Clippings on School Admissions (Folder)

    F. t i  /



n



Making It, as a Black, at Harvard and Radcliffe
NEW YORK TIMES. 1 1 / 2 4 / 7  6

By David L . Evans

CAMBRIDGE, Mass.— So much has 
been written about the illegitimacy of 
special recruiting efforts for minority 
students,- black students’ disillusion­
ment and "reverse discrimination” that 
the mere presence  of blacks at selec­
tive institutions has more and more 
begun to ilm-ply substandard oreden- 
tials or relaxed admissions Rolioies. 
Why is this? One reason is the almost 
total absence of news-media coveaiage 
of the successes of black students. This 
one-sided coverage ha®, in many cases, 
become an excuse for inaction and a 
belief that nothing can be done with­
out "lowering the standards.”

Harvard and Radcliffe Colleges have 
no special programs for minority stu­
dents, but the more than 400 black 
undergraduates here have not escaped 
this unfair criticism.

The first marshal of the Harvard 
College Class of 1976 visited the 
People’s Republic of China, was a 
Harvard National Scholar, a member 
of the news board of The Harvard 
Crimson, and was admitted to the 
graduate progtam- in East Asian Stu­
dies at Harvard.

The. All-American captain of the 
197S Ivy League championship football 
team now plays for the Chicago Bears 
and during his four years at Harvard 
was viewed as a campus folk hero!

(“You couldn’t meet a more genuine 
person,” a  classmate said.)

The treasurer of the Radcliffe Class 
of 1976 chose to study sociology at the 
London School or Economics on a 
Rotary Fellowship instead o>f accept­
ing a place in the graduate school a t  
either Princeton or Yale. She is sorely 
missed at Harvard, especially a t the 
Kennedy Institute of Politics, where 
she served on the student advisory 
committee.

The president of the Crimson Key 
(1975-76), who is now in his first 
year at Harvard Law School, was also 
a marshal of the Harvard Class of 
1976, a National Scholar, and a direc­
tor of the Harvard Cooperative Society.

All four o f these members of the 
Harvard/Radcliffe Class of 1976 — 
Ronald Wade, Danny Jiggetts, Mary 
Johnson, and Marvin Bagwell —  are 
black. Their accomplishments contra­
dict the recent publicity about black 
students on selective college cam­
puses. That image is in need of a re­
appraisal, lest it continue to register 
as one of individuals undeserving of 
the desirable positions that they oc­
cupy. But despite the adverse publicity 
of the last six or seven years, black 
men and women continue to excel in 
diverse ways reflective of the best 
Harvard traditions.

Although averaging above the 94th 
percentile on the Scholastic Aptitude 
Test, and thus belonging to the cream 
of the crop of all college-bound teen­

agers, black students who come to deserving of a fairer shake and of the 
Haa-vard far too often receive the respect commensurate with their dis-
coolest, most ambivalent reception played abilities and courage as in-
givey to any upwardly-mobile ethnic , dividuals.
group that has ever entered these ivied One would hope that by now a dif-
walls. The polite black student still ferent picture would emerge from this
finds some of his white peers suspi­
cious and probing.

“They are often trying to silently 
confirm that ‘awful something,’ ” ex­
plains one black student, "so even a 
casual conversation takes on a nasty 
competitiveness. I feel I have to be 
wary of making the little mistake that 
-will confirm what they are seeking— 
proof that ‘reverse discrimination’ is 
what brought me here.”

Yet the average black student at 
Harvard/Radcliffe, like his or her 
white counterpart, is in academic rank 
“group III.” This rank or a higher one 
qualifies a  student for the Dean’s List.

There is something meritorious 
about young people who persist to­
ward an education in this often un­
settling environment when they are 

told that they are not qualified to be 
here, when there is only a handful of 
black faculty members and adminis­
trators as examples (despite Harvard’s 
affirmative-action plan) and when the 
smallest gathering of black students is 
labeled self-imposed apartheid, or anti- 
intellectualism. Although beset by 
many discouragements, black students 
have made outstanding contributions 
to the university community; they are

particular campus than that painted by 
seven years of limited news coverage.

David L. Evans is senior adm issions 
officer  o f  H arvard/R adcliffe.



T H E  N E W  Y O R K  WEUNKSDAY.  V C Y O B E R  li,  1'),

About Education

Report Backs Colleges on Use of Race as Entry Criterioi
By EDWARD B. FISKE

Colleges and professional schools are 
vigorously engaged in affirmative-ac- 
tion'^adnlBslons-program, and any re­
strictions on their freedom to use race 
as a criterion for acceptance could sub­
stantially reduce the participation of 
minority students in higher education, 
according to two officials of the Educa­
tional Testing Service.

These were the basic conclusions of 
a study conducted by Warren W. Will­
ingham and Hunter M. Breland of the 
service for the Carnegie Council on 
Policy Studies in Higher Education.

The two research psychologists found 
that, by and large, graduate and profes­
sional schools were enrolling minority- 
group students in roughly the same 
proportion as these students were rep­
resented in college graduating classes. 
On the other hand, blacks and other 
minority-group students arrive at both 
college and graduate and professional 
schools with “substantially lower” 
grade-point averages and standardized- 
test scores than whites.

“To us this is evidence of strong af­
firmative-action programs on the part 
of the selective colleges and universi­
ties as well as medical and law 
schools," said Mr. Willingham. “It also 
suggests that if you do not permit 
schools to take race into account— if 
you insist that they look only at grades 
and test scores— then the effect will 
inevitably be to  reduce the number of 
minority students in admission.”

The role of race In admission to col­
leges and universities has become a 
major issue in higher education in the 
wake of a suit brought by Allan Bakke

against the Medical School of the Uni­
versity of California at Davis.

Mr. Bakke, who is white and was 
denied admission to the school, alleged 
that he was a victim of “reverse dis­
crimination” because minority candi­
dates of lesser academic ability were 
accepted through a special admissions 
program. The United States Supreme 
Court has agreed to rule on the case.

The Testing Service’s study was part 
of a report on “Selective Admissions 
in Higher Education” published several 
days ago by the Carnegie Council. The 
report concluded that race was a rele­
vant factor—among many others— în 
determining who should be admitted 
to colleges and professional schools. 
The council also opposed fixed quotas 
and urged colleges to put their admis­
sions criteria “up front” for public 
scrutiny.

The study, which was carried out 
with the assistance of two consultants, 
Richard I. Ferrin and Mary Fruen, 
found considerable evidence of a com­
mitment in the admissions policies of 
American colleges and universities.

Number of Whites Entering
At the college level, for example, ac­

cording to data from the American 
Council on Education, the percentage 
of nonwhites in entering classes in­
creased from 10.1 percent in 1967 to 
13.8 percent in 1976. Mr. Breland noted 
that the latter figure were “still some­
what lower than the percentage of mi­
norities in the 18-year-old population.”

On the other hand, the figures for 
minority college graduates show a con­
siderably different picture. Figures

from the National Board of Graduate 
Education indicate that in the spriv 
of 1974 minority students received only 
7.8 percent of bachelor’s degrees 
awarded in this country. According to 
the Council on Education nonwhite stu­
dents made up 11.4 percent of those 
entering four years previously.

“The basic problem seems to be 
retention rather than unwillingness to 
accept minorities,” said Mr. Willing­
ham. “For various reasons, including 
financial problems and the general 
level of educational disadvantage, mi­
nority students are persisting in college 
at the same rate as whites.”

