Crafting a Class: College Admissions and Financial Aid, 1955-1994

by Elizabeth A. Duffy, Idana Goldberg

Overview

Admissions and financial aid policies at liberal arts colleges have changed dramatically since 1955. Through the 1950s, most colleges in the United States enrolled fewer than 1000 students, nearly all of whom were white. Few colleges were truly selective in their admissions; they accepted most students who applied. In the 1960s, as the children of the baby boom reached college age and both federal and institutional financial aid programs expanded, many more students began to apply to college. For the first time, liberal arts colleges were faced with an abundance of applicants, which raised new questions. What criteria would they use to select students? How would they award financial aid? The answers to these questions were shaped by financial and educational considerations as well as by the struggles for civil rights and gender equality that swept across the nation. The colleges' answers also proved crucial to their futures, as the years since the mid-1970s have shown. When the influx of baby boom students slowed, colleges began to recruit aggressively in order to maintain their class sizes. In the past decade, financial aid has become another tool that colleges use to compete for the best students.

By tracing the development of competitive admission and financial aid policies at a selected group of liberal arts colleges, Crafting a Class explores how institutional decisions reflect and respond to broad demographic, economic, political, and social forces. Elizabeth Duffy and Idana Goldberg closely studied sixteen liberal arts colleges in Massachusetts and Ohio. At each college, they not only collected empirical data on admissions, enrollment, and financial aid trends, but they also examined archival materials and interviewed current and former administrators. Duffy and Goldberg have produced an authoritative and highly readable account of some of the most important changes that have taken place in American higher education during the tumultuous decades since the mid-1950s. Crafting a Class will interest all readers who are concerned with the past and future directions of higher education in the United States.

Originally published in 1997.

The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9781400864683
Publisher:	Princeton University Press
Publication date:	07/14/2014
Series:	The William G. Bowen Series , #377
Sold by:	Barnes & Noble
Format:	eBook
Pages:	322
File size:	18 MB
Note:	This product may take a few minutes to download.

Read an Excerpt

Crafting a Class

College Admissions and Financial Aid, 1955â?"1994

---

By Elizabeth A. Duffy, Idana Goldberg

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS

Copyright © 1998 Princeton University Press
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-691-01683-2

---

CHAPTER 1

Enrollment Pressures: Ebbs and Flows

Generally speaking there is no "perfect" size of a college or university.... Members of each generation tend to think their institution was at its best size when they were there. And, perhaps it was. The "best" size clearly varies with the time and with what a college or university wishes to do and to be, and on what the consequences of a change would be.

Over the course of the 40 years which our study spans, all of our colleges grappled (more than once) with the question of what size they should be. Two counter considerations framed their discussions. On the one hand, there is a minimum enrollment level which enables a liberal arts college to function effectively. Below some size a college can't afford to offer a reasonable variety of courses, attract distinguished faculty, or support its infrastructure. On the other hand, beyond some size an institution may lose its small-college character.

Liberal arts colleges tend to have small endowments and high expenditures per student. Therefore, they are extremely reliant on tuition revenue. In order to maintain current operating levels, colleges must meet enrollment targets that are consistent with existing commitments. The ability of a college to meet its enrollment target—given demographic trends and the size and quality of its expected applicant pool—is perhaps more important even than the target itself. Once a college has set an enrollment target, deviations around that target cause revenues to change much faster than costs, because budgetary commitments to faculty, curriculum, and facilities must be made before final enrollment numbers are known.

Given the variability of entering class size, we concentrate throughout this chapter on total undergraduate enrollment rather than first-year enrollment. When we refer to enrollment, we mean full-time undergraduate enrollment. The few colleges in our study with graduate programs have very modest graduate enrollments, and, except where noted, part-time enrollments at our schools were also insignificant.

In order to understand the enrollment histories at the colleges in our study, we divided the 40 years that our study encompasses into three periods. The first period—the years between 1955 and 1970—was known as the "Tidal Wave" since both applications and enrollments swelled at colleges and universities across the United States, including almost all of the liberal arts colleges in our study. During this period, the rate at which a college expanded seemed to depend most on its starting size. In the second period, the decade of the 1970s, the rapid growth rate that higher education had been experiencing leveled off and a stable "zero growth" period ensued. In addition, coeducation, a drop in college-going rates, and worsening economic conditions led to major shifts in enrollments not only between the different sectors of higher education but also among liberal arts colleges. The only colleges in our study that were able to expand significantly during this period were the men's colleges that became coeducational. The third period, which extends from 1980 through the present, saw a renewed emphasis by parents and the public first on quality and then on value. The most prestigious colleges were able to capitalize on these trends and maintain, or even moderately expand, their enrollments. Many of the other colleges in our study experienced declining enrollments either because they couldn't fill their classes with students of desired quality or because they purposefully reduced their class sizes in order to improve their class profile.

