhaps it was different on his own podcast? But on TAL, his conclusion was about "thresholds". People with "low thresholds" are willing to do things differently from others, but as a result, can be terrible to be around. People who have high thresholds (most people), are easy to get along with but are conformists.
This "thresholds" concept is, well, kind of a useful descriptor I guess, but much less well established than the concept of homophobia and sexism and masculine gender policing, which seems like the immediate cause that I wish he had named, even if he went on to say that the few men who are willing to tolerate violating gender roles have low "thresholds".
posted by latkes at 6:43 PM on July 20, 2016
I had a totally different understanding of his conclusion, based on the version I heard which was on This American Life. Perhaps it was different on his own podcast? But on TAL, his conclusion was about "thresholds". People with "low thresholds" are willing to do things differently from others, but as a result, can be terrible to be around. People who have high thresholds (most people), are easy to get along with but are conformists.
This "thresholds" concept is, well, kind of a useful descriptor I guess, but much less well established than the concept of homophobia and sexism and masculine gender policing, which seems like the immediate cause that I wish he had named, even if he went on to say that the few men who are willing to tolerate violating gender roles have low "thresholds".
posted by latkes at 6:43 PM on July 20, 2016
Haven't a bunch of "need blind" institutions gotten into trouble because they were anything but that?
While we can quibble about the specifics, I think that Glad well's broader point is overwhelmingly true -- for all the private universities who are claiming to be"need-blind," there sure aren't many underprivileged students attending them.
And Gladwell actually backs this particular claim up with numbers. Bowdoin runs its endowment like a corporation. Vassar spends its returns to further its educational mission.
The food might be a red herring, but Bowdoin deserved this callout.
and oh god NYU. could there be a nonprofit less deserving of that status?
posted by schmod at 7:26 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
While we can quibble about the specifics, I think that Glad well's broader point is overwhelmingly true -- for all the private universities who are claiming to be"need-blind," there sure aren't many underprivileged students attending them.
And Gladwell actually backs this particular claim up with numbers. Bowdoin runs its endowment like a corporation. Vassar spends its returns to further its educational mission.
The food might be a red herring, but Bowdoin deserved this callout.
and oh god NYU. could there be a nonprofit less deserving of that status?
posted by schmod at 7:26 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
I'd also recommend listening to the podcast before judging. I'm typically not a Gladwell fan, but I'm liking Revisionist History.
Bowdoin's response to this story was also.... surprisingly childish, tone-deaf, and incompetent. The claims that Bowdoin makes in its defense do not compare favorably to its peer institutions.
posted by schmod at 7:29 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
Bowdoin's response to this story was also.... surprisingly childish, tone-deaf, and incompetent. The claims that Bowdoin makes in its defense do not compare favorably to its peer institutions.
posted by schmod at 7:29 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
Having listened to this piece I don't think he's saying what a lot of posters seem to think he's saying. The problem according to him is not that certain colleges are not spending as much on financial aid per se, but that colleges who spend a great deal of money on amenities poor colleges cannot afford hurts the ability of those colleges to compete for the full price students who will subsidise the tuition of poor students.
posted by mikek at 7:32 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by mikek at 7:32 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
The fact that endowments have exploded in recent decades—and how that alters institutional behavior—is important.
And it's one of the only things giving nonprofit institutions like educational organizations the ability to make better moral choices, weather the pressures of periodic economic crises and cost spikes, and still meet the goals stated in their mission. Endowment isn't some pot of Croesus' gold, it's sustainability and smoothing over the long haul. One of the ways it alters institutional behavior is that it allows institutions to act in ways that better promote justice than does a cash-in, cash-out budget.
posted by Miko at 8:03 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
And it's one of the only things giving nonprofit institutions like educational organizations the ability to make better moral choices, weather the pressures of periodic economic crises and cost spikes, and still meet the goals stated in their mission. Endowment isn't some pot of Croesus' gold, it's sustainability and smoothing over the long haul. One of the ways it alters institutional behavior is that it allows institutions to act in ways that better promote justice than does a cash-in, cash-out budget.
posted by Miko at 8:03 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
Also, is it just me or is 'need-blind' the exact same thing as the "Stephen Colbert" character's "inability to see race"?
That is not how the term is used and understood, so yes, this is just you.
posted by Dip Flash at 8:21 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
That is not how the term is used and understood, so yes, this is just you.
posted by Dip Flash at 8:21 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
yes, if you're a low-income student at a school that calculates your board costs based on the meal plan they offer (which is not an unreasonable thing to do), you're going to be in the cafeteria every meal. [...T]here's actually a decent argument for making the food attractive: you want the students to eat together as much as possible, not to segregate out by social class.
My private alma mater had a somewhat controversial requirement that all first-year students must purchase a cafeteria meal plan as part of their tuition. You could pick among three tiers: 7, 14, or 21 meals a week. The college's argument went that the required meal plan ensured that new students could have at least one full meal a day without the students needing to save or earn money for food during the school year.