Further evidence of colleges’ commit­
ment is seen in figures on the relation­
ship of academic ability to college 
selectivity, according to the Education­
al Testing Service researchers;

Mr. Willingham noted that blacks 
i also tended to be under-represented in 

moderately selective colleges and over­
represented in colleges of low selectivi­
ty. “The situation seems to be that 
blacks, especially the most able ones, 
are either getting financial aid and 
going to the selective schools, or they 
go to the community college down the 
street, or to predominently black col­
leges,” he said. “They don’t go to the 
colleges in the middle.”

The researchers found similar pat­
terns in the admissions policies of 
medical and law schools.

In the fall of 1975, according to fig­
ures from the Association of American 
Medical Colleges, 41 percent of black 
applicants were accepted by medical 
schools, in contrast to 37 percent of 
whites. Mr. Breland noted, though, that

f two predominantly black medica 
schools in the sample were discounted 
then the acceptance rates would hi 
“roughly equal.”

Further figures, however, show that 
medical schools were, on the average, 
accepting blacks with less demonstrat­
ed academic ability than whites. Blacks 
accepted by medical schools in 1975 

. had a mean grade-point average of 2.89 
in college while those not accepted had 
a mean average of 2.70. Whites who 
were accepted had a mean of 3.52, 
whereas those not accepted had an 
average of 3.28, or 0.39 points above 
that of accepted blacks.

Similar patterns hold true in relation 
to scores on the Medical College Ad­
mission Test, the researchers found. 
“Obviously we have affirmative action 
going,” said Mr. Willingham.

The Data on Law Schools
Regarding law schools, a 1977 study 

by the Law School Admission Council 
reported that whereas 59 percent of 
white applicants to law schools were 
accepted, the figure for blacks was only 
39 percent.

“This looks like discrimination, but 
it really isn’t,” said Mr. Breland. “If 
you look at the grade-point averages 
and results of the law boards, you see 
that within any ability level the black 
acceptance rate is higher.”

Among students with Law School 
Admission Test scores of 500 to 549 
and undergraduate grade point aver­
ages of 3.00 to 3.24, for 
example, 90 percent of black applicants 
were accepted as opposed to 84 percent 
of Chicanos, 60 percent of “other mi­
norities? and only 50 percent of whites.



The Decline of Black Enrollme^fln Universities I
B y Solveig Torvik

After a decade of battling to 
break down the barriers to a 
college degree, many black stu­
dents seem to be turning then- 
backs on the ivory tower,

They are disappearing in dra­
matic numbers from the California 
campuses they once fought to 
enter, particularly in graduate pro­
grams and at the more prestigious 
universities.

The most telling evidence that 
something has gone awry with 
efforts to get minorities into the 
higher reaches of higher education 
is the follow'ing:

1 • Stanford University has seen
its mmority graduate student en­
rollment decline, from a total of 533 
in 1973 to 388 last year. Minority 
undergraduate enrollment, mean- 
whEe, increased except for Ameri­
can Indians.

• Graduate school enrollment 
by blacks at the University of 
California campuses has dropped 
by nearly 20 percent in four years, 
the graduate enrollment of ehica- 
nos has declined by 4 percent and 
American Indian enrollm ent is 
down by nearly 8 percent.

Future of Muni Fares
The San Francisco Public Utilitira Commission 

received a report yesterday spelling out the 
consequences in revenue and ridership of a 
number of proposed Municipal Railway fare 
increases.

federal funds, he said.

“Somewhere down the road there will be a 
Muni fare increase,” PUC General Manager Rich­
ard Sklar said. Yesterday’s report, prepared by the 
private consulting firm of Gruen, Gruen and 
Associates, tried to predict what would happen if a 
various fare increases were enacted.

The Gruen study estimated that a simple 
increase in the base fare to 30 cents, with nO 
change in the flve-cent student and senior citizen 
discount fare, would provide an extra $1.2 million 
in revenue.

It would mean, however, a 2 percent decline in. 
the number of riders. '

Muni’s basic problem, Sklar said, is that while 
it cost $38 million to operate the transit system in 
fiscal 1968-89, and $85 million in fiscal 1978-79, it 
will cost an estimated $186 million to provide 
essentially the same service ten years from now.

An increase to a 50-cent fare, with a ten-cent 
discount fare, would mean an extra $14 million, but 
a 12 percent drop in riders, the study estimated.

“No fare increase in the world is going to 
make up that entire amount,” Sklar said. An 
increase could make up some of the difference, 
with the rest coming from increased state and

The study noted, however, that even an ■ 
increase to a 75-cent fare during peak commute' 
hours, with a 5&cent fare for other hours, would 
provide for Muni’s financial needs only through 
fiscal year 198384, assuming the current levels of 
state and federal funds remain constant.

er, are stronger academically than 
before, and Stanford is admitting a 
larger percentage of those who do 
apply, he said.

■Walker said it does not seem to 
be a case of graduate work at 
Stanford proving too difficult for 
minorities because their retention 
rate is about the same as for whites.

“Minority students are begin­
ning to find that the Ph.D. is not as 
attractive economically as it once 
was,” he said.

Since 1972, Stanford’s enroll­
ment of new black graduate stu­
dents dropped over 30 percent, 
while chicanes dropped 25 percent. 
But 12 more chicanes enrolled this 
year than last, a possible reflection 
of the growing numbers of chicane 
students completing undergradu­
ate degrees. The decline continued 
this year for blacks.

• At the same time, UC’s un­
dergraduate black enrollment de­
clined nearly six percent, and 
chicane and American Indian un­
dergraduate enrollm ent has in­
creased.

whose personnel recruiters seek 
minority students fresh out of 
college and lure them with good 
salaries and management training 
opportunities. Many of these stu­
dents are too poor to continue 
financially unrewarding graduate 
studies.

“There’s a  ̂feeling we don’t 
want them,” Cox said. “That’s not 
true.” The Bakke decision by the 
U.S. Supreme Court does allow UC 
to use race as a factor in admis­
sions, she noted.

through teaching assistantships and 
grants. Financial aid has not d*a- 
clined for those at the m aster’s 
degree level, so that is not a factor 
either. Walker said. ,

The declines in minority enroll­
ment, for which educators have no 
clear explanation have come at a 
time when graduate and under­
graduate enrollment at four-year 
colleges has held steady or in­
creased. These changes mirror a 
national trend.

Chronic lack of financial aid, 
the psychological impact of the 
Bakke decision and even allega­
tions of “Institutional racism” are 
all suggested as reasons for the 
decline on many campuses. The 
drop in enrollment of minority 
students reflects an equal drop in 
applications.

Seeking the cause, however, 
educators most often cite a “brain 
drain” by businesses and industries

The decline is expected to 
intensify the shortage of minorities 
in professorial ranks. Universities 
already under the gun of federal 
affirm ative action requirements 
complain they are unable to find 
enough qualified minority profes-

“They’re getting creamed off 
by industry,” said Alice C. Cox, 
assistant vice president for student 
academic services at UC. Businesses 
holding government contracts also 
are monitored for their minority 
hiring practices under federal law.

Some say minority students 
have been discouraged from trying 
to enter graduate and professional 
programs since Allan Bakke won 
admission to UC Davis Medical 
School with a lawsuit charging 
reverse discrimination.

