As Callahan thoroughly discusses in "The Cheating Culture," a big part of cheating in America takes place in High Schools. He argues that the pressures of getting into a top school can instigate cheating on exams. These pressures start early: "'In the beginning of freshman year, they sit you down and have a talk about starting to prepare for college applications,' says Martina Meijer, a recent graduate" (Callahan, 201). In addition, there is an even bigger pressure coming from the side of Ivy League Universities to perform well on the SATs, provide perfect GPAs, and exemplify well-roundedness in order to get accepted. In light of all this, I was refreshed to find this article on the front page of the New York Times this morning:
Harvard University, breaking with a major trend in college admissions, says it will eliminate its early admissions program next year, with university officials arguing that such programs put low-income and minority applicants at a distinct disadvantage in the competition to get into selective universities.
As I was reading Callahan, this paragraph he wrote about Harvard disturbed me:
The admissions office at Harvard College is a button-down, secretive place. It is accustomed to withstanding entreaties on behalf of applicants from some of the most powerful people in the world—from foreign leaders to U.S. senators to top CEOs…Yet in 2000, the dean of admissions took the highly unusual step of publicly castigating America’s parents for how they primed their young to succeed (Callahan, 205).
Since I read this before I saw the NY Times article, I was a little disturbed by Harvard’s hypocritical actions. According to Callahan, Harvard has been placing the blame on parents, ignoring the standards that their own admissions office places on students. Besides this, there are other pressures on students that Callahan speaks of.
However, after reading this article, I see exactly how Harvard’s actions are paralleled in Callahan’s book. The phrase "breaking with a major trend" in the article is directly related to "the dean of admissions took the highly unusual step" in Callahan. While Harvard does fail to see its own fault in the pressures created, there does seem to be a refreshing trend going on at their admissions office. They are realizing the need to reduce the pressures of High School students to get ahead, while creating a fairer path to doing so. The article explains the predicted affect on students, one which Callahan would be most satisfied with:
Mr. Bok also spoke about reducing the frenzy surrounding admissions. "I think it will improve the climate in high schools," he said, "so that students don’t start getting preoccupied in their junior year about which college to go to."
By reducing this "preoccupation," I definitely think this is a good start in "Dodging Brazil" at America’s High Schools. While Harvard hasn’t eliminated the pressure of admissions in its entirety, it has delayed the process, given students a fairer advantage. I think it will also provide a less competitive atmosphere among students as they all turn in their Harvard applications at the same time. No one has gotten their application in "ahead."
Also, how can just one college make a difference? Since Harvard is a "brand-name" college, it has incredible influence. This article was on the front page of the Times and will get much exposure. In addition, Harvard is such a top, prestigious school that other schools cannot help but follow in the trend. Along with Avery, this is my hope:
"The one thing that always seemed commonly agreed was that no college could give up its early application program if the others didn’t, too," said Christopher Avery, a Harvard professor and a co-author of "The Early Admissions Game: Joining the Elite" (Harvard University Press, 2003). "This seems to move to do just that."
Conor Friedersdorf @ September 12, 2006 - 3:45pm
I'm pleased that Harvard has given up its early admissions program, but I can't see how it will reduce cheating among high school students. Assuming that the pressure of getting into a good college is driving the cheating, the same high stakes admissions game will merely be postponed due to this decision.
But is that a sound assumption?
High school students have cheated on exams as long as there have been high schools, and nowhere did Callahan convincingly demonstrate that the problem is greater now than it has ever been. His explanation is plausible at times -- it may well be that an increasingly competitive college admissions culture is incentivizing some of the cheating.
On the other hand, perhaps an increasingly competitive college admissions culture is simply causing non-cheaters to be vocally angry and feel cheated by their cheating classmates as never before.
Finally, even if a competitive college admissions culture is incentivizing cheating, that doesn't necessarily make it a bad thing. Perhaps cheating is incentivized, but intense study and considerable learning are encouraged too.
Worrying about the college I'd be admitted to certainly caused me to work harder during high school than I otherwise would've, and I never plagiarized papers or brought pocket dictionaries into the SAT.
»