PD Editorial: Don’t rush college admissions reforms

California is at the center of the college admissions scandal. Prosecutors say officials at some of the state's premier schools accepted bribes. Many of the families involved are Californians. And the ringleader business was based here. It is, simply, embarrassing for the state. That's not a reason to rush to change state laws.

California must ensure that higher education isn't just for the privileged. All high school students deserve a fair shot at attending a college or university. For every student admitted through bribery and chicanery, an honest student qualified student was denied a seat.

A group of state lawmakers has legislation ready to go. In their haste, however, they risk unintended consequences. This issue deserves thoughtful analysis and public dialogue, not bills hurriedly introduced to seize the limelight.

Lawmakers would, for example, consider phasing out national standardized tests like the ACT and SAT. They might require greater scrutiny of “special admissions” sometimes given to borderline applicants. And, most sensibly, they're calling for an audit of admissions systems at state schools. Gathering solid data before acting is usually a good idea.

Some of their ideas, however, could cause serious disruptions to higher education. For instance, they propose banning legacy preferences in which the children of alumni receive some application boost. The ban would even extend to private schools that accept Cal Grant funding.

Legacy preferences serve a purpose, though. Colleges and universities rely on donations from alumni to balance their budgets. As the state has scaled back funding for higher education, schools have had to find other sources of revenue. Tuition can only go so high. Giving preference to the children of alumni cultivates a strong family relationship that can generate donations over time.

That's not to say money should trump equity. But it is a consideration in the real world. And if lawmakers choose to change that, they must address how to fill the funding gap.

To be clear, some of these proposals have merit. But without a thorough vetting, you can count on unexepected surprises down the line.

It's not as if the biases in the college admissions system have been secret. The system is rigged to benefit privileged students.

Wealthy families can make sure their kids participate in the right sorts of activities that make an application shine. They can hire tutors and test-prep coaches. They can enroll their kids in private schools with all the right support. It's all on the up and up.

And if all else fails, a hefty contribution to a school's endowment might help. That's not a bribe; it's a tax-deductible donation.

Meanwhile, students from more modest means and a public high school might be just as capable of excelling in higher education, but they lack those advantages. They're lucky if they even have a guidance counselor who isn't overwhelmed.

Those are endemic challenges that a few well-meaning bills won't fix.

Yet lawmakers suddenly deem these issues so important that they are using a tactic called “gut-and-amend” to get around the Feb. 22 deadline to introduce new legislation. If fixing college admissions is important enough to resort to parliamentary tricks, it's important to get it right. Put off the overhaul until next year, and spend the intervening months bringing everyone to the table and developing a plan that's more than impulsive reaction to a scandal.

You can send a letter to the editor at letters@pressdemocrat.com