Jay Jones, president of the 
Black Law Students Association at 
Berkeley, contended that the uni­
versity never did defend its special 
admissions program for minorities 
wholeheartedly. That perception 
has filtered down into the commu­
nity and shows up in the number of 
minority applicants to law school, 
he said. Normally 280 to 300 minori­
ty students apply to Boalt Hall, 
Jones said. This year there were 
only 200.

Stanford has not tightened c*- 
altered its admissions procedures in  
any way regarding minorities, h e  
said, and it has no “quota” o f  
mmority seats.

Another factor, according to 
Jones, is that many graduate pro­
grams offered by universities faU to 
prepare students to work on the 
special problems of minority com­
munities, so would-be students are 
finding other means of bringing 
about social change.

“I think the pressure is off,” 
said John Leonard, chairman of 
Berkeley’s Graduate Assembly, re-“ 
garding university recruitment of 
minorities.

“They can come to the univer­
sity on the university’s terms,” 
Leonard said. He contended the 
university is less inclined to adapt 
Itself to the needs of minorities 
than it was when they first ap­
peared on campus in the ’60s.

UC is now trying to identify 
“barriers” to minority students that 
might be preventing their enroll­
ment.

A survey of 129 members of the 
National Association of State Uni­
versities and Land Grant Colleges 
showed black graduate school en­
rollment dropped nearly 2 percent 
between 1976 and 1978 while all 
other categories increased.

Stanford officials express cau­
tious hope that they have stemmed 
the tide: In 1979 four more minority 
students enrolled in graduate pro­
grams than last year.

Associate dean Arthur Walker, 
asked to explain the pattern of 
apparent dis^fection of minorities 
for Stanford s graduate programs, 
said, “It’s a bit of a mystery to us.”

He discounted Stanford’s high 
tuition as a factor, since Ph.D. 
students, with the ekceptloii W  
those hi eflucSHon, are support^



. CXCIII NO. 68^ it

Cream of the Crop?
Elite Colleges Consider 
Many Factors in Search 
For a Mix of Students

Going Beyond Test Scores, 

Duke Panel Seeks Talent, 
Diversity and Also ‘Spark’

Gumbo of Porkers & Whizzes

By Anthony Ramirez
Staff Reporter of T h e  Wa l l  St r e e t  J o urn al

DURHAM, N .C .-It 's  a sunlit Thursday 
morning, and around a long wooden table, a 
college admissions committee squints at 
thick books of computer printouts and 
argues about a black high-school senior with 
much promise but bad grades.

One of 12 children from a Detroit ghetto 
family, he wants to attend Duke University 
here, but his case perplexes admissions offi 
cials. Although they want to admit more 
blacks, this young man ranks in the bottom 
fifth of his class, and his scores are just av­
erage on the Scholastic Aptitude Test, which 
is said to measure college potential. “He’s 
scary,” mutters Edward Lingenheid, Duke’s 
admissions director. Yet the Massachusetts 
prep school that the student is attending on 
an affirmative-action scholarship is one of 
the best private schools in the country. It 
backs him strongly, saying his character 
and leadership ability are outstanding. 
Painstaking Process

After a few minutes of sharp debate, the 
committee, swayed mainly by the school’s 
praise, decides to accept him. He is one of 
more than 6,800 high-school seniors who 
want to get into Duke’s freshman class next 
fall. Only 1,000 will make it.

Every year, elite colleges and universi­
ties get tens of thousands of applications 
from anxious high schoolers throughout the 
nation-and launch a painstaking selection 
process that most other schools don’t bother 
with. By mid-April, the colleges tell most of 
their applicants that they aren’t getting in. 
Watching the admissions committee’s delib­
erations here at Duke for a few days shows 
the sifting and sorting that lands some stu­
dents in the college of their choice, and 
leaves others-often with almost identical 
grades and test scores-rejected.

lik e  other selective institutions, Duke 
wants a “diverse” student body. The reason 
tng is that a kind of gumbo of top students 
who are different, either in the lives they 
have led or the talents they possess, pro­
duces opportunities for learning that books 
don’t provide. To admissions officers, get­
ting the right mix requires the work of rea­
sonable people trying to judge reasonably. 
To high schoolers and their parents, the pro­
cess can often mean apprehension and mys­
tery, followed by disappointment.
Many Pressures

The mysteiy is an inevitable result of the 
highly subjective criteria many schools use. 
Stanford University, for example, wants ac­
ademic ability and a “high energy level,” 
says Fred Hargadon, admissions dean, but 
doesn’t stipulate minimum grades or stan­
dardized test scores. Mr. Hargadon men­
tions a high-school student who runs a busi­
ness earning $120,000 a year, “We find that 
Interesting,” he says. Harvard University 
will admit students with average scores on 
aptitude te s ts -if the students “add some­
thing to the campus,” says William Fitzsim­
mons, admissions director. “The best possi­
ble mix is a student body in which students 
teach other students.”

Here at Duke, picking “diverse” college 
freshmen is hard work, made harder by 
many pressures. The alumni office wants al­
umni children. Coaches want athletes. The 
music department wants musicians. The 
fund-raising office wants rich kids. Local 
boosters want North Carolinians. Minority 
groups want minorities. The faculty wants 
smart kids-but not “grinds” interested only 
in grades.

And all the while the admissions commit­
tee is possessed by a fear of failure, of pass­
ing over a potential leader and rewarding a 
workaday mind. At one admissions meeting, 
Steven Vogel, a Duke zoology professor, 
asks an admissions staffer, “Why with such 
a fantastic pool of applicants do we get so 
many porkers?”

Duke, which some educators call “the 
Harvard of the South,” could probably till 
much of its freshman class mechanically 
and objectively by picking those in the top 
10% of their high school who also scored su­
perbly on standardized tests. Some parents 
think that’s the way the system should work. 
Burden on Upper-Middle Class

“I ’ve been called anti-Semitic, anti-Ital­
ian, you name it,” says Mr. Lingenheid, 
Duke's 34-year-old admissions director. 
“But in what sense are kids qualified? 
That’s what admissions is all about. Sure, 
Johnny may have high testing, but he ought 
to, father’s an M.D. and mother’s an M.A 
from Columbia. Johnny’s gone to Europe 
over the summer. He’s gone to the finest 
prep school. He’s totally different from a 
promising black kid from Newark, who’s got 
12 brothers and sisters, and whose peers 
hang around street comers all day.”

Duke searches out students from disad­
vantaged backgrounds, Mr. Lingenheid 
says, and as a result, “There’s often a tre­
mendous burden on children of upper-mid 
dle-class parents-whites or minorities-to 
prove that they’ve taken advantage of the 
things open to them. Have they just slid 
along on their opportunities?”

Almost all the critical admissions deci 
sions are made by the admissions commit 
tee-m em bers of the permanent admissions 
staff of nine plus any professors and admin­
istrators who want to get involved. The per­
manent staff’s five men and four women are 
mostly in their 30s or late 20s. Five are 
Duke alumni. Five have teaching experi­
ence. One, a man, was a college cheer­
leader. Two are black.

The admissions marathon begins in early

Please Turn to Page 2S, Column J



Creatn of the Crop#- 
Elite Colleges Search 
For a Mix of Students

Continued From  F irst Page 
December, when the first applications 
trickle in. In all, the staff must ponder more 
than 8,000 applications (counting an extra 
1,200 for the engineering and nursing 
schools), most of them in about nine weeks. 
Even with the hiring of seven part-timers 
(mostly faculty wives) to evaluate applica­
tions, each permanent staffer must study 
thoroughly as many as 50 applications a 
day.

