wanted: umass director (of admissions)
the daily hampshire gazette reports today on the fact that umass has been without a director of admissions for 6 years, with the two finalists from the latest search turning the position down. i've speculated that this might have to do the fact that the position reports to mike gargano, and with the administration's hypocrisy on diversity-related recruitment and support issues. in the gazette article, gargano suggests that it has to do with the perpetually unsure status of state support for umass, and with "an antiquated admissions office that makes it harder to meet recruitment goals".
he adds: "i think the problem, actually, is a lot of folks just didn't know where this institution is headed". no doubt - a lot of folks in particular don't know where student affairs is headed under his own incompetent leadership. some professional student affairs staff don't even know if they'll have jobs at this time next week, and it's anybody's guess when or whether the many offices that have been "decapitated" under his rule - the offices whose directors have been removed and not replaced - will once again be allowed to function at full capacity.
the article notes that the average SAT and GPA of applicants is up this year, and that enrollment is expected to be higher than last year. given the well-known fact that SAT scores tend to correlate well with socioeconomic status, we can speculate that the rise in SAT scores indicates that the trend of purging low-SES students from umass is continuing.
although GPA is supposed to be a better indicator of academic prospects that SAT scores, there is a sociological factor affecting GPA that isn't often mentioned: weighted GPA. in massachusetts, advanced placement (AP) courses can produce "bonus" GPA points compared to regular courses. and AP courses are not offered at all high schools - they tend to be offered in high schools in higher-income neighborhoods. a trusted source in the umass admissions office assures me that the biasing effect of weighted GPA is not an important factor, but the question lingers.
the trend towards boosting out-of-state enrollment, mentioned in the gazette article as one of gargano's priorities, is yet another indication of the departure of umass's admissions practices from the university's responsibility to the massachusetts public. if it's true that umass students continue to come from higher income levels, it suggests that the quality of umass undergraduate students continues to deteriorate, by suggesting that qualified students from low-income backgrounds must obtain higher and higher SAT scores and GPA, and have higher and higher levels of motivation for enrolling in a university which increasingly excludes people like them.
one positive note in the article is that (according to gargano) there is no change in the number of applications from students of color, and a slight rise in the number of students of color putting down deposits. it's not clear to me how to reconcile these facts with the administration's attacks on diversity programs.
another positive point is the new "first choice, early action" program, which rewards students who name umass as their first choice. statistics are not currently collected on what other schools umass applicants apply to, but it's been argued that there are many umass undergraduates for whom umass is a "safety" school - often students who are privileged enough, but not qualified enough, to be able to attend more prestigious private institutions. such students have been blamed for much of the rowdiness associated with umass undergrads. it would seem to benefit the university to admit in their place students who appreciate what umass can offer them.
he adds: "i think the problem, actually, is a lot of folks just didn't know where this institution is headed". no doubt - a lot of folks in particular don't know where student affairs is headed under his own incompetent leadership. some professional student affairs staff don't even know if they'll have jobs at this time next week, and it's anybody's guess when or whether the many offices that have been "decapitated" under his rule - the offices whose directors have been removed and not replaced - will once again be allowed to function at full capacity.
the article notes that the average SAT and GPA of applicants is up this year, and that enrollment is expected to be higher than last year. given the well-known fact that SAT scores tend to correlate well with socioeconomic status, we can speculate that the rise in SAT scores indicates that the trend of purging low-SES students from umass is continuing.
although GPA is supposed to be a better indicator of academic prospects that SAT scores, there is a sociological factor affecting GPA that isn't often mentioned: weighted GPA. in massachusetts, advanced placement (AP) courses can produce "bonus" GPA points compared to regular courses. and AP courses are not offered at all high schools - they tend to be offered in high schools in higher-income neighborhoods. a trusted source in the umass admissions office assures me that the biasing effect of weighted GPA is not an important factor, but the question lingers.
the trend towards boosting out-of-state enrollment, mentioned in the gazette article as one of gargano's priorities, is yet another indication of the departure of umass's admissions practices from the university's responsibility to the massachusetts public. if it's true that umass students continue to come from higher income levels, it suggests that the quality of umass undergraduate students continues to deteriorate, by suggesting that qualified students from low-income backgrounds must obtain higher and higher SAT scores and GPA, and have higher and higher levels of motivation for enrolling in a university which increasingly excludes people like them.
one positive note in the article is that (according to gargano) there is no change in the number of applications from students of color, and a slight rise in the number of students of color putting down deposits. it's not clear to me how to reconcile these facts with the administration's attacks on diversity programs.
another positive point is the new "first choice, early action" program, which rewards students who name umass as their first choice. statistics are not currently collected on what other schools umass applicants apply to, but it's been argued that there are many umass undergraduates for whom umass is a "safety" school - often students who are privileged enough, but not qualified enough, to be able to attend more prestigious private institutions. such students have been blamed for much of the rowdiness associated with umass undergrads. it would seem to benefit the university to admit in their place students who appreciate what umass can offer them.
posted by Uri at 1:35 PM
<< Home