• HOME
  • About
  • MINUTES
    • 2022-2023 >
      • 9-7-2022
      • 9-14-2022
      • 9-21-2022
      • 9-28-2022
      • 10-05-2022
      • 10-12-2022
      • 10-19-2022
      • 10-26-2022
      • 11-2-2022
      • 11-09-2022
      • 11-16-2022
      • 11-30-2022
      • 12-7-2022
      • 1-11-2023
      • 1-18-2023
      • 1-25-2023
      • 2-1-2023
      • 2-8-2023
      • 2-15-2023
      • 2-22-2023
      • 3-1-2023
      • 3-8-2023
      • 3-15-2023
    • 2021-2022
    • 2020-2021
    • 2019-2020
    • 2018-2019
    • 2017-2018
    • 2016-2017
    • 2015-2016
    • 2014-2015
    • 2013-2014
    • 2012-2013
    • 2011-2012
    • 2010-2011
    • 2009-2010
    • 2008-2009
    • 2007-2008
    • 2006-2007
    • 2005-2006 >
      • 5-17-2006
    • Subject Index 1943 - 2016
  • Programs
    • Spring 2023
    • Meeting Information
  • Members