The Years That Matter Most: How College Makes or Breaks Us

Paul Tough explores the current world of college education and finds flaws all around. The story of the "welder" who gets a high paying job without going to college? Well, there are some high paying jobs around in big cities. But most of welding jobs are not in the "Super high paying" realm. The jobs also require going to school to become a welder. What about the worry that under-qualified low-income minorities are taking all the good college seats away? Colleges would love to have more low-income minorities. However, the primary "under-qualified" admits are of the "rich and white" variety. While admissions scandals brought attention to people paying thousands to get their kids into college via phony sports resumes, hey were just people trying to do it on the cheap. Many colleges have spots waiting for anybody waiting to donate a few million dollars.
He also debunks plenty of College Board propaganda. Standardized tests tend to benefit the wealthy that are willing to pay for expensive test preparation. Even the free SAT-prep offered by the college board is primarily used by those who need it the least.
Is college worth it? That also depends. The most prestigious colleges tend to lead to the best paying jobs. Even among the ivy league schools, there is a hierarchy of "the best" with the likes of Harvard, Stanford, Princeton and Yale up top. Employers use the caliber of school as a proxy of the best students. (Thus school admissions officers end up making decisions.) Extra circulars are also analyzed, though this often favors the wealthy. Lacrosse is preferable to football.
Even the minority students at elite schools are a mirage. Many of the ethnic minorities are the children of wealthy executives and immigrants. Poor students are likely to be those that attended elite prep schools on scholarship. Schools also work to manipulate the numbers. Students that just qualify for Pell grants are much more likely to be admitted than students that just miss the cut off.
The anecdotes are also enlightening. A student wanted to go to Penn or maybe Princeton as a backup. She got rejected by both. However, she ended up getting into Stanford - a school with a much lower acceptance rate. A master test prep consultant charges $400 per hour, and spends most of the time chatting with the students. He helps them to de-stress and minimize the importance of the test. He also teaches a few tips and tricks - and produces great results. The super-elite colleges spend a lot more per student on education, however, most of this comes from the endowment. The mid-tier schools need tuition money to survive. They play a complicated quantitative game of admissions. They must get the right mix of students that will generate income, while also having enough high-quality students. They dangle enough scholarship money to entice acceptance (and the tuition money that comes with it.) There was also the study that showed that letting poor students know about colleges led to more attending elite colleges that matched their scores. However, when the college board tried to repeat it, nothing much happened. There are other factors (such as family) that prevent poor students from attending the most elite colleges. However, the poor would benefit the most. The quality of college is strongly correlated with lifetime income. Across all incoming income levels, those that attend more elite schools will earn more. Those that come in wealthy will have some advantage, but those that come in poor will see the biggest increase in income. The logical path is to attend to best school you can get in to. However, high-performing poor are more likely to go to a nearby community college or state school (even if they could get a free ride to an ivy)
The college system could be a great equalizer. Instead, it just helps out the haves. What can we do about it?