The fatigue is evident. " I  want to know if 
I goofed,” says David Belton, an admissions 
staffer, asking advice from other staffers 
about a candidate. He says he had only two 
hours’ sleep when he read the applicant’s 
folder. (The candidate, after review, stays 
rejected.)

Each application usually is read twice, 
first by a part-timer, and then by a perma­
nent staffer. They rate a candidate's aca­
demic and extracurricular records, assess­
ing both categories with letter grades from 
A through G. A student rating ”A/A” is 
hardly ever rejected, and one with a ”G/G,” 
the lowest rating, is hardly ever accepted. 
Almost all cases fall in between.

Readers score the apparent difficulty of 
the applicant’s high-school courses, how well 
the student did in them, what his counselors 
and teachers think of him, what the reader 
thinks of the application as a whole, and the 
quality of the high school. This last category 
is Duke’s “very own, very esoteric” assess­
ment of “several thousand” high schools na­
tionally, says Mr. Lingenheld.

After two close readings, each applica­
tion is reviewed by three to five admissions 
staffers, plus a faculty member and the 
dean of minority affairs. Typically, a staff 
member will “present” applications from 
one section of the country. The staffer acts 
as an advocate for applicants; his faint 
praise can be damning!

The committee works from a 1,140-page 
computer printout that contains each candi­
date’s standardized test scores, class rank 
(if available), reader ratings, sex, race, 
whether there’s a Duke alumnus in the fam­
ily, whether the athletic department wants 
the student, and whether the fund-raising of­
fice wants the parents.
Essays Also Important

In most cases a staffer hasn’t met the.ap­
plicant (an interview isn’t required). So usu­
ally the committee must base its decision on 
a catalog of numbers, recommendations 
from high-school teachers and counselors, 
and intuition.

Also important are the two essays stu­
dents must write-one describing their ex­
tracurricular activities and the other dis­
cussing a topic that concerns them. The 
black student from the Detroit ghetto, for 
example, submitted a well-written essay on 
the decline of inner-city schools, helping off­
set his mediocre S.A.T. scores. That stu­
dent’s case also got strong support from Da­
vid Belton, a black staffer and minority-stu­
dent recruiter. What’s more, the committee 
hoped that by taking him, other blacks from 
his prep school, with higher grades and bet­
ter test scores would be encouraged to apply 
next year.

In other cases, the judgment is simpler.
One applicant is an 18-year-old boy from 

rural Georgia. The class valedictorian, he 
scored 750 in the verbal and 730 in the math 
sections of the S.A.T. (800 is the maximum).

His physics and chemistry teacher writes 
that he is an only child “adopted by older 
than usual parents (his father died this past 
fall) of rather limited financial means. 
These factors have made him more mature 
and self-reliant than most students of his * 
age.” A counselor says that his parents’ ed­
ucation was “minimal,” and that they have 
been “bewildered by this bright young 
man.”

The student says in his essay that his two 
main extracurricular interests are writing 
and comic books (he buys 30 a month). 
“Many people scoff at comic books,” he 
writes, “and consider them juvenile. I feel, 
though, that these people are over-generaliz­
ing and maintaining a closed mind. Comic 
books occupy the unusual position of pres­
enting both literature and art simultane­
ously, combining the two media.”
Sign Him Up

The committee loves him. “Sign that boy 
up,” says Mr. Lingenheld.

Sometimes the committee cares more 
about an applicant’s background than inter­
ests. A girl born in Taiwan has fairly strong 
grades and average test scores. Her counse­
lor says her work would have been better if 
she had lived in this country longer. For 
most of her life she has lived in Libya with 
her parents, a Nationalist Chinese army 
doctor and nurse now stationed there. For 
the last six years she has lived in the U.S., 
attending three Southern schools and cur­
rently a New England prep schiMl. Her 
brother and two sisters attended Duke.

Although her writing is uneven, her Eng­
lish instructors praise her for insight and 
forcefulness in class discussions. “She’s had 
a tough life,” Mr. Lingenheld tells the com­
mittee. “This kid’s been on her own for a 
long time, and she’s shown drive and prom­
ise. There’s also this strong alumni connec­
tion.” The committee accepts her.

In another case, alumni in the family 
don’t help. A New Jersey applicant comes 
from a longtime Duke family that has been 
trying very hard to get him in. Terry San­
ford, Duke’s president, includes a note in the 
student’s folder, saying he is “Interested” in 
the student’s application. “I believe his 
grandfather graduated from Duke,” he 
writes, "as well as his father in 1954. I un­
derstand that his only choice is Duke.”
Many Lack “Spark”

Mr. Sanford’s note doesn’t swing it. Al­
though talented in biology (the student 
scored a near-perfect 780 on his biology 
achievement test), he is basically a C stu­
dent. The committee turns him down, with­
out discussion.

A major quality the committee looks for 
is “spark.”

One student, typical of many, seems to 
lack it. The son of a prosperous Harvard 
graduate, he is trying to decide where he’s 
going in life. For “anticipated career” and 
“anticipated major” he has checked “un­
decided.” Gifted in mathematics (a 790 on 
the math section of the S.A.T.), he is only a 
B student overall.

The committee considers his extracurri­
cular activities lackluster. He is a stamp 
collector, a Boy Scout, and a Sunday-school 
teacher, who also plays the piano and guitar 
and sings. On Duke’s scale, his grades

X

extracurricular activities rank him a 
“D/D.”

Nevertheless, an admissions staffer in' 
eludes a note in the student’s folder: "Bad 
soph year but super scores. I really like 
him. Fine student-admit if possible.”

His high school also recommends him 
“with enthusiasm,” but an admissions staf­
fer who interviewed him notes his “lethargic 
demeanor.” David Miller, another staffer, 
says his admission would be “tantamount to 
saying scores can get you in.”

The student writes, “Years from now, all 
the pressure of this decision will probably 
seem funny. But right now it seems very im­
portant to get it all sorted out. 1 will be re­
lieved when the work and the waiting are 
over and commitment has been made, for 
better or worse.”

The committee rejects him.



Open Admissions Ruinous? Let’s Look at the Class of ’ll
By Kenneth Libo

City College is still reeling from the 
disastrous effects of the City Univer­
sity crisis. Moreover, the community 
at large, beset by more than its share 
of ills, is easy prey to any eloquent 
preacher of negativism. It is therefore 
hardly surprising that self-fulfilling 
prophesies of doom aimed at the Col­
lege have been receiving more than 
their share of attention in the news 
media nowadays.

While I would defend anyone’s free­
dom to disseminate such dire predic­
tions, I  nevertheless disagree with the 
thesis that the open-admissions expe­
dience has caused irreparable damage 
to the College. Such attitudes are pre­
dicted on unrealistic ideas of what the 
College should or ought to be.

To be sure, we did go through a 
halcyon period from the 1930’s through 
the mid-1960’s in which we received 
more than our share of the best pre­
pared students in the city.

Nevertheless, it is shortsighted to 
assume that any radical departure from 
such fortuitous circumstances leads 
necessarily to tragedy. Actually, 
through its involvement with open ad­

missions, the College has returned to 
what it was like at the turn of the 
century, a time when a largely in­
digenous student body was being sup­
plemented by a wave of newer students. 
Then, the sons of poor immigrants 
from Eastern Europe began entering 
the College in droves, while now dif­
ferent minorities are repeating the 
same pattern.

