The Sorting Machine and The Tyranny of Merit

Work under copyright: Title from which this excerpt is taken ( The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good? )
Author: Michael J. Sandel
Publisher: Allen Lane (2020)
The material is for students registered in a specific course at the University of St Andrews only.

College Enrollment Inequity
- Top colleges have exceptionally high enrollment from wealthy families.
- Only 3% of students in prestigious colleges come from the bottom income bracket.
- Significant presence of wealthy 1% families in Ivy League and elite colleges.
- At Yale and Princeton, approximately 1 in 50 students come from the bottom 20% of families.
Statistics on Attendance
- A student from a rich family (top 1%) is 77 times more likely to attend an Ivy League institution compared to someone from a poor family (bottom 20%).
Trends Over Time
- Elite colleges have increased financial aid yet representation from low-income families remains stagnant since 2000.
- The percentage of first-generation college students at Harvard is unchanged since 1960.
- Jerome Karabel cites continuity in accessibility for lower-income families to elite schools over decades.

Ineffectiveness of Elite Colleges
- Conducted by economist Raj Chetty, a comprehensive study analyzed the economic mobility of 30 million college students.
- Findings suggest minimal upward mobility facilitated by the current elite educational framework.
Mobility Rates
- At Harvard, only 1.8% of students rise from the bottom income quintile to the top.
- Compared to other public universities, similar profiles (e.g., University of Michigan and University of Virginia) indicate low mobility rates due to incoming wealth.
Exceptions in Mobility Rates
- Lesser-known public universities (e.g., Cal State University - LA, SUNY Stony Brook) demonstrate better mobility, with around 10% rising to the top income quintile.
Overall Impact
- The majority of America's 1,800 colleges yield less than 2% of students rising from the bottom income quintile to the top.
- College rarely transforms economic realities, instead consolidating privilege.

Understanding Mobility Standards
- The expectation that students from the bottom can rise to the top (annual incomes between $20,000 to $110,000 and beyond) indicates lofty demands from educational institutions.
- Youth through elite colleges show limited mobility; even rising two rungs (two quintiles) is rare.
College Reality vs. Myth of Mobility
- Degrees from prestigious institutions anchor greater job prospects but do not generate downward mobility for lower classes, challenging contemporary political beliefs.
- The concept that increased college attendance cultivates a meritocracy proves to be a misconstruction of actual mobility dynamics.

Affirmative Action Misconception
- Colleges practice affirmative action favoring the wealthy and alumni, diminishing attempts to diversify the student body per socioeconomic backgrounds.
Legacy Admissions
- Legacy applicants at institutions like Harvard have acceptance rates significantly higher than general applicants (1 in 3 vs 1 in 20).
Athletic Preferences
- Recruitment based on athletic performance overwhelmingly benefits affluent, white students as sports choices skew towards the privileged.
Recommendations for Change in Admissions
- Institutions could recognize class-based affirmative action for lower-income applicants akin to current benefits awarded to legacies and donors.
- Ending standardized testing requirements may favor social mobility, as tests often reflect socioeconomic disparities.

Studying Social Esteem
- Merit-based systems harbor public judgments on worth and success giving rise to social discord.
- Elite networks correlate with perception of worth and societal status; educational systems inadvertently prolong such stratification.
Emergency of New Elite
- The correlation between elite college admissions and socio-economic privilege mimics past aristocratic privileges.
- The emotional toll through competitive admissions produces anxiety, dictating personal narratives of students attempting to perpetuate or flee from inherited privilege.
Counterproductive Outcome
- Such meritocratic regimes generate anxiety and emotional distress, particularly through intense academic competition among high school students.

Parental Pressures and Systematic Issues
- Increasing parental involvement has intensified as families prepare their children to navigate competitive environments. This paternalism often prioritizes curriculum-focused achievement compromising genuine learning experiences.
Mental Health Epidemic
- The rise of parental control styles correlates with increasing mental health grievances among affluent youth, suggesting an inverted correlation between affluence and individual well-being.
Societal Trends
- Studies depict affluent youths experiencing heightened rates of depression and anxiety despite being predisposed to elite pathways.

Rethinking Admissions Criteria
- Possible reform includes strategies to amplify equity within admissions through randomized lotteries while maintaining merit as a threshold.
- Emphasis on diversity and fairness instead of solely competitive standing allows enriched college environments respecting a broader social and cultural spectrum.
Shifting Cultural Values
- The societal viewpoint towards vocational and non-college degree professions should transform, abolishing hierarchies that undermine contributions of essential job roles.
Why Civic Education Matters
- Addressing moral and civic education imperatives across varied educational frameworks exemplify democratized learning pathways not solely confined to elite institutions.

Counteracting Merit’s Tyranny
- Meritocracy breeds both unhealthy competition and grounds for unjustifiably elevated self-worth among the affluent while demoralizing others.
The Importance of Balance
- Respect and acknowledgment of dignity in all vocational roles promotes communal virtue; dismantling the myths of educational supremacy thereby cultivating inclusive civic understanding.