THE TIDAL WAVE (1955–1970)

After the veterans returned from fighting World War II and settled down to peace and prosperity, the country's birthrate exploded. As a result, between 1955 and 1970, the number of 18- to 24-year-olds (generally considered to be the college-age population) grew 60 percent, from 15 million to 24 million. Even more important, the high school graduation and college-going rates increased. (See Figures 1.1A and 1.1B.) In 1955, only 63 percent of 17-year-olds were high school graduates. In 1968. when the high school graduation rate peaked. 77 percent of 17-year-olds had earned high school diplomas. The absolute numbers of high school graduates approximately doubled between 1955 and 1969 from 1.4 million to 2.8 million. College enrollment rates also increased nearly 10 percentage points during the 1960s so that in 1968. when the college-going rate reached its peak, 55 percent of high school graduates were attending college.

These demographic facts reflected a heightened sense among all Americans of the importance of education at both the high school and college levels. After World War II. the GI Bill opened up educational opportunities for millions of veterans, many of whom had previously not considered a college education. A decade later in 1957, the Russians launched Sputnik I, causing the United States to doubt its scientific and military capabilities. Shortly after, economists, most notably Theodore Schultz and Gary Becker, began to develop models of "human capital" that articulated why well-educated workers were essential to the country's economic strength and. thus, enabled policy makers to justify greater investments in higher education. The concept that there was a social return to higher education, coupled with the "security fear" prompted by Sputnik, committed the United States to increasing the number of students graduating from high school and continuing to college. This national commitment to expanding the educational attainment of students coincided with the maturation of the first children of the baby boom, leaving colleges and universities overwhelmed by the sheer number of applications.

The tidal wave of students brought new pressures (and opportunities) for the colleges in our study to enlarge their student bodies. At the extremes. either colleges could maintain their same admissions standards and expand their enrollments to accommodate the increased number of applicants. or they could stay the same size and become far more selective. In reality, the sheer number of applicants precluded the first option. A 1956 staff paper entitled "Admissions Problems in a Time of Expanding Enrollments" described what would happen if Ohio Wesleyan continued its current admissions policies:

If we start with the proposition that Ohio Wesleyan will maintain its present position in relation to the total number of applications received by its most directly competitive sister Ohio colleges, then we may expect an annual increase of at least 10 percent in applications received during the next decade. Under these conditions Ohio Wesleyan could reasonably look forward to a total of 2,319 applications in 1960–61 and 4.105 in 1966–67. The unmodified continuation of present practices would in turn lead to 1,948 approvals in 1960–61 and 3,448 in 1966–67. To state such a prospect is. of course, to affirm that we must find good wavs to keep it from happening.

Although no college in our study opened its door to all qualified applicants, many of them did expand. The colleges we studied grew by an average of 62 percent between 1955 and 1970. Such growth necessitated major capital investments. A 1955 report described what was required at Wheaton College, which at the time enrolled fewer than 550 students:

In order to accommodate 750 students the College will need to erect within the next few years three additional dormitories.... A new dining room and kitchen will have to be provided ... steps must be taken to erect a new classroom building.... Some other campus structures will need to be enlarged to accommodate the increased student body. These will include the library. the gymnasium and the science building.

Because growth required substantial investments in classroom and dormitory buildings, there was often a delay—sometimes of nearly a decade—between the initial decision by trustees to expand and the actual admission of a larger class while a college first raised capital and then built new facilities. These delays would become highly problematic for some colleges in the late 1960s and early 1970s when the college-going population leveled off.

The major reason that colleges in our study chose to expand during the 1960s was financial. The trustees of Wheaton voted to increase the size of the college by 40 percent in 1955 because "the enlarged college will result in providing a sounder educational and economic unit." The College of Holy Cross's 1962 decision to grow was also "made with the hope that increased tuition would help the financial status of the College." For at least one of the colleges in our study, expansion was perceived as a way to solve recurring deficit problems. In 1965, Kenyon, which had had an operating deficit each year since World War II, decided to expand from 750 to approximately 1,250—a sizable expansion especially considering that the college had already grown 53 percent between 1955 and 1965. In explaining the decision, the treasurer of the college, Samuel Lord, wrote in the Kenyon Alumni Bulletin, "I believe that the indicated expansion of the student body without a corresponding increase in costs, in combination with the continuing growing success of our development efforts, will solve our financial problems—at least for the next decade."

As shown in Figure 1.2, there was a strong inverse correlation between the size of the full-time undergraduate student body in 1955 and the extent of expansion over the next decade and a half. In general, the smallest colleges increased their enrollments by the largest percentages, in order to benefit from economies of scale. Not only did the small colleges have the most to gain by growing, but they also had the least to lose. Liberal arts colleges have always valued their smallness as essential for forging close bonds between and among students and faculty. Those colleges that were the smallest to begin with could afford to expand significantly without worrying that they would sacrifice these relationships.

