I read a fascinating article by Matt Feeney in the Chronicle of Higher Education, The Abiding Scandal of College Admissions. It’s paywalled, so I’ll quote some key snippets, which are enough for a simple case study. Here are some questions to think about as you read:
- Is college admissions an accountability system? Why or why not?
- Do the holistic and Coalition portfolio admissions processes fall short of any of the principles in the MAP? Which ones, how and why?
- Which is better from a MAP perspective: to select randomly from the pool of qualified students, or to “launch an inquisition of their applicants’ souls”? Why or why not?
- What changes would help these admissions processes live up to the MAP more completely?
- What gaps or other weaknesses of moral accounting itself are revealed by this analysis?