A closer look at these two periods 
reveals additional similarities. Old- 
time instructors and middle-class par­
ents alike looked with disdain and 
suspicion at these “lower-class” new­
comers. Many, like Israel Davidson ’95, 
could barely read and write English. 
One day Davidson’s drawing instructor 
commanded him to go to the black­
board and draw a carrot. Davidson was 
embarrassed. A mere greenhorn, he did 
not know the meaning of the word. 
Nevertheless, he graduated with hon­
ors and later became a distinguished 
scholar of medieval literature.

A 1904 C.C.N.Y. teacher’s report on 
the state of education a t the College 
might just as well have been written 
today. Most City College students then 
rarely heard standard English spoken 
in the home. It was therefore necessary 
to devote a large number of hours in

many classes to reading, writing and 
speaking English.

" I t  is no reflection on the efficient 
work of the College,” the teacher notes, 
“to say . . . that the majority of our 
students' who fail in the examination 
for teacher’s license do so because of 
weakness in English, whether of accent, 
grammar, idiom or fluency.”

Another similarity between then and 
now is the public school backgrounds 
of those who aspire to a City College 
degree. In 1906 in a public school on 
Henry Street there were 80 children in 
a classroom built for 40. The teacher, 
herself practically a child, was kept so 
busy keeping order that she had no 
time to teach. Her main subject was 
discipline. According to Abraham 
Cahan, editor o f The Jewish Daily For­
ward, school authorities then believed 
that the offspring of immigrant Jews 
were incapable of becoming anything 
better than clerks, and therefore en­
couraged them to  obey and not to think.

Those who made it to  City College 
did not necessarily graduate. Morethan

1,000 students were accepted each 
year, but fewer than 150 received de­
grees. Those who did make it were put 
through a five-year program of inten­
sive education. According to Felix 
Frankfurter ’01, it was a great institu­
tion then for the acquisition of dis­
ciplined habits of work. This tradition 
is still maintained at City College by a 
core of hardworking teachers who 
instill in their students an awareness 
that the College offers them a last 
chance to make something of them­
selves.

Many graduates of the earlier period 
went on to make significant contribu­
tions in business, the professions and 
the arts. Though only a few, like Felix 
Frankfurter and Morris Raphael Cohen, 
scaled the heights of their professions, 
many others achieved success and 
recognition on a smaller scale.

Paul Abelson ’99, the son of a com­
mon laborer, established arbitration 
machinery for the apparel trade under 
the National Recovery Administration. 
Benjamin Antin ’10, who worked as a

boy in a dismal Lower East Side sweat­
shop tor $3 a week, represented the 
22d District of the Bronx in Albany 
from ,1923 to 1930. William Auerbaoh- 
Levy ’l l ,  a ragged youth whose talent 
for drawing was encouraged at City 
College, lived to see his etchings hung 
in the Library of Congress and the 
Boston Museum of Fine Arts.

For such people, this plain College 
was the only passport to a better way 
of life. Recalling their college years 
40, 50 and 60 years later, many con­
fessed a deep sense of gratitude to the 
College for the faith it placed in them 
— a faith matched by no other institu­
tion of higher learning in the country.

There is no reason why City College 
today cannot continue in the tradition 
of educating such people. All that is 
required is an unshakable faith in our­
selves, our students and the democratic 
way of life. __________

Kenneth Libo, an assistant professor of. 
English at City College, assisted Irving 
Howe on the book "World o f Our 
Fathers."



THE PROMISE OF OPEN ADMISSIONS:
AN EVALUATION AFTER FOUR YEARS AT CUNY

Leslie Berger and Jeanette B. Leaf

In recent years, open admissions has been a controversial subject, with supporters defend­
ing it on theoretical grounds as a means by which schools can educate students who are 
academically unprepared for college. This study examines the first class to be admitted  
under the open admissions policy at the City University o f N ew York in order to answer 
the questions and criticisms surrounding the program. Data have been  com piled and re­
viewed in areas such as the allocation o f open admissions students, the scholastic progress 
o f the academically disadvantaged, and the retention and graduation o f open admissions 
students.

I n  Se p t e m b e r  1970 the City University of 
New York admitted its first class under the 
new policy of open admissions. Since its 
founding in 1849 as the Free Academy, the 
university has attempted to respond to the 
social, political, and economic milieu in 
which it existed. Its growth paralleled that 
of New York City, providing educational 
opportunity for the successive waves of 
immigrants who settled here throughout 
the 1900s. Open admissions was specifically 
initiated in response to the needs and 
demands of the most recent newcomers to 
the city, the blacks and Hispanics, who 
were sorely underrepresented in the college 
community. Having approved the new ad­
missions policy, the Board of Higher Edu­
cation stipulated that the policy adhere to 
the following guidelines:

1. It shall offer admission to some uni­
versity program to all high school grad­
uates of the city.

2. It shall provide for remedial and other 
supportive services for all students re­
quiring them.

3. It shall maintain and enhance the 
standards of academic excellence of the 
colleges and of the university.

4. It shall result in the ethnic integration 
of the colleges.

5. It shall provide for mobility for stu­
dents between various programs and 
units of the university.

6. It shall assure that all students w'ho 
would have been admitted to specific 
community or senior colleges under the 
admissions criteria that we have used 
in the past shall still be so admitted. 
In increasing educational opportunity 
for all, attention shall also be paid to 
retaining the opportunities for students 
now eligible under present Board poli­
cies and practices.

Although the open admissions policy was 
formulated centrally by the Board of 
Higher Education and was on behalf of all 
individual colleges, its implementation was 
not centrally organized or administered. 
W ith each of the eighteen colleges being 
for the most part autonomous, considerable

155



E D U C A T I O N A L  R E C O R D  Vol. S7, No. 3

diversity was exhibited by the colleges in 
their strategies to fulfill the intent of the 
open admissions guidelines. Although this 
diversity was desirable and beneficial in 
many ways, especially in providing the col­
leges with flexibility to meet the specific 
needs of their individual student popula­
tions, limitations have been incumbent on 
research assessing the effectiveness of open 
admissions for the university as a whole. 
Differences exist between the campuses in 
the composition of student bodies, in aca­
demic requirements, and in grading poli­
cies. Nevertheless, the aggregate data sug­
gest important findings that are widespread 
and consistent, transcending such institu­
tional variations. The progress of the first 
open admissions class has been the subject 
of intensive study.

Entering students
In interpreting the following results of 

the fall 1970 class, the reader must clearly 
keep in mind that the implementation of 
open admissions was dramatically sudden. 
The university moved from a restricted 
meritocratic system to a completely open 
system without delay and without a period 
of gradual transition. Consequently, in 1970 
more than 35,000 freshmen entered com­
pared to 20,000 in 1969. Based on place­
ment examination results, only 51 percent 
of the entering students did not need re­
mediation in reading or in basic mathe­
matics. Nine percent of the students needed 
intensive remediation in reading and 22 
percent in mathematics. An additional 40 
percent of the students needed moderate 
remediation in reading and 27 percent in 
mathematics.

Not a single college in the City Uni­
versity was equipped in the fall of 1970 to 
provide the educational environment es­
sential for the academic success of under­
skilled students. Adequate campus facilities 
were not available for the students, and not 
enough teachers were adequately qualified

Leslie Berger is the university dean for academic 
evaluation at the City University of New York, 
and Jeanette B. Leaf is the coordinator of testing 
and research at Herbert H. Lehman College of the 
City University of New York.