Our campus cafeteria was probably one that Gladwell would criticize; weekend breakfasts were dull cereal affairs, but weekday lunches were amazing: multiple buffet lines! Vegan options! Made-to-order bananas Foster! And as a result EVERYONE ate in the cafeteria: students, professors, staff, visitors, the college president. I went back for my class reunion recently and the alumnae meals were folded into the cafeteria with the students.
Why is Gladwell's focus on the food going directly into students' mouths instead of the money spent on sports teams or manicured lawns? As a broke student I didn't complain too much about the college meal plan, but I remember my outrage at learning that campus landscaping had a specific donated endowment that was paying to keep the grass green.
posted by nicebookrack at 8:22 PM on July 20, 2016 [11 favorites]
My private alma mater had a somewhat controversial requirement that all first-year students must purchase a cafeteria meal plan as part of their tuition. You could pick among three tiers: 7, 14, or 21 meals a week. The college's argument went that the required meal plan ensured that new students could have at least one full meal a day without the students needing to save or earn money for food during the school year.
Our campus cafeteria was probably one that Gladwell would criticize; weekend breakfasts were dull cereal affairs, but weekday lunches were amazing: multiple buffet lines! Vegan options! Made-to-order bananas Foster! And as a result EVERYONE ate in the cafeteria: students, professors, staff, visitors, the college president. I went back for my class reunion recently and the alumnae meals were folded into the cafeteria with the students.
Why is Gladwell's focus on the food going directly into students' mouths instead of the money spent on sports teams or manicured lawns? As a broke student I didn't complain too much about the college meal plan, but I remember my outrage at learning that campus landscaping had a specific donated endowment that was paying to keep the grass green.
posted by nicebookrack at 8:22 PM on July 20, 2016 [11 favorites]
Haven't a bunch of "need blind" institutions gotten into trouble because they were anything but that?
GWU did. I'm not aware of others. Mostly that would be a con which, as explained above, the kind of schools that usually offer need-blind admissions (a small group; even if you limit need-blindness to U.S. applicants, you're talking about ~50 schools, and if you don't, it's less than ten) don't need to run.
for all the private universities who are claiming to be"need-blind," there sure aren't many underprivileged students attending them.
This is not because they're lying about their admissions policies, though. I find it a bit disturbing that this unsupported statement keeps getting echoed through this thread.
Social stratification in higher education is a complex problem that results from the interaction of any number of forces. Certainly the universities share some responsibility for it, but the problem is really not what they spend on amenities.
posted by praemunire at 8:24 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
GWU did. I'm not aware of others. Mostly that would be a con which, as explained above, the kind of schools that usually offer need-blind admissions (a small group; even if you limit need-blindness to U.S. applicants, you're talking about ~50 schools, and if you don't, it's less than ten) don't need to run.
for all the private universities who are claiming to be"need-blind," there sure aren't many underprivileged students attending them.
This is not because they're lying about their admissions policies, though. I find it a bit disturbing that this unsupported statement keeps getting echoed through this thread.
Social stratification in higher education is a complex problem that results from the interaction of any number of forces. Certainly the universities share some responsibility for it, but the problem is really not what they spend on amenities.
posted by praemunire at 8:24 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
I remember my outrage at learning that campus landscaping had a specific donated endowment that was paying to keep the grass green.
Why would that outrage you? That's a portion of the college's budget that did not have to be covered by tuition and fees.
posted by plastic_animals at 8:34 PM on July 20, 2016
Why would that outrage you? That's a portion of the college's budget that did not have to be covered by tuition and fees.
posted by plastic_animals at 8:34 PM on July 20, 2016
The cafeterias at the state university I went to did seem to serve a lot of things that I thought of as prestige food. For example, in one cafeteria, there were hand carved turkey and roast beef sandwiches. I'm not sure I ever saw someone buy one. But the roasts were always there on display.
It's one thing to have a cafeteria. It's another thing to have an expensive as fuck cafeteria that dorm residents must buy into with no refunds allowed. Which freshmen are mandated to live in, in turn. Moreover, as a non-resident with a university ID, I am offered a ten percent discount, which I dutifully take when dining on campus.
But while I'm too lazy to bother with Gladwell's podcast or the rebuttal, mostly like arguing about the cost of gas -- not a huge portion of any actual budget.
posted by pwnguin at 8:34 PM on July 20, 2016
It's one thing to have a cafeteria. It's another thing to have an expensive as fuck cafeteria that dorm residents must buy into with no refunds allowed. Which freshmen are mandated to live in, in turn. Moreover, as a non-resident with a university ID, I am offered a ten percent discount, which I dutifully take when dining on campus.
