Meritocracy is at the heart of the modern democratic state. In principle it guarantees that the rewards in a society will be distributed based on accomplishment. However, once the components of merit are agreed upon and once the rewards are set forth, there is nothing to prevent advantage seeking, at least for the well-informed and the well-resourced.
Of all the areas in which advantage seeking may be identified, perhaps none is more understandable than that of seeking advantage for one’s children. We have no sooner digested the recent Varsity Blues scandal in which well heeled parents purchased college admission for their children than we come upon another case of parents seeking advantage on behalf of their already advantaged children. A recent piece in Pro Publica tells the story of a Hedge Fund Billionaire who made major contributions to seven elite universities in an effort to encourage admission of his children.
The story is interesting for several reasons. First, it is an illustration of the lengths to which those who have profited from meritocracy seek to extend the benefits to the next generation. Second, the account shows efforts on both ends of the college admissions equation, substantial investments in the education of the children together with efforts to skew the admissions process in their favor. Third, like earlier stories around elite college admissions, it raises questions about the connection between the admissions process and fund raising at elite schools.
An important lesson to be drawn from this and similar examples is that while we can deploy rigorous assessment practices to promote meritocracy, such practices are always operating in a larger social context from which they cannot be isolated. This means that individuals with resources can mobilize those resources to enhance their assessment results, and with sufficient resources they can even influence the conditions under which decisions employing such results are made.
Be the first to comment