156

in basic skills training. Insufficient planning 
and funding were evident— and \-ery im­
portantly, considerable faculty resistance" to 
the new students existed.

Allocation
The allocation of students to the various 

campuses of the City University is a vital 
component of open admissions, for it de­
termines the academic, ethnic, and eco­
nomic composition of each campus. The 
purpose of open admissions was to rectify 
the inequities resulting from the traditional 
merit system of admissions, which was based 
on high school grades and standardized 
test scores— two factors that are strongly 
related to socioeconomic status. It was 
hoped that greater access to the City Uni­
versity by minority group students would in­
crease these students’ chances for social 
mobility and decrease the poverty and urban 
blight of their communities.^

During the years 1969-74, the six enter­
ing freshman classes showed an almost un­
interrupted increase in the number and 
percentage of black and Puerto Rican stu­
dents, with both groups substantially in­
creasing their representation the very first 
year of open admissions. Tire number of 
entering black students increased from 2,815 
in 1969 to over 12,000 in 1974. Puerto 
Rican students showed a similar trend, al­
though their increase was not as marked; 
enrollment of Puerto Rican students in­
creased from 1,215 in 1969 to 5,624 in 
1974. The immediate prime beneficiaries of 
open admissions, however, were white stu­
dents. Although the percentage of white 
students comprising the freshman class de­
creased with open admissions from 80 
percent in 1969 to 75 percent in 1970, 
approximately 10,000 additional white stu­
dents enrolled in 1970 in comparison to an 
additional 5,000 black and Puerto Rican 
students combined. Thus, while all groups 
benefited from the new admissions policy, 
a greater number of white students enrolled 
in the universih' than black and Puerto 
Rican students.

1. T h e data compiled on the allocation of stu­
dents are from Data Book (New York: Office of 
University Management Data, C ity University of 
New York, 1 9 7 4 ).



T H E  P R O M I S E  O F  O P E N  A D M I S S I O N S  Berger L eaf

Campus variations
From the beginning of open admissions, 

concern was expressed over the variation 
from campus to campus in the proportion 
of black and Puerto Rican students allo­
cated. Tlie racial balance of an individual 
campus is largely a reflection of student 
choice and of the demographic characteris­
tics of the neighborhood in which the 
campus is located. The Board of Higher 
Education modified the allocation system 
several times in the first three years of 
open admissions to correct a des’eloping 
pattern of economically and educationally 
disadvantaged students becoming dispropor­
tionately high in certain colleges.

In 1969 the majority of the entering 
freshman students at all the senior colleges 
were wliite, w'ith the percentages varying 
from 88 percent at Queens College to 70 
percent at Baruch College. Five years later 
a much wider range existed among the 
senior colleges, with 76 percent of the fresh­
man class at Brooklyn College being white 
but only 32 percent being white at City 
College.

W ith the advent of open admissions, the 
community colleges experienced similar ra­
cial composition changes. In 1969, the year 
prior to open admissions, three of the six 
existent community colleges (Borough of 
Manhattan, Bronx, New York City) had 
a nonwhite freshman class of 40 percent 
or more. Critics claimed that this phenom­
enon of overrepresentation of minority stu­
dents in certain community colleges was 
due to the tracking of such students into 
two-year, vocationally oriented programs. 
The remaining three community colleges 
(Kingsborough, Queensborough, Staten Is­
land) closely approximated the senior col­
leges, with less than 20 percent of their 
freshman classes being nonwhite before 
open admissions. Undoubtedly, geographic 
location was one of the major elements un­
derlying the disparity among the commun­
ity colleges in enrollment of ethnic minorit)’ 
students. W ith the continuation of open 
admissions the disparity within the two 
groups of community colleges was greatly 
exacerbated. Borough of Manhattan, Bronx, 
and New York City Community Colleges,

the three colleges that had enrolled signi­
ficant proportions of nonwhite students 
prior to open admissions, became predomi­
nantly nonwhite by 1974. The remaining 
three community colleges (Kingsborough, 
Queensborough, and Staten Island) experi­
enced relatively little change in the ethnic 
composition of their freshman classes, with 
enrollments of nonwliite students remaining 
20-30 percent.

Access by disadvantaged
In addition to effecting the racial com­

position of the university as a whole, open 
admissions, by definition, proiided access 
to higher education for many students who 
would not have qualified under the old 
academic achievement standards. Using the 
high school average as the index measuring 
academic achievement and open admissions 
status, unisersity enrollment figures show 
that the percentage of open admissions stu­
dents increased at the senior colleges from 
40 percent in 1970 to almost 50 percent 
in 1973. The greatest increase in enrollment 
was for the most academically disadvantaged 
students, those with high school averages 
below 70. By 1973 these students consti­
tuted over 12 percent of the freshmen at­
tending the City University. Modifications 
made by the Board of Higher Education 
in the allocation system were effective in 
bringing about a reasonably equitable dis­
tribution of these students in the senior 
colleges.

The greatest difference between the 
senior colleges in the composition of their 
freshman classes has become the percent­
age of students with high school averages 
above 80. By 1973 only three of the senior 
colleges (Brooklyn, Hunter, Queens) en­
rolled freshman classes with a majority of 
students having high school averages above 
80 and presumably being academically pre­
pared for college work. Tlie percentages of 
these nonopen admissions students enrolled 
at the other senior colleges ranged from 47 
percent at City College to 26 percent at 
York College.

For the community colleges as a whole, 
the percentage of enrollments in each of the 
three high school average categories desig­
nated by the University (Below 70, 70-

157



E D U C A T I O N A L  R E C O R D  V ol. 57, No. 3

74.9, 75 and above) remained relatively 
stable during the first four years of open 
admissions. W ith the exception of several 
minor variations, the students were almost 
equally divided among the three high school 
average eategories, resulting in mueh higher 
enrollment of academically disadvantaged 
students at the community colleges. The 
data show that in the years 1970-73 the 
percentage of students with high school 
averages below 70 ranged from 31-36 per­
cent at the community colleges, in com­
parison to 4.5-12 percent at the senior 
colleges.

In summary, the City University began 
to achieve in the first year the fundamental 
goals it had set under the open admissions 
policy. Increasing numbers of students from 
underrepresented ethnic groups, especially 
from the black and Puerto Rican com­
munities, were enrolled at the various col­
leges. Also, with high school achievement 
requirements being waived in 1970, a 
greater diversity in the entering students’ 
level of college preparation resulted. The 
complex allocation system underwent sev­
eral res'isions to assure greater equity among 
the colleges in the composition of their 
freshman classes.

Academic progress
Tire feasibility of open admissions is 

necessarily dependent on the academic 
achievement of students admitted under 
this policy. Tlie entering class of 1970, the 
first open admissions class, has been fol­
lowed up intensively by the university (most 
notably by Dr. David Lavin), providing 
soluminous data on issues of concern and 
thus clarifying one of the most problematic 
issues, the success of the program. Several 
measurable criteria have constituted the 
major elements in Lavin’s studies assessing 
the academic progress of open admissions 
students, these criteria being: (1) grade 
point average; (2) credit generation; (3) 
credit ratio; (4) grade point average and 
credit generation combined. Academic suc­
cess has been defined by these criteria and 
with these qualifications: (1) a grade point 
average of 2.00 or more; (2) credit genera­
tion to equal 12 or more credits earned per 
semester; (3) the ratio of credits earned to

credits attempted to equal 0.75 or more; 
and (4) a grade point average of 2.00 or 
more and credit generation to equal 12 
or more credits per semester.