But while I'm too lazy to bother with Gladwell's podcast or the rebuttal, mostly like arguing about the cost of gas -- not a huge portion of any actual budget.
posted by pwnguin at 8:34 PM on July 20, 2016
It's all cargo cult education. White-collar parents (correctly) observe that their bosses and superiors went to schools with great food and green lawns and fancy buildings, so they push their kids to attend schools with those properties -- completely forgetting that a) small liberal arts colleges don't have anywhere near the same academic caliber as small rich research univisersities and b) the academics don't matter anyway, rich/well-connected people come out of exclusive colleges because they were rich/well-connected going in. You could have a beautiful oak-covered campus with 18th century buildings and serving the finest gourmet cuisine, but teaching nothing but 4th grade level classes, and people would fight to spend $50k to send their kids there.
posted by miyabo at 8:36 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by miyabo at 8:36 PM on July 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
Gladwell is a paid shill.
The real interest in reading his articles generally stems from trying to guess what corporate interests he's serving this time around; even The Tipping Point was a kind of infomercial -- for himself!
It came to the conclusion that highly connected people are the most important factor when something reaches a tipping point (and who is more connected than a highly paid PR professional such as, well, Malcolm Gladwell himself, of course!), whereas later research shows just the reverse to be the case, in that influence which causes a tipping point to be reached wells up from below.
So what's his hidden agenda this time around?
I can't tell; Bowdoin does do a lot of social justice work -- students and faculty were heavily involved in the Flint water crisis, for example -- maybe he's trying to attack Bowdoin's credibility as an advocate for the poor and least privileged in order to make it more difficult for it to gain the trust of leaders in the communities it tries to help.
posted by jamjam at 8:49 PM on July 20, 2016 [8 favorites]
The real interest in reading his articles generally stems from trying to guess what corporate interests he's serving this time around; even The Tipping Point was a kind of infomercial -- for himself!
It came to the conclusion that highly connected people are the most important factor when something reaches a tipping point (and who is more connected than a highly paid PR professional such as, well, Malcolm Gladwell himself, of course!), whereas later research shows just the reverse to be the case, in that influence which causes a tipping point to be reached wells up from below.
So what's his hidden agenda this time around?
I can't tell; Bowdoin does do a lot of social justice work -- students and faculty were heavily involved in the Flint water crisis, for example -- maybe he's trying to attack Bowdoin's credibility as an advocate for the poor and least privileged in order to make it more difficult for it to gain the trust of leaders in the communities it tries to help.
posted by jamjam at 8:49 PM on July 20, 2016 [8 favorites]
Anecdote Filter Volume XXXIII: In my misspent youth, I dated a very nice young woman who was taking classes at the St. Paul ag campus of the U of Minnesota. I spent more than a couple of nights there, and the amount of corn, beans, beef, lamb, pork, chicken, turkey, and more corn that got passed around would shock you.
It was like the Sopranos, but tasty.
posted by Sphinx at 8:57 PM on July 20, 2016
It was like the Sopranos, but tasty.
posted by Sphinx at 8:57 PM on July 20, 2016
One of the ways that elite liberal arts colleges (and elite schools in general) establish and maintain their identities and rankings is by not having too large a percentage of local students (rich or poor). Part of being an elite college is pulling from a national (and increasingly international) pool of applicants, rather than local or regional.
When I toured Carleton College back in the day, our guide, who was a raging snob, reassured us that most students weren't Minnesotan.
small liberal arts colleges don't have anywhere near the same academic caliber as small rich research univisersities
I attended a SLAC and found the small class sizes and focus on actually teaching students great. I seemed to be in very good shape compared to my fellow students when I got my next degree.
posted by Alluring Mouthbreather at 8:58 PM on July 20, 2016 [5 favorites]
When I toured Carleton College back in the day, our guide, who was a raging snob, reassured us that most students weren't Minnesotan.
small liberal arts colleges don't have anywhere near the same academic caliber as small rich research univisersities
I attended a SLAC and found the small class sizes and focus on actually teaching students great. I seemed to be in very good shape compared to my fellow students when I got my next degree.
posted by Alluring Mouthbreather at 8:58 PM on July 20, 2016 [5 favorites]
completely forgetting that a) small liberal arts colleges don't have anywhere near the same academic caliber as small rich research univisersities
At the elite end of the spectrum in the US, this is not the case at all, and shows in things like the percentage of students who go on to graduate school.
As long as you are at an elite institution, large or small, you are probably going to do ok. But I would not want to generalize from the experiences at the top of the elite rankings to other schools, and that shows up in a lot of educational discussions here. The economics are different, and the student experience is different.
posted by Dip Flash at 9:00 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
At the elite end of the spectrum in the US, this is not the case at all, and shows in things like the percentage of students who go on to graduate school.
As long as you are at an elite institution, large or small, you are probably going to do ok. But I would not want to generalize from the experiences at the top of the elite rankings to other schools, and that shows up in a lot of educational discussions here. The economics are different, and the student experience is different.
posted by Dip Flash at 9:00 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
So what's his hidden agenda this time around?
