Aidan Marzo

October 6th 2015

Writing 015- Professor Debelius
Don't Leave Your Kid Jobless

"Don't Send Your Kid to the Ivy League" was written by William Deresiewicz
and published in the magazine, The News Republic on July 21st 2014.
Deresiewicz was actually a professor at Yale University from 1998 to 2008
before deciding to advocate for high education reformation. In "Don't Send
Your Kid to the Ivy League", Deresiewicz outlines the problems of the college
process and higher education. He points out the high levels of mental
disorders in college students and the overemphasis on "return on
investment" when referring to the value of a college education. Moreover,
Deresiewicz advocates that the real value of education isn't how much
money one makes, but how one builds oneself. The Ivy League is producing
motivated kids from high-income families, but these kids have no idea what
their next step in life is. Deresiewicz argues from both personal experienceafter spending 24 years in the Ivy League as both a student and a professorand other research that the current state of higher education supports social
immobility and that the private college education is overvalued.
(Deresiewicz)

Deresiewicz's concerns regarding higher education and the college process

are largely valid. Much of what Deresiewicz describes is very relatable as I
am a product of this system myself. I have been on the receiving end of
dozens of SATs, APs, and score delivery receipts and I realize that I'm lucky
enough to not have to worry too much about the costs. But what about the
thousands of other applicants who do? Deresiewicz touches briefly on the
financial issues in high education and points to the inequality found in the
college process. I agree with Deresiewicz that the college process is unfair
and tremendously influenced by one's socioeconomic status. However,
Deresiewicz also oversimplifies and undervalues private universities and
thereby fails to acknowledge life after college and the issues that students
face upon graduation.

Firstly, I agree with Deresiewicz that parental income largely influences ones'
ability to attend more selective universities (Deresiewicz 9). Standardized
tests are one of the main factors of influence in the college admissions
process. They are supposed to provide a level playing field to test students'
academic abilities. However, what they really measure is parental income
and socioeconomic class. According to a 2009 report by The Journal of Blacks
in High Education, parental income tracks extremely closely to SAT scores
and is one of the best indicators in predicting a student's score. (Why Family
Income Differences Don't Explain the Racial Gap in SAT Scores.) The SAT has
little to do with "what you know" and "how smart you are". Rather it is more

a measure of how many SAT prep books you bought and how much money
you spent on SAT tutors. Personally, I've taken the SAT 3 times (not including
the dozens of practice tests) and spent hundreds of dollars on prep books
and classes. After all this time spent, you would expect my improving scores
to be some sort of reflection of an increase of knowledge and learning. In
reality, I had learned nothing of value from my hours of practice, only the
skills and techniques necessary to do well on the test. Even the SAT tutors
that I've met agree that their job isn't to educate the student, but to teach
him/her how to take the test. The SAT is inherently skewed favorably towards
those of higher economic background by testing students on how much
money they spent rather than on their intellectual ability.

Not only is the SAT unfair and biased towards students of upper class, but
the organization that administers the test, College Board, has made it even
harder for low income families to even take the tests. It costs $54.50 to take
the SAT with the essay, while the SAT subject tests, often required for many
universities, can cost up to $26 each. There is also an $11.25 fee per score
report charged by College Board to send scores to your select colleges.
Assuming that the average student takes the SAT I (with essay) twice and
two additional subject tests, the total cost of an average student would be
around $200. (FAQs About the SAT) This is the minimum cost excluding any
extra services, prep material or AP tests. It is well known that if a student
wants to attend a more selective university, he/she will most likely have to

take several AP tests along with the SAT and SAT subject tests. Although
College Board does give up to four fee waivers per student, the remaining
expenses can still be a financial burden to low-income families.

One might wonder, why does College Board, a supposed not-for-profit

corporation charge so much for its services? That's because, despite its label
as a "not-for-profit", it rakes in immense amounts of revenue and ends up
with substantial surpluses- of which they fork to their financial officers.
According to Americans for Educational Testing Reform, in 2009, College
Board had a surplus of $66 million, a large surplus one would expect to find
at a for-profit corporation. Instead of offering lower-income students more fee
waivers or finding a way to subsidize these costs, College Board distributes
these surpluses among their employees and financial officers, including
Gaston Caperton- the president of College Board- who received $1.3 million
in compensation in 2009 (Lorin). I agree with Deresiewicz in that "SAT scores
should be weighted to account for socioeconomic factors." (Deresiewicz 11)
If this doesn't happen, which it likely won't due to College Board's appetite
for money, a new standardized test needs to be introduced that evaluates
students on a more level playing field. As of right now, College Board is
taking advantage of their standardized testing to feed their financial officers
millions of dollars.