The first two years
Studies have documented the importance 

of the first two years of college in determin­
ing students’ ultimate ability to earn a 
degree.  ̂ For those students attending the 
senior colleges, it was found that as high 
school average increased, so did the per­
centage of students earning a satisfactory 
GPA of 2.0 or higher. This finding is not 
surprising, for, by definition, the open ad­
missions students (those having high school 
averages below 80) cannot be expected to 
achieve at the same level as students meet­
ing the traditional admissions standards. 
Nevertheless, the data is supportive of open 
admissions, confirming that a significant 
proportion of previously ineligible students 
are capable of meeting the GPA require­
ment of the City University. The figures for 
the 1970 open admissions enrollees range 
from an average of 35 percent for those 
students entering with high school averages 
below 70 to 70 percent for students with 
averages between 75.0 and 79.9.

The criterion credits earned, or progress 
toward the degree, also showed a strong re­
lationship to high school average. As high 
school average increased, so did the per­
centage of students earning 48 or more 
credits over four semesters. Academic re­
strictions imposed on open admissions stu­
dents (such as enrollment for non-credit 
bearing remedial courses) partially account 
for the difference between open admissions 
students and regular students. Data indi­
cate that after two years, 25 percent of 
students with high school averages below 
70 had earned 48 or more credits, the 
percentage increasing with each high school 
average group to 79 percent of regular 
students meeting this standard of achieve­
ment.

2. T h e source for data on academic achieve­
m ent of open admissions students is Lavin’s Open 
Admissions at the City University of New York: 
A Description of Academic Outcomes After Two 
Years (New York: Office of Program and Policy 
Research, C ity University of New York, 1 9 7 4 ).

158



T H E  P R O M I S E  O F O PE N  A D M IS S IO N S  Berger 6- L ea f

Credit ratios
Although relatively few open admissions 

students progressed at the same rate as 
regular students, especially those in the two 
lowest high school average groups, high 
percentages of open admissions students did 
acquire a credit ratio of 0.75 or more. 
The figures imply that although open ad­
missions students enroll for fewer credits 
than regular students, a majority of them 
succeed in completing the courses in which 
they do enroll. Among the four measures 
of academic success under consideration, 
the most .positive outcome obtained for 
all entering students, regardless of the 
student’s overall high school average, is 
the credit ratio.

Finally, two combined academic criteria 
are considered— the achievement of 48 or 
more credits and a GPA of 2.0 or better. 
As expected, fulfillment of this last condi­
tion of academic success is for all students 
the most difficult of the four conditions 
included in this analysis. High school aver­
age predictably is related to the incidence 
of attainment of the designated achieve­
ment standard. The percentage of students 
meeting the combined criteria increases 
abruptly from 17 percent for students with 
high school averages below 70 to 76 per­
cent for students admitted with averages 
above 80. Thus, the higher the grade point 
average, the greater the success rate.

The strong positive relationship found at 
the senior colleges between each of the four 
academic variables and high school average 
is similarly evident at the community col­
leges. Furthermore, community college stu­
dents demonstrate the same strengths and 
weaknesses in academic achievement as 
senior college students; that is, the highest 
percentages for students meeting the success 
criterion are for the variable credit ratio, 
while the lowest percentages are for the 
combined variables of 48 or more credits 
earned and a grade point average of 2.0 or 
better.

In addition to underscoring the relation­
ship between high school average and each 
of the four academic variables measuring 
academic success, the data also lends itself 
to a comparison between the senior colleges

and community colleges. Two fundamental 
facts are noteworthy. First, for any of the 
four academic variables analyzed, little or 
no difference exists between the senior 
college and community college students en­
tering with high school averages above 80. 
The majority of these students consistently 
meet the standards designated for academic 
success. This finding suggests that regular 
students are likely to perform equally W'ell 
academically in meeting the minimum 
standards of success regardless of whether 
they enter a senior college or a community 
college. Tlie second fact disclosed by the 
data is that, unlike regular students, higher 
percentages of open admissions students 
meet the criteria for success at the com­
munity colleges than at the senior colleges. 
For each of the four variables and within 
each of the three high school average 
groups below' 80, a difference of 10-16 per­
cent exists between the senior college and 
community college students achieving the 
success criterion, the difference favoring the 
community college students.

Retention and graduation
Ultimately, the criterion to which both 

critics and advocates will turn in ascertain­
ing the success or the feasibility of an open 
admissions policy is whether a student 
graduates. The descriptive and comparative 
data obtained by the City University of 
New York over a four-year period are of 
national as well as local significance. The 
follow'ing analysis of this complex issue be­
gins with the retention patterns of students 
during the first two years, which are most 
critical in determining whether or not stu­
dents will subsequently graduate.“

Retention rates obtained after the very 
first semester provide several noteworthy 
facts. As expected, high school average was 
positively associated with retention, although 
to a lesser degree at the community col­
leges than at the senior colleges. Of greater 
significance, how'ever, is the fact that aca-

3. D ata on student retention and graduation 
are from Student Retention and Graduation at the 
City University of New York: September 1970 
EnroUees Through Eight Semesters (New York: 
Office of the Chancellor, City University of New 
York. 1 0 7 5 ).

159



E D U C A T I O N A L  R E C O R D  Vol. 57, No. 3

dcmic performance during the first semester 
was more closely related to retention than 
high school average. For e\eiy level of high 
school average, students who met the pre­
scribed standards for academic performance 
were much more likely to return the second 
semester than those students who failed to 
meet the standards. Retention rates were 
significantly higher for students who earned
( 1) a grade point average of 2.0 or higher;
(2) 12 or more credits; and (3) 0.75 or 
more of the credits attempted. Furthermore, 
of the three academic variables considered, 
the last (credit ratio) was the one best 
differentiating between students who re­
turned the second semester and those who 
did not. Finally, longitudinal data show 
that 6 percent of the senior college students 
and 13 percent of the community college 
students attended City University during 
the first semester only.

Fourth semester figures
By the fourth semester a marked reten­

tion difference existed between the high 
school average groups and between the 
senior and community colleges. For the 
university as a whole, continuous attendance 
throughout the first four semesters ranged 
from 49 percent for students with high 
school averages below 70 up to 77 percent 
for students with averages above 80. Al­
though the positive relationship between 
high school average and continuous attend­
ance was similar for both senior and com­
munity colleges, the attendance rates at the 
senior colleges were higher for every high 
school average group. That is, regardless of 
high school average, senior college students 
were much more likely to remain in at­
tendance than community college students. 
By the end of the fourth semester, 72 per­
cent of the senior college students as com­
pared to 52 percent of the community col­
lege students had been in continuous at­
tendance.

Fourth semester retention figures are 
higher when all students attending are con­
sidered because this figure includes students 
who had withdrawn from the university 
during any of the three previous semesters. 
I ’he fourth semester overall attendance was 
77 percent and 61 percent of those initially

enrolled at the senior colleges and com­
munity colleges respectively. These figures, 
higher than the figures for continuous at­
tendance, reflect the fact that 18 percent 
of the students who had withdrawn earlier 
subsequently reenrolled at the City Uni­
versity.

