It is widely assumed that admission to elite U.S. universities is based solely on academic merit--the best and brightest are admitted to Harvard, Yale, and their peer institutions as determined by test scores and GPA, and not by lineage or family income. But does reality support those expectations? Or are admissions governed by a logic that rewards socioeconomic status while disguising it as personal merit?
"The Power of Privilege" examines the nexus between social class and admissions at America's top colleges from the vantage point of Yale University, a key actor in the history of higher education. It is a documented history of the institutional gatekeepers, confident of the validity of socially biased measures of merit, seeking to select tomorrow's leadership class from among their economically privileged clientele. Acceptance in prestigious colleges still remains beyond the reach of most students except those from high-income professional families. Ultimately, the author suggests reforms that would move America's top schools toward becoming genuine academic meritocracies.

It is widely assumed that admission to elite U.S. universities is based solely on academic merit - the best and brightest are admitted to Harvard, Yale, and their peer institutions as determined by test scores and GPA, and not by lineage or family income. But does reality support those expectations? Or are admissions governed by a logic that rewards socioeconomic status while disguising it as personal merit? The Power of Privilege examines the nexus between social class and admissions at America's top colleges from the vantage point of Yale University, a key figure in the history of higher education. It is a documented history of the institutional gatekeepers, confident of the validity of socially biased measures of merit, seeking to select tomorrow's leadership class from among their economically privileged clientele. Acceptance in prestigious colleges still remains beyond the reach of most students except those from high-income professional families. Ultimately, the author proposes reforms that would move America's top schools toward becoming genuine academic meritocracies.

This book studies Oxford University's transformation-and the political hazards for academics that ensued-when, after World War II, it changed from a private liberal-arts club with aristocratic pretensions into a state university heavily committed to the natural sciences, and with a middle-class constituency and a meritocratic ethos. Despite these changes, the author shows that Oxford has not been able to elude its long-standing Brideshead Revisited reputation. This antiquated image became a source of difficulties when the Labour Party in the 1960's sought to expand educational opportunities to promote the cause of social justice. In the 1980's the University again came under attack, this time for its supposedly anti-industrial ethos, as Margaret Thatcher's Conservative Party attempted to reverse Britain's economic decline. The largely unrecognized process of internal change at Oxford is shown to have been driven by two distinct dynamics: its scientists took advantage of huge increases in government funding to build departmental empires, while an informal alliance of reform-minded arts dons strove to renew Oxford's collegiate traditions of scholarly excellence and self-governance. When the scientists and reformist dons revitalized the University in the light of changed social and economic conditions, they inadvertently eroded the foundations of its autonomy. During its transformation, Oxford lost its upper-class ties, its financial self-sufficiency, and its deferential friends in government. As a result, it was at its weakest when the Thatcher government sought to harness universities to the goals of economic competition. Consequently, Thatcherites successfully rewrote the compact between the state and universities, including the abolition of tenure for new faculty and the elimination of block grant funding. Thus, paradoxically, Oxford's internal renewal coincided with a surrender of its institutional independence.

This book studies Oxford University's transformation--and the political hazards for academics that ensued--when, after World War II, it changed from a private liberal-arts club with aristocratic pretensions into a state university heavily committed to the natural sciences, and with a middle-class constituency and a meritocratic ethos.
Despite these changes, the author shows that Oxford has not been able to elude its long-standing "Brideshead Revisited" reputation. This antiquated image became a source of difficulties when the Labour Party in the 1960's sought to expand educational opportunities to promote the cause of social justice. In the 1980's the University again came under attack, this time for its supposedly anti-industrial ethos, as Margaret Thatcher's Conservative Party attempted to reverse Britain's economic decline.
The largely unrecognized process of internal change at Oxford is shown to have been driven by two distinct dynamics: its scientists took advantage of huge increases in government funding to build departmental empires, while an informal alliance of reform-minded arts dons strove to renew Oxford's collegiate traditions of scholarly excellence and self-governance.
When the scientists and reformist dons revitalized the University in the light of changed social and economic conditions, they inadvertently eroded the foundations of its autonomy. During its transformation, Oxford lost its upper-class ties, its financial self-sufficiency, and its deferential friends in government. As a result, it was at its weakest when the Thatcher government sought to harness universities to the goals of economic competition. Consequently, Thatcherites successfully rewrote the compact between the state and universities, including the abolition of tenure for new faculty and the elimination of block grant funding. Thus, paradoxically, Oxford's internal renewal coincided with a surrender of its institutional independence.

What can a college admissions officer safely predict about the future of a 17-year-old? Are the best and the brightest students the ones who can check off the most correct boxes on a multiple-choice exam? Or are there better ways of measuring ability and promise? In this penetrating and revealing look at high-stakes standardised admissions tests, Joseph Soares demonstrates the far-reaching and mostly negative impact of the tests on American life and calls for nothing less than a national policy change. SAT Wars presents a roadmap for rethinking college admissions that moves us past the statistically weak and socially divisive SAT/ACT. The author advocates for evaluation tools with a greater focus on what youth actually accomplish in high school as a more reliable indicator of qualities that really matter in one's life and to one's ability to contribute to society. This up-to-date book features contributions by well-known experts, including a piece from Daniel Golden, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his reporting in the Wall Street Journal on admissions, and a chapter on alternative tests from Robert Sternberg, who is the world's most-cited living authority on educational research. As we continue to debate the use and misuse of standardised testing, SAT Wars will be important reading for a wide audience, including college administrators and faculty, high school guidance counsellors, education journalists, and parents.