While I agree with Deresiewicz in that the college process is deeply faulted,
Deresiewicz fails to recognize the financial burden of college and how
students may cope with their student debt post graduation. As of 2014,
student debt has risen to over $1 trillion nationwide (Smith). It seems naive
of Deresiewicz to simply dismiss the importance of "return on investment"
for college students and the value of a private school education (Deresiewicz
5). While Deresiewicz has good intentions in attempting to bring out the
deeper meaning of education, one cannot ignore that college, like any other
educational institution- preschool to grad school- is an investment. With
college tuition rates on the continued rise, students now have to think about
how they are going to pay off their student debt once they graduate.
According to the 2015 College Return On Investment (ROI) study by
PayScale, out of the top 25 colleges with the best ROI over a 20-year period,
20 of them are private schools while only 5 are public. Moreover, out of the
top ten best value colleges, only one of them is a public college (College
Education Value Rankings - PayScale 2013 College ROI Report). PayScale has
come to these conclusions by determining the cost of attending a school and
then comparing it to the expected future income of the graduates over a
certain time period. Considering the current student loan crisis, this data
suggests that the vast majority of best value colleges are in fact private
schools. These private schools have higher chances providing larger streams
of income post graduation and reducing the probability default on loans.

Another study, "Estimating the Return to College Selectivity over the Career
Using Administrative Earning Data", found that for black students, Hispanic
students and students from less-educated families, the more selective the
college they attended, the greater their returns post graduation (Dale, Stacy,
and Alan B. Krueger). Given that the majority of highly selective schools are
private, we can come to the conclusion that for these students, attending
private colleges increases their socioeconomic mobility. Deresiewicz believes
that the Ivy League schools and private universities promote inequality but in
fact it is these schools that allow students from lower-income backgrounds to
rise up (Deresiewicz 9).

Another problem that Deresiewicz fails to address is the real world

application of one's college education. You graduate college not only with
your GPA and resume but your school's reputation (or lack thereof) and
alumni base. For students interested in entering exclusive industries, their
school's reputation and alumni base can play a critical role. Fashion design is
one such industry in which alumni connections and school reputation can
help fast track a student into the working industry and provide valuable
points of entry.

Deresiewicz wants a world where "...you don't have to go to the Ivy League,
or any private college, to get a first rate education." The problem with
Deresiewicz's wish is that it totally ignores life after college. Deresiewicz

wants all students to have a "mind-expanding, soul-enriching experience that

a liberal arts education provides." (Deresiewicz 12) Why should all students
go through a liberal arts education if they already aware of their passions?
Shouldn't students interested in engineering go to an engineering school and
students interested in fashion design go to a fashion design school?
Deresiewicz's one-size-fits-all view of the liberal arts education is both
illogical and inconvenient in the real world.

Deresiewicz's Don't Send Your Kid to the Ivy League is a refreshing read
compared to the majority of content written on higher education.
Deresiewicz addresses many problems associated with the current state of
high education. I agree with Deresiewicz in that the college process is largely
biased against those of lower socioeconomic status. However Deresiewicz
oversimplifies his argument for a pro-liberal arts education and ignores the
post graduate issues that students face.

Works Cited

"College Education Value Rankings - PayScale 2013 College ROI Report."

PayScale. Bloomberg Businessweek, May 2013. Web. 03 Oct. 2015.
<http://www.payscale.com/college-education-value-2013>.
Dale, Stacy, and Alan B. Krueger. Estimating the Return to College Selectivity
over the Career Using Administrative Earning Data. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
U,
2011. Http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/. 16 Feb. 2011. Web. 4 Oct.
2015. <http://www.mathematica
mpr.com/~/media/publications/PDFs/education/returntocollege.pdf>.
Deresiewicz, William. "Don't Send Your Kid to the Ivy League."
www.newsrepublic.com. N.p., 21 July 2014. Web. 06 Oct. 2015.
<http://www.newrepublic.com/article/118747/ivy-league-schools-areoverrated-send-your-kids-elsewhere>.
"FAQs About the SAT." About the Tests. College Board, n.d. Web. 04 Oct.
2015.
<https://sat.collegeboard.org/about-tests/sat/faq>.
Lorin, Janet. "Nonprofit Head of College Board Paid More Than Harvard's
Leader." Bloomberg.com. Bloomberg, 26 Aug. 2011. Web. 03 Oct.
2015.
<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-08-26/nonprofithead-of-college-board-paid-more-than-harvard-s-leader>.
Smith, Craig. "Student Debt." The Education Digest 79.7 (2014): 426. ProQuest. Web. 4 Oct. 2015.
"Why Family Income Differences Don't Explain the Racial Gap in SAT
Scores." The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education.62 (2009): 102. ProQuest. Web. 4 Oct. 2015.
2015 PayScale College ROI Report. Rep. PayScale, 2014. Web. 4 Oct. 2015.
<http://www.payscale.com/college-roi?page=2>.

Aidan,
Great title! Your Writers Report mentions that it was hard to choose
one specific aspect of the article to address; I think you made a good choice
in narrowing down your points of agreement and disagreement to financial
aspects of the Ivy League question. This keeps the paper focused and lends
itself well to being supported by the statistics from your research. Your
choice to focus on one aspect also led you to an interesting and arguable
thesis. While I like the complex thesis (agreeing with some of D., disagreeing
with other aspects), I think the result is a little long---could you apply some of
our work on editing for conciseness to the wording of your thesis?

There are a few places (see margin notes) where you seem to assume
that your reader has closely read Dont Send Your Kid (which I have, of
course). But a strong argument shouldnt assume---make sure to show, with
a quick quote or paraphrase, exactly which point or assumption from the
article youre proving or disproving.
-Casey
B+/A-