Graduation rates
Having considered retention after the 

first and fourth semesters, the final time 
period to be undertaken in this analysis is 
the eighth semester, which has, by tradi­
tional standards, been considered the last 
semester for the majority of students who 
graduate. Twenty-two percent of the senior 
college students and 24 percent of the com­
munity college students graduated by the 
end of the eighth semester. Variations exist 
among the students by high school average 
and arc more pronounced at the senior col­
leges. For example, only 3 percent of stu­
dents with high school averages below 70 
graduated from senior colleges, whereas 16 
percent graduated from community col­
leges. This disparity exists for every high 
school average group and is smallest for 
students with averages above 80. Among 
these students, analogous figures are 32 per­
cent graduating from senior colleges and 
41 percent from community colleges.

The graduation rates cited above require 
two qualifications. First, a substantial num­
ber of City University students withdraw 
every semester, with many returning in later 
semesters. This attendance pattern is not 
unique to the 1970 open admissions class, 
having been documented in an earlier 
study.* Max found that 48 percent of the 
City University students graduated within 
four years, but that over 70 percent grad­
uated after seven years. Tlris phenomenon 
has been largely attributed to the fact that 
many students find it necessary or desirable 
to be employed while obtaining a college 
degree. A second qualification that places 
the low figures for on-time graduation into 
better perspective is the fact that noncredit 
remedial courses or smaller credit loads 
prescribed during the first year of enroll-

4. See Pearl M ax, How Many Graduate (New 
York: C ity University of New York, 1 9 6 8 ).

160



T H E  P R O M I S E  O F  O P E N  A D M I S S I O N S  Berger 6  Leaf

inent necessarily delayed graduation for 
many open admissions students.

Comparison to national data
The graduation data is especially mean­

ingful when compared to national data. For 
the senior colleges. City University grad­
uation rates after four years were lower 
than national rates for every high school 
average category. This outcome is not sur­
prising in view of the rationale that has 
been presented justifying the need of a 
substantial proportion of City University 
students for more than four years to meet 
graduation requirements. Therefore, a more 
significant comparison is that of retention 
in addition to graduation after four years. 
On this basis, the rates for City University 
students surpass national rates for every 
high school average group with one excep­
tion, that exception being students with 
averages below 70. For students vsith high 
school averages below 70, no comparison 
is possible because no meaningful national 
normative group is available so far. Never­
theless, the high retention rates after four 
years at the City University are indicative 
of improved graduation rates, which will 
undoubtedly be evidenced as the students 
are tracked in subsequent years.

Similar data were collected comparing the 
City University and national community 
colleges. Both the retention and graduation 
rates at the City University community col­
leges are higher than the national sample. 
Again, no valid comparison is possible for 
students with high school averages below 
70. This exception is subject to the same 
limitation discussed previously for the senior 
colleges, namely that the small number of 
students in the national sample (19) can­
not justify generalization. In the final analy­
sis the City University community college 
graduation rates are expected to be even 
higher than those reported because many 
students transferred to the senior colleges 
and will require more than four years to 
graduate.

Open admissions has been a complex 
experiment unparalleled in higher education. 
As an experiment, its long-term viability is 
dependent on its success in educating stu­

dents academically unprepared for college 
w'ork. This concept of success remains enig­
matic and subjective. Having anal3'zed the 
available aggregate data, it is evident that 
the City University must undertake studies 
of a more qualitativ'e, in-depth nature that 
take into account the content differences 
between the colleges. Furthermore, studies 
of classes entering after 1970 are especially 
crucial because the open admissions pro­
gram was first implemented on short notice 
and thus prevented the colleges from being 
fully able to provide an optimal educational 
environment at the outset.

Many new programs and curricular 
changes were initiated at the various col­
leges as a result of the special needs of the 
first open admissions class. Many areas be­
gan to venture away from traditional ap­
proaches, including remediation, counseling, 
tutoring, and testing. The dynamic changes 
of recent years vv'ill likely have a significant 
effect on the educational process for open 
admissions students. Tire promise of open 
admissions was that, while high academic 
standards would be maintained and en­
hanced, the revolving door phenomenon 
occurring at other institutions attempting an 
open admissions experiment would be pre­
vented if at all possible. Whether this 
promise has been kept or broken is a ques­
tion that remains elusive.

As of this writing, one thing has become 
clear— namely, that the open admissions of 
1969 has already been altered. In the se­
vere New York City financial crisis, no other 
governmental agency or institution was 
abandoned or as detrimentally affected as 
the university. As a result, the university 
was compelled to introduce tuition for the 
first time in its long history, starting with 
the fall 1976 semester. TTie university also 
introduced new criteria for admission to 
both the senior and community colleges 
based on high school average and class rank. 
These new competitiv'e standards were ini­
tiated in order to reduce the number of 
freshmen entering the university. Just as 
in 1970 when the open admissions program 
was put into effect, the basis of decision­
making in 1976 has been sociopolitical and 
economic rather than educational. □

161



THE ARTIST-IN-RESIDENCE

James W. Hall

T h e relationship betw een the artist and academ e has changed dramatically; each seems to 
have discovered in the other a new and vital force. Institutions are bringing the professional 
artist into their instructional and cultural environments through five approaches: concert 
performances, extended performances, master classes, part-time residencies, and full-time 
residencies. Hall analyzes each program’s effect on the artist and the college or university 
and answers these questions: W h at are the opportunities, the advantages, and the disad­
vantages o f each arrangement? W hat future can each procedure expect? W hat is the long­
term effect o f  the artist-in-residence program?

N o t long ago in a less self-conscious time, 
the one eccentric member of the campus’s 
art or music department was regarded with 
the hind of tolerance or amusement usually 
extended to a pet cockatoo. The secret pride 
some members of the community may have 
taken in accepting his brightly colored pres­
ence more likely had its source in their 
satisfaction in their own liberality and so­
phistication in accepting the artist than in 
any appreciation of his talent. This token 
artist, for his part, missed the exchange on 
which to sharpen his own ideas and talents 
and retreated further to his canvasses or 
composition sheets and the assorted scraps 
and fragments of his intellectual garret. But 
today is not yesterday, and that simple fact 
is dramatically illustrated in the changed 
relationship of the artist and academe. Each 
seems to have discovered in the other a 
new, disturbing, and vital force.

Forty years ago the story on most cam­
puses was indeed unpromising. The world 
of academe, then secure in its pastoral set­
ting, focused its efforts on restudying the 
verbal content of manuscripts, tomes, and 
texts housed in great libraries. It placidly

conducted its business in ordered classrooms 
neatly called forth by registrars and as­
sistant deans, and it sought the support of 
a number of gentlemanly students drawn 
to the lure of fraternities and football. The 
halls of ivy were an enclave as separate to 
itself as the perimeters of the world in­
habited by the professional artist.

The artist’s world was predominantly cen­
tered in a few of the great metropolises of 
the western world, nurtured by a sophisti­
cated, aesthetically sensitive, and economi­
cally supportive public. The “world” was 
housed by a few great museums, galleries, 
and concert halls, and properly contained 
by critics, teachers, and studios. A bevy of 
eager students gathered to be illuminated 
by the bright glow of the stars.

The resistance of academe to the artist 
stemmed in part from a tradition nurtured 
by the theologically oriented medieval uni­
versity and English university system, which 
viewed the fine arts as somewhat suspect 
and the artist as definitely suspect. Because 
this tradition was almost entirely concerned 
with verbal learning, literature and poetry 
were the only creative arts actively encour-

162