I think he's probably working on spec, but the kind of free-floating neoliberal higher-education "reform" he probably sees in the offing requires that the small-scale, personal education offered by the prestige institutions of the existing system be delegitimized — presumably in favor of online, decentralized, mass-broadcast MOOC-type "solutions" to be peddled by him and his ilk.
posted by RogerB at 9:15 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
I think he's probably working on spec, but the kind of free-floating neoliberal higher-education "reform" he probably sees in the offing requires that the small-scale, personal education offered by the prestige institutions of the existing system be delegitimized — presumably in favor of online, decentralized, mass-broadcast MOOC-type "solutions" to be peddled by him and his ilk.
posted by RogerB at 9:15 PM on July 20, 2016 [4 favorites]
There are poor people in Maine.
Most of Maine is poor. In comparison to the national average we have some of the lowest wages and the highest costs of living.
As someone who grew up very poor, didn't finish college, and is generally against the sham which is "accessible" higher education: Bowdoin is doing their best to do it right. There might be a small bias because I know a lot of people who work or have worked at Bowdoin, and alums, but I also have those same connections with people for Colby and Bates, and I wouldn't say the same for those institutions.
Bowdoin is an elite liberal university that is actually located directly in the middle of a Maine town. They interact with that town on the daily and give quite a bit back. The food program itself focuses on trying to support local businesses and food producers. I may be slightly out of date, but the food program used to incorporate students as part of their curriculum.
And as Semisalt said the Maine commitment is very strong. They could do more in regards to youth outreach and trying to fix the vast multitudes of societal wrongs that lead up to the point where they only have a few poor Mainer's who "qualify", but it's not their fault that we live in a plutocracy and they do pretty good work with their privilege.
posted by mayonnaises at 9:15 PM on July 20, 2016 [11 favorites]
Most of Maine is poor. In comparison to the national average we have some of the lowest wages and the highest costs of living.
As someone who grew up very poor, didn't finish college, and is generally against the sham which is "accessible" higher education: Bowdoin is doing their best to do it right. There might be a small bias because I know a lot of people who work or have worked at Bowdoin, and alums, but I also have those same connections with people for Colby and Bates, and I wouldn't say the same for those institutions.
Bowdoin is an elite liberal university that is actually located directly in the middle of a Maine town. They interact with that town on the daily and give quite a bit back. The food program itself focuses on trying to support local businesses and food producers. I may be slightly out of date, but the food program used to incorporate students as part of their curriculum.
And as Semisalt said the Maine commitment is very strong. They could do more in regards to youth outreach and trying to fix the vast multitudes of societal wrongs that lead up to the point where they only have a few poor Mainer's who "qualify", but it's not their fault that we live in a plutocracy and they do pretty good work with their privilege.
posted by mayonnaises at 9:15 PM on July 20, 2016 [11 favorites]
You know who could really clear this up? Those Freakonomics guys.
posted by benzenedream at 9:40 PM on July 20, 2016 [7 favorites]
posted by benzenedream at 9:40 PM on July 20, 2016 [7 favorites]
high flying need blind rhetoric from colleges that use holistic admission measures to admit a window dressing minority of poor students
I'm not actually quite sure what this means? I mean I'm guessing your point is that they could be admitting significantly more minority or poor students if they really cared to (which may be the case I don't know) but the way you phrased it doesn't make that very clear.
small liberal arts colleges don't have anywhere near the same academic caliber as small rich research univisersities
There are probably crappy liberal arts colleges but a place like Bowdoin is not one of them.
posted by atoxyl at 10:43 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm not actually quite sure what this means? I mean I'm guessing your point is that they could be admitting significantly more minority or poor students if they really cared to (which may be the case I don't know) but the way you phrased it doesn't make that very clear.
small liberal arts colleges don't have anywhere near the same academic caliber as small rich research univisersities
There are probably crappy liberal arts colleges but a place like Bowdoin is not one of them.
posted by atoxyl at 10:43 PM on July 20, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm writing a non-poor person from a non-poor family, both of whose parents have advanced degrees, who went to a public university because that's what was affordable. (Many years ago, so affordable meant affordable.)
The idea that whether Bowdoin or Vasser is better on class issues is relevant inequality strikes me as totally missing the point. They are small, selective top line liberal arts schools. Combined they have maybe a quarter of the student population of the smallest UC campus. They are only important if you already buy into the narrative that these traditional elite schools and their alumni networks deserve a privileged place in our national narrative, at which point I think the egalitarian types have already lost.
It may read like I'm trying to trash the schools but I'm not, and I hope young people who go there find it enriching and take full advantage of the opportunities. It's just if you are worried about access to education across class lines, fund community colleges, don't consider them afterthoughts to "real" colleges, and do what you can to ensure graduates without elite alumni networks are getting good opportunities to advance in fulfilling careers. And then maybe at item #10,857 on the list take a look at endowment spending and dining plans at potted ivies.
posted by mark k at 11:38 PM on July 20, 2016 [9 favorites]
The idea that whether Bowdoin or Vasser is better on class issues is relevant inequality strikes me as totally missing the point. They are small, selective top line liberal arts schools. Combined they have maybe a quarter of the student population of the smallest UC campus. They are only important if you already buy into the narrative that these traditional elite schools and their alumni networks deserve a privileged place in our national narrative, at which point I think the egalitarian types have already lost.