The three colleges that lie well below the trend line in Figure 1.2 grew less than would have been expected considering their starting sizes. These colleges were among the most competitive and wealthiest colleges both in our study and in the country. That the most prestigious and selective colleges and universities were limiting their expansion was recognized even at the time. In 1966, Richard Pearson, president of the College Board, wrote an article outlining ways for liberal arts colleges to increase their influence in the educational system. In it, he lamented, "The older, liberal colleges and universities have limited their expansion, for compelling reasons, to something on the order of 10 to 20 percent. Rather than expand, the liberal institutions have raised admissions standards to the point where they are denying admission to many students whom the schools identify as both able and well prepared." In the epilogue to his often-cited The American College and University: A History, Frederick Rudolph explained just how unusual such behavior was:

The question of numbers was no question at all. except perhaps in the little quality colleges and Ivy League universities of the East, where the belief existed that a choice could be made between quantity and quality; here the admissions standards would go up faster and higher than the dormitories. Elsewhere, in characteristic American fashion the pursuit of quality and quantity would ... be accepted as an inevitable challenge and as a public responsibility"

An Obligation to Expand

Although the liberal arts colleges in our study might not have grown as much as other types of institutions, many of them did feel an obligation to do their part to accommodate the increasing numbers of college students nationwide. For example, a 1956 report of Wheaton s long-range planning committee noted. "The enlargement of the College will also enable Wheaton to make a modest contribution in furnishing increased educational opportunity for the tidal wave' of young people who will be seeking admission to institutions of higher learning within the next two decades." Similarly, when the College of the Holy Cross decided to increase its size in 1962, it was in part because the college recognized its obligation, "'to do our share' to assist in the education explosion which had already begun across the nation."

Many of the Ohio liberal arts colleges in our study also felt obliged to expand. In 1956, the Committee on the Expanding Population of the Ohio College Association commissioned a study on "Meeting Ohio's Needs in Higher Education." The Russell Report, as it came to be known, found:

Most of the privately controlled institutions are giving thought to the question of the number of students they will be able to accommodate in the future.... In general, the privately controlled colleges and universities look forward to expansions that will amount in the next ten years to approximately a 65 percent increase over the 1955 enrollment levels. The increase in the period up to 1970 may be as much as 77 percent over the 1955 levels.

Although private colleges in Ohio, including those in our study, did grow, many of them worried about the impact growth might have on their quality. Ohio Wesleyan, for example, believed that "The impending crisis is twofold. There is the quantitative problem of how to give all qualified applicants an opportunity to gain a college education; and there is the qualitative problem of how to maintain and raise the standards of education in colleges as this increased load is placed upon their facilities and resources." Ohio Wesleyan's faculty were particularly concerned that the university not expand at the expense of quality. In 1955, 1956, and 1958, groups of faculty members urged President Flemming that "there should be no expansion of Ohio Wesleyan unless we can be assured that the quality of education it offers will not merely be maintained, but improved before such an expansion." (As it turned out and as is described in Chapter 3, during the tidal wave, candidates to Ohio Wesleyan and the other colleges in our study presented higher qualifications than ever before.)

Perhaps the most radical response to the enrollment crisis among our colleges (and the strongest evidence that the pressure to expand was ubiquitous) was "The New College Plan." In 1958, with support from the Ford Foundation, four institutions in the Connecticut Valley of Massachusetts—Amherst, Mount Holyoke, Smith, and the University of Massachusetts—developed a plan to create a new private liberal arts college. A 1958 faculty committee report described the genesis of "The New College Plan":

It is acknowledged on all sides that American higher education is facing a crisis and that if we are to continue "the pursuit of excellence" on which our society's growth, health, and safety depend, we shall have to bring to bear both great resources and great imagination. Many things will need to be done to meet the rapidly mounting demand which is the result not only of a drastic increase in the college age population but also of the steadily rising proportion of our young people who are seeking a college education. Amherst, Mount Holyoke, Smith, and the University of Massachusetts are already engaged in exploring and carrying out measures which each can take individually to meet the coming challenge. This report proposes that the four institutions also make a contribution cooperatively by sponsoring a new departure in liberal education of the highest quality ... To sponsor such a pilot plant should be a particularly appropriate role for privately endowed colleges, since as they are presently constituted they cannot, for economic reasons, expand rapidly and still maintain the higher standards which are their distinctive contribution.

(Continues...)

---

Excerpted from Crafting a Class by Elizabeth A. Duffy, Idana Goldberg. Copyright © 1998 Princeton University Press. Excerpted by permission of PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

---

Table of Contents

List of Figures and Tables

Foreword

Preface

Acknowledgments

Pt. I Enrollment, Admissions, and Quality 1

Ch. 1 Enrollment Pressures: Ebbs and Flows 3

Ch. 2 The Admissions Process 34

Ch. 3 Student Quality 76

Pt. II Responses to Social Forces 103

Ch. 4 The Coeducation Movement 105

Ch. 5 Minority Recruitment 137

Pt. III The Evolution of Financial Aid 167

Ch. 6 The Development of Need-Based Aid 169

Ch. 7 The Growth of Merit Aid 205

Conclusion 228

Notes 233

App. A Survey Forms 267

App. B Interviews 273

Bibliography 277

Index 286

What People are Saying About This

From the Publisher

"An excellent, interesting, well-written book.... It is a significant contribution to the history of higher education, and in particular, to the history of liberal arts colleges."—David W. Breneman, University of Virginia

Editorial Reviews

"An excellent, interesting, well-written book.... It is a significant contribution to the history of higher education, and in particular, to the history of liberal arts colleges."—David W. Breneman, University of Virginia

From the Publisher