Aidan Marzo

December 16th 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 New Republic on July 21st
2014. Deresiewicz was 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 frequency 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 educations real value is how one builds oneself,
not how much money one makes. 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 experience, as a
student and a professor, and other research that the current state of higher
education supports social immobility and that 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 have gone through the system myself. Ive received dozens of

SATs, APs, and score delivery receipts and I realize that I'm lucky enough to
not have to worry about the costs. But what about the thousands of other
applicants who do? I agree with Deresiewicz that the college process is bias
towards the wealthy however, Deresiewicz also oversimplifies life after
college and undervalues private university education.
Firstly, I agree with Deresiewicz that parental income largely influences
students application strength (Deresiewicz 9). Standardized tests are one of
the main factors of influence in the college admissions process. The tests 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 Higher
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).
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 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, Ive 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 only 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 the 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. 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 College Board, a supposed not-for-profit
corporation charges so much for its services? Despite its label as a "not-forprofit", College Board 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 student 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 distribute millions of dollars
to their financial officers.
While I agree with Deresiewicz that the college process is deeply
faulted, Deresiewicz fails to recognize the severity of colleges increasing
tuition costs and how students may cope with their debt post graduation.
Deresiewicz simply glosses over the issue of rising tuition despite the fact
that in 2014, student debt had 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, it cannot be ignored 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 paying off their student debt in the future. Deresiewicz offers no real

solution to his Ivy League problem other than for students to transfer to a
public university., a solution that addresses the financial burden of college
in no way whatsoever. 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 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 a higher chance to provide large streams of
income post graduation and reduce the probability of loan default.
Another study, "Estimating the Return to College Selectivity over the
Career Using Administrative Earnings 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, et al.). 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 over
exaggerates how the Ivy League is ...exacerbating inequality, retarding
social mobility, perpetuating privilege and creating an elite that is isolated
from the society that its supposed to lead. (Deresiewicz 8) Today, this is

simply not true, as about 44% of the Harvard class of 2018 and class of
2019 are upper or lower class (Freed). While Deresiewicz takes data from
over 9 years ago to support his claims, more recent findings show that a
large percentage of Harvards freshman class are middle to lower class.
Deresiewicz believes that the Ivy League schools and private universities
promote inequality when in fact the opposite may be true and that it may be
the Ivy League that helps facilitate social mobility (Deresiewicz 9).
Another problem that Deresiewicz fails to address is the real world
application of a college education. Students graduate college not only with
their GPA and resume but their 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. College education isn't the final stage of learning. A lot of
what one learns about a field is learned through personal experience in the
industry. Sometimes these industries are extremely hard to enter which is
why colleges specifically tailored to these industries can help open doors for
their students. If a student wants to work in fashion, how is he/she going to
enter such an exclusive industry without the opportunities that fashiontailored private schools provide to their graduates? There is no way that a
public university student can compete with other students who've graduated

from well known fashion institutions like Pratt's School of Design or Fashion
Institute of Technology.
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 accurately addresses many problems associated with the
current state of higher education and college process. I agree with
Deresiewicz in that the college admissions process is biased against those of
lower socioeconomic status. However, Deresiewicz oversimplifies his
argument for a pro-liberal arts education and ignores the postgraduate
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.mathematicampr.com/~/media/publications/PDFs/educati
on/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>.

Freed, David, and Idrees Kahloon. "Class of 2019 by the Numbers." The
Harvard Crimson. N.p., 2015. Web. 15 Dec. 2015.

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/nonprofit-

head-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>.