It may read like I'm trying to trash the schools but I'm not, and I hope young people who go there find it enriching and take full advantage of the opportunities. It's just if you are worried about access to education across class lines, fund community colleges, don't consider them afterthoughts to "real" colleges, and do what you can to ensure graduates without elite alumni networks are getting good opportunities to advance in fulfilling careers. And then maybe at item #10,857 on the list take a look at endowment spending and dining plans at potted ivies.
posted by mark k at 11:38 PM on July 20, 2016 [9 favorites]
It's just if you are worried about access to education across class lines, fund community colleges, don't consider them afterthoughts to "real" colleges, and do what you can to ensure graduates without elite alumni networks are getting good opportunities to advance in fulfilling careers.
I would say fund community colleges and make sure that people across the economic spectrum have de facto actual access to educational choices across the academic spectrum. The students at community colleges are coming from backgrounds that are disadvantaged in a lot of ways, but the solution to that isn't just "fund community colleges so those disadvantaged students can have something, too!" it's "do something about economic segregation in post-secondary education." People should have choices...when they don't, it's not enough to take the one option they have and make it better, you have to open up the options.
Besides the obvious benefit of giving disadvantaged students the same opportunities as more priviliged students, having elite schools be more representative in their student populations would have some other advantages: There are only so many spots at elite schools. If privileged students weren't overrepresented at these schools they would have to go somewhere else. In other words, schools where privileged students are currently under-represented would get more of them. When some rich students are at community college because they couldn't get in to other kinds of schools, you can bet that will solve the problem of community college funding and jobs for community college graduates, right quick.
Second, it would expose students at those elite colleges to actual diversity. I've spent a lot of time at an elite college and though they made a big show and point of having supposed racial diversity, all the students were alike. I never saw an undergraduate student in a turban, hijab, or yarmulke. I never saw an undergraduate student with kids or eldercare responsibilities. I never saw an undergraduate with dreadlocks, or extensive tattoos, or those ear grommets. I never saw an undergraduate over the age of maybe 25 (though I understand there were two. Literally two who had taken some time off and returned). I never talked to any student who was involved in the community apart from the school (i.e. if they volunteered or belonged to some group, they did it via the school). I never talked to a student who worked a minimum wage job before college for the purpose of making money. But they throw in some students across the skin colour spectrum and tell the students it's so diverse and the students go on and on about how great the diversity is. Think how great the diversity would be if it actually existed.
I realize that yes, the number of students at this school is a drop in the bucket. And of course this one school can't change the whole educational system on its own. But bragging that 15% of your students are first generation students is pretty tone-deaf, IMO.
*And yes, not all of those things are easily visible or knowable about students, so maybe there were some, but sure as hell not anything that could be called representative.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 6:16 AM on July 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
I would say fund community colleges and make sure that people across the economic spectrum have de facto actual access to educational choices across the academic spectrum. The students at community colleges are coming from backgrounds that are disadvantaged in a lot of ways, but the solution to that isn't just "fund community colleges so those disadvantaged students can have something, too!" it's "do something about economic segregation in post-secondary education." People should have choices...when they don't, it's not enough to take the one option they have and make it better, you have to open up the options.
Besides the obvious benefit of giving disadvantaged students the same opportunities as more priviliged students, having elite schools be more representative in their student populations would have some other advantages: There are only so many spots at elite schools. If privileged students weren't overrepresented at these schools they would have to go somewhere else. In other words, schools where privileged students are currently under-represented would get more of them. When some rich students are at community college because they couldn't get in to other kinds of schools, you can bet that will solve the problem of community college funding and jobs for community college graduates, right quick.
Second, it would expose students at those elite colleges to actual diversity. I've spent a lot of time at an elite college and though they made a big show and point of having supposed racial diversity, all the students were alike. I never saw an undergraduate student in a turban, hijab, or yarmulke. I never saw an undergraduate student with kids or eldercare responsibilities. I never saw an undergraduate with dreadlocks, or extensive tattoos, or those ear grommets. I never saw an undergraduate over the age of maybe 25 (though I understand there were two. Literally two who had taken some time off and returned). I never talked to any student who was involved in the community apart from the school (i.e. if they volunteered or belonged to some group, they did it via the school). I never talked to a student who worked a minimum wage job before college for the purpose of making money. But they throw in some students across the skin colour spectrum and tell the students it's so diverse and the students go on and on about how great the diversity is. Think how great the diversity would be if it actually existed.
I realize that yes, the number of students at this school is a drop in the bucket. And of course this one school can't change the whole educational system on its own. But bragging that 15% of your students are first generation students is pretty tone-deaf, IMO.
*And yes, not all of those things are easily visible or knowable about students, so maybe there were some, but sure as hell not anything that could be called representative.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 6:16 AM on July 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
When I toured Carleton College back in the day, our guide, who was a raging snob, reassured us that most students weren't Minnesotan.
!!!!
Carleton was where students made fun of my parents while we were on the campus tour, as mentioned upthread! Your anecdote gratifies me intensely.
