by Amanda Dick

Hatchet Staff Writer

Issue date: 4/17/08

Correction appended

While record-high numbers of academically prestigious freshmen are enrolling at Ivy League colleges, fewer smart students are choosing to attend GW, according to a report presented at last Friday's Faculty Senate meeting.

The report, "The Decline in Elite Freshmen Admissions," highlights aspects of this rift including fewer freshman recipients of National Merit Scholarships, a 6 percent drop in early decision I applicants and a 15 percent drop in early decision II applicants for fall 2008 admission.

"Faculty members who have read the report are both surprised and concerned," said Donald Parsons, a professor of economics and chair of the Faculty Senate's educational policy committee. "The few administrators who have given an opinion seem skeptical that the phenomenon exists at all."

Members of a Faculty Senate committee commissioned the report in response to a $1 million cut in funding for merit scholarships in its 2007-2008 operating budget. High tuition and cuts to available merit aid caused concern for some administrators. They worried GW might seem less attractive to academically prestigious students. Many of these students took advantage of GW's generous merit scholarship awards in previous years.

Parsons said he has been circulating the report to professors and administrators as a means to stimulate debate about GW's current policies.

"Only the administration can address issues of resources," Parsons said. "GW has a long tradition of 'top down' governance. Although that may be changing under (University President Steven) Knapp, under the last president, faculty 'surprise and concern' over an issue of educational quality was not something that would affect policy."

Margaret Soltan, an English professor who blogs on higher education, said the University is failing to attract, or failing to keep, the best students who apply to GW.

"If GW has (the money), it should certainly spend like a drunken sailor on scholarships for our best students," Soltan said. "But I get the feeling GW doesn't really have these resources anymore - at least not in the way it once did."

GW was not among the 98 colleges and universities with at least 20 National Merit Scholars among the classes they admitted last spring. The trends for National Merit Scholar enrollment is "almost entirely driven by the amount of internal funds devoted to National Merit Scholarships," meaning GW is not spending enough on merit scholarships, the report said.

"It is important for schools to attract students with strong academic records," said Cheryl Beil, assistant vice president for academic planning. "This group would include National Merit Scholars, but is not limited to merit winners."

In the early 1990s, when GW was aiming to increase its students' academic profiles, Beil said the University made a concerted effort to recruit National Merit Scholars. This effort led to a "bi-modal class."

"At one end was the high SAT scorers made up of National Merit Scholars (and at) the other was the bulk of GW students at that time, with lower SAT scores," Beil said, adding that GW faculty found it difficult to teach to this group because the differences among them were so vast.

But other professors are not bothered by the trends detailed in the report.

Professor Barbara von Barghahn said, "I have been teaching art history at GW since 1974. Quite honestly, many of my very best students have not been 'elite' freshmen."

This article has been changed to reflect the following correction (April 17, 2008):

The Hatchet erroneously reported that the University commissioned the report, "The Decline in Elite Freshmen Admissions." Members of a Faculty Senate committee commissioned the report.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=800896&forum_id=1#9649858)

Issue date: 4/21/08 Section: Opinions

Have GW's undergraduate programs reached a glass ceiling of intellectual talent? Or, in the spirit of last Thursday's Hatchet front page, are we getting dumber?

The glaring headline "Intelligent students decrease" greeted the GW community and the throngs of admitted high school seniors and parents here last week for spring visits. These three words likely instilled a specific fear in many readers and have reinvigorated the debate about affordability and student caliber at GW.

A report presented at the Faculty Senate, entitled "The Decline in Elite Freshmen Admissions," is forcing into question the quality of GW students. The findings are based on fewer early decision I and early decision II applicants, a decline in mean SAT scores for the University Honors Program and a decrease in the number of enrolling National Merit Scholars. While these declines could be tied to a cut in merit-based financial aid from the University in the past year, other factors must be taken into account.

Early decision at GW is a binding agreement, and considering the downturn in the economy and the University's over $50,000 per year price tag, students and families who have doubts about being able to afford GW without financial aid are advised to steer clear of early decision. Thus, a decline in applicants in the early decision stage does not necessarily equate to a decline in extremely qualified students interested in GW.

It is also important to remember that the University Honors Program has recently changed its structure, which has affected the type of student who might be attracted to the program. The decline in mean Honors Program SAT scores could be indicative of this shift, rather than of a general decline in student quality.

Similarly, pointing to a decrease in enrolling National Merit Scholars as a sign of a deteriorating student body makes an absurd generalization about what makes a talented, qualified student. The National Merit process relies initially on the scores of the PSAT, which brings its own issues about standardized testing and the merits of defining students' abilities by those scores.

Affordability and academic prestige should continue to be hot-button issues at GW, but correlation should not be mistaken for causation. There are many diverse factors that contribute to college admissions numbers, and it may be too soon to start lamenting the state of the GW student body's intelligence.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=800896&forum_id=1#9664782)

[To begin with, precisely what "correlation" does the piece address?]

Anyway, I enjoyed these paragraphs:

"It is also important to remember that the University Honors Program has recently changed its structure, which has affected the type of student who might be attracted to the program. The decline in mean Honors Program SAT scores could be indicative of this shift, rather than of a general decline in student quality.

"Similarly, pointing to a decrease in enrolling National Merit Scholars as a sign of a deteriorating student body makes an absurd generalization about what makes a talented, qualified student. The National Merit process relies initially on the scores of the PSAT, which brings its own issues about standardized testing and the merits of defining students' abilities by those scores."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=800896&forum_id=1#9694550)

by Amanda Dick

Hatchet Staff Writer

Issue date: 4/28/08

Some top administrators are second-guessing the validity of a report released this month regarding the decline of "elite" freshmen attending GW.

The Faculty Senate report, called the "Decline of Elite Freshmen Admissions," said a lack of National Merit Scholars and a drop in early decision applicants meant less top-tier students were attending the University. Carol Sigelman, associate vice president for academic affairs, said it leaves out important information and should be redone.

"The report presents a damaging view of GW, especially at recruitment time," Sigelman said. "The purpose of the report is to inform, and there are some distortions and missing information in the report, such as the SAT scores of incoming freshmen."

Robert Chernak, vice president for student and academic support services, said the University has consistently admitted a better freshman class in terms of test scores and class rank every year - though the number of admitted National Merit Scholars has recently decreased.

Over the past three years, enrollment of students ranked in the top two admissions rating categories has declined, according to the report.

The University rejected 200 lesser-qualified students from the waitlist last spring, making them short of admitting the targeted 2,350 freshmen, according to the report. Focusing on increasing the number of National Merit Scholars or other measures of the freshman class are "easy things to correct if we set them as priorities," Chernak said.

"We are in a difficult market-niche," he said. "We need a mutual agenda about where we will be, how to get there and what we are looking to do."

Katherine Napper, executive dean for undergraduate admissions, declined to comment on the report, but wrote in an e-mail that the statistics "require a much further and sophisticated analysis than what might be apparent in (the report)."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=800896&forum_id=1#9706429)