I got in, no problem, because frankly I may be from a prole-y background but my test scores, etc, have always been above reproach - but I sure did not attend.
posted by Frowner at 6:26 AM on July 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
!!!!
Carleton was where students made fun of my parents while we were on the campus tour, as mentioned upthread! Your anecdote gratifies me intensely.
I got in, no problem, because frankly I may be from a prole-y background but my test scores, etc, have always been above reproach - but I sure did not attend.
posted by Frowner at 6:26 AM on July 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
small liberal arts colleges don't have anywhere near the same academic caliber as small rich research univisersities
mmmmmmmm, no. do you mean Ivies specifically? if you're judging caliber by "faculty research productivity," maybe, but this is not correct on the whole. i went from a small liberal arts college to the top-ranked Ph.D. program in the U.S. in my field (at a public state flagship). many of my colleagues had similar trajectories.
posted by listen, lady at 6:46 AM on July 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
mmmmmmmm, no. do you mean Ivies specifically? if you're judging caliber by "faculty research productivity," maybe, but this is not correct on the whole. i went from a small liberal arts college to the top-ranked Ph.D. program in the U.S. in my field (at a public state flagship). many of my colleagues had similar trajectories.
posted by listen, lady at 6:46 AM on July 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
I've spent a lot of time at an elite college and though they made a big show and point of having supposed racial diversity, all the students were alike. I never saw an undergraduate student in a turban, hijab, or yarmulke. I never saw an undergraduate student with kids or eldercare responsibilities. I never saw an undergraduate with dreadlocks, or extensive tattoos, or those ear grommets. I never saw an undergraduate over the age of maybe 25 (though I understand there were two. Literally two who had taken some time off and returned). I never talked to any student who was involved in the community apart from the school (i.e. if they volunteered or belonged to some group, they did it via the school). I never talked to a student who worked a minimum wage job before college for the purpose of making money.
I'm not going to challenge your experiences and observations, and there must be schools like that. But I attended elite institutions for undergrad and grad, and have spent quite a bit of time on some other elite campuses. Everything you say you did not see, I saw all the time, with the exception of age diversity -- the small liberal arts college I attended had just as little age diversity as you describe, and was the poorer for it.
That's not at all to say that the student bodies were in any way representative of the country or the world, even with excellent need-based aid available. But given that, there was more economic and other diversity than some of the accounts here would suggest. Elite schools can be particularly hard for first-generation college students, and many have struggled with retention and support for students from non-traditional backgrounds. Some schools are doing well at this, many are not, and they should be held accountable.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:59 AM on July 21, 2016
I'm not going to challenge your experiences and observations, and there must be schools like that. But I attended elite institutions for undergrad and grad, and have spent quite a bit of time on some other elite campuses. Everything you say you did not see, I saw all the time, with the exception of age diversity -- the small liberal arts college I attended had just as little age diversity as you describe, and was the poorer for it.
That's not at all to say that the student bodies were in any way representative of the country or the world, even with excellent need-based aid available. But given that, there was more economic and other diversity than some of the accounts here would suggest. Elite schools can be particularly hard for first-generation college students, and many have struggled with retention and support for students from non-traditional backgrounds. Some schools are doing well at this, many are not, and they should be held accountable.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:59 AM on July 21, 2016
I used to love Gladwell so much, before the facts started showing up
posted by rebent at 7:25 AM on July 21, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by rebent at 7:25 AM on July 21, 2016 [5 favorites]
it's "do something about economic segregation in post-secondary education." People should have choices...when they don't, it's not enough to take the one option they have and make it better, you have to open up the options.
Selective, wealthy schools get their cachet because they are selective and wealthy. I completely agree with your comments earlier that "needs blind admission" doesn't give people an equal shot to get in because the wealthy kids have had more opportunities and prep before hand. But if you want Bowdoin to really have half their graduates as first generation college kids, you need to admit a lot more (because you can't predict who graduates) and change the school to make sure they have time to get up to speed and in general make them look like a community college, just one that serves fewer students for more money in a less convenient way.
I've actually read people who are quite open that they'd like to see all elite colleges & universities "leveled" through various policy changes so it doesn't matter much--so saying you went to Swarthmore has as much meaning to a future employer as saying you had a swanky debutante ball. Which solves segregation but does not seem to be what you're picturing. (?)
Otherwise, worrying about whether Bowdoin in anything like its current incarnation has an incoming class with 50 or 150 people from poor backgrounds they've handpicked to join the existing elite still seems totally beside the point. It's not IMHO "opening up options," it's again focusing on the top strata of the meritocracy and giving them even more resources and attention at the expense of the rest.
posted by mark k at 7:46 AM on July 21, 2016
Selective, wealthy schools get their cachet because they are selective and wealthy. I completely agree with your comments earlier that "needs blind admission" doesn't give people an equal shot to get in because the wealthy kids have had more opportunities and prep before hand. But if you want Bowdoin to really have half their graduates as first generation college kids, you need to admit a lot more (because you can't predict who graduates) and change the school to make sure they have time to get up to speed and in general make them look like a community college, just one that serves fewer students for more money in a less convenient way.
I've actually read people who are quite open that they'd like to see all elite colleges & universities "leveled" through various policy changes so it doesn't matter much--so saying you went to Swarthmore has as much meaning to a future employer as saying you had a swanky debutante ball. Which solves segregation but does not seem to be what you're picturing. (?)
Otherwise, worrying about whether Bowdoin in anything like its current incarnation has an incoming class with 50 or 150 people from poor backgrounds they've handpicked to join the existing elite still seems totally beside the point. It's not IMHO "opening up options," it's again focusing on the top strata of the meritocracy and giving them even more resources and attention at the expense of the rest.
posted by mark k at 7:46 AM on July 21, 2016
I'm not going to challenge your experiences and observations, and there must be schools like that. But I attended elite institutions for undergrad and grad, and have spent quite a bit of time on some other elite campuses. Everything you say you did not see, I saw all the time, with the exception of age diversity -- the small liberal arts college I attended had just as little age diversity as you describe, and was the poorer for it.
How did they get the diversity of life course and life experiences without age diversity? (serious question).
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 8:33 AM on July 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
How did they get the diversity of life course and life experiences without age diversity? (serious question).
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 8:33 AM on July 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
Without age diversity you don't get the people who spent five or ten years in the military, or the person going back to school after having kids. It's a big deal but I think many small schools have not done much towards it.
posted by Dip Flash at 8:53 AM on July 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Dip Flash at 8:53 AM on July 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
Haven't listened to this podcast yet, but I can attest to how amazing the Bowdoin cafeteria is.
posted by eusebis_w_adorno at 12:01 PM on July 21, 2016
posted by eusebis_w_adorno at 12:01 PM on July 21, 2016
Anyone who actually listened to the episode would have realized that he wasn't specifically saying that food was the cause, he was using it as a place-holder example of things colleges spend money on instead of aid. Whether or not you agree with his conclusions or assumptions about what is better for the world etc, it was abundantly clear to me that the cafeteria stuff was a short hand for everything. He even spoke about building nicer dorms or saving the money to offer aid, and other money trade-offs.
posted by charles148 at 12:09 PM on July 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by charles148 at 12:09 PM on July 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
First Google result for best college food in america
Guess who is #1?
posted by stchang at 2:15 PM on July 21, 2016
Guess who is #1?
posted by stchang at 2:15 PM on July 21, 2016
a) small liberal arts colleges don't have anywhere near the same academic caliber as small rich research univisersities
Co-signing listen, lady and atoxyl that I don't believe this. My life sci PhD program was full of graduates of small liberal arts colleges -- Davidson, Dickinson, Ursinus, etc. -- who were at least as well prepared as I was, honestly probably even more so (I came from an Ivy R1). I've also been told by faculty with experience sitting on graduate admissions committees that, in fact, SLACs disproportionately send people to top-rated graduate programs.
And this makes sense to me; the quality of undergraduate academics at rich research universities is actually pretty uneven. You have lots of big names, sure, but a lot of them treat teaching with about as much effort and engagement as court-ordered community service. You're also unlikely to be penalized for mediocre or even poor teaching. At a SLAC, teaching is your main gig, so you can't blow it off to the same degree, and because you usually have few/no graduate students, if you want to do any research at all (at least in experimental sciences) you basically have to involve undergrads.
b) the academics don't matter anyway, rich/well-connected people come out of exclusive colleges because they were rich/well-connected going in
This is sorta true for middle-class-and-above white people, but doesn't appear to be true for Latinx and Black students, as well as students whose parents have fewer years of formal education. That might not be because of the academics, of course, but it does suggest that admission to a selective college can really be of value for people who are underrepresented minorities or are, e.g., the first generation to go to college in their families.
posted by en forme de poire at 5:38 PM on July 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
Co-signing listen, lady and atoxyl that I don't believe this. My life sci PhD program was full of graduates of small liberal arts colleges -- Davidson, Dickinson, Ursinus, etc. -- who were at least as well prepared as I was, honestly probably even more so (I came from an Ivy R1). I've also been told by faculty with experience sitting on graduate admissions committees that, in fact, SLACs disproportionately send people to top-rated graduate programs.
And this makes sense to me; the quality of undergraduate academics at rich research universities is actually pretty uneven. You have lots of big names, sure, but a lot of them treat teaching with about as much effort and engagement as court-ordered community service. You're also unlikely to be penalized for mediocre or even poor teaching. At a SLAC, teaching is your main gig, so you can't blow it off to the same degree, and because you usually have few/no graduate students, if you want to do any research at all (at least in experimental sciences) you basically have to involve undergrads.
b) the academics don't matter anyway, rich/well-connected people come out of exclusive colleges because they were rich/well-connected going in
This is sorta true for middle-class-and-above white people, but doesn't appear to be true for Latinx and Black students, as well as students whose parents have fewer years of formal education. That might not be because of the academics, of course, but it does suggest that admission to a selective college can really be of value for people who are underrepresented minorities or are, e.g., the first generation to go to college in their families.
posted by en forme de poire at 5:38 PM on July 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
FWIW, what I worry about more is not places like Bowdoin, but when state schools start to target higher-income, out-of-state-tuition-paying students at the expense of lower-income, in-state-tuition-paying students. My sense is that this is becoming a lot more common because of a lack of adequate state funding. My home state's largest state university, for instance, has seen the proportion of in-state students drop by nearly a third over the last ten years; meanwhile, it has spent extensively on building luxe new amenities, in large part to increase the number of out-of-state applicants. The university can then justify not admitting as many in-state students on selectivity grounds, because the pool has gotten bigger. But the net result is a loss of financial diversity in the admitted class, and fewer opportunities for students from poorer backgrounds and school districts.
posted by en forme de poire at 6:17 PM on July 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by en forme de poire at 6:17 PM on July 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
I work at Amherst College, which is similar to Bowdoin in a lot of ways and has really been successful in building a diverse student body. In my job I get to see what a subset of parents think about the school, and complaints about the food and comparisons to Bowdoin are common. One kid never went to the dining hall on campus and paid extra to eat at UMass instead!
posted by apricot at 6:27 PM on July 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by apricot at 6:27 PM on July 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
I went to Williams and the food was good but not Bowdoin good...
posted by Joseph Gurl at 4:54 PM on July 22, 2016
posted by Joseph Gurl at 4:54 PM on July 22, 2016
(I was also there on grants & loans, largely. Yay for rich colleges with awesome FA)
posted by Joseph Gurl at 4:55 PM on July 22, 2016
posted by Joseph Gurl at 4:55 PM on July 22, 2016
Need-blind admissions is a separate thing from affordability of financial aid.
It turns out that when I was at Bowdoin (before transferring away for financial reasons), they were the worst college in their category in terms of actual affordability - that is, they'd lure students like me in with good financial aid packages in first and second year, and then the aid would drop by a substantial amount in the third year, when they figured we were likely committed for the long haul. I've heard that this problem was identified, steps were taken to address it, and Bowdoin is more actually-affordable nowadays. But at the time, their financial aid packages definitely did not effectively take into consideration issues like estrangement from parents, or financial obligations of families outside of a narrow range of categories that assumed a nuclear family with parents who are married and live together or previously nuclear family with parents who are divorced and live apart, and whose only debts are of the mortgage and car payment variety. Families with non-child dependents or financial commitments/obligations, families sending two or more kids off to college for the first time during the same year, families where the parents were recently students themselves with their own student loan debt, or any other sorts of debts that upper middle class families don't tend to have, families where the parents are married and love each other and all that but live apart and maintain two households for whatever reason, etc. were all situations that were completely ignored by the financial aid of the day.
The fact that expensive private schools can sometimes give much better financial aid packages, and thus kids from poorer backgrounds should not write them off as infeasibly expensive options, is something that should be much more widely advertised. Part of that is explicitly reassuring potential students that the financial aid process is separate from the admissions process, and that their ability to pay will not be a factor in their admissions evaluation. There is still a giant amount of room for improvement in making private elite liberal arts colleges actually affordable for students from all economic backgrounds, however.
posted by eviemath at 9:13 PM on July 22, 2016 [4 favorites]
It turns out that when I was at Bowdoin (before transferring away for financial reasons), they were the worst college in their category in terms of actual affordability - that is, they'd lure students like me in with good financial aid packages in first and second year, and then the aid would drop by a substantial amount in the third year, when they figured we were likely committed for the long haul. I've heard that this problem was identified, steps were taken to address it, and Bowdoin is more actually-affordable nowadays. But at the time, their financial aid packages definitely did not effectively take into consideration issues like estrangement from parents, or financial obligations of families outside of a narrow range of categories that assumed a nuclear family with parents who are married and live together or previously nuclear family with parents who are divorced and live apart, and whose only debts are of the mortgage and car payment variety. Families with non-child dependents or financial commitments/obligations, families sending two or more kids off to college for the first time during the same year, families where the parents were recently students themselves with their own student loan debt, or any other sorts of debts that upper middle class families don't tend to have, families where the parents are married and love each other and all that but live apart and maintain two households for whatever reason, etc. were all situations that were completely ignored by the financial aid of the day.
The fact that expensive private schools can sometimes give much better financial aid packages, and thus kids from poorer backgrounds should not write them off as infeasibly expensive options, is something that should be much more widely advertised. Part of that is explicitly reassuring potential students that the financial aid process is separate from the admissions process, and that their ability to pay will not be a factor in their admissions evaluation. There is still a giant amount of room for improvement in making private elite liberal arts colleges actually affordable for students from all economic backgrounds, however.
posted by eviemath at 9:13 PM on July 22, 2016 [4 favorites]
« Older "There is something you can do." | ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by leotrotsky at 3:40 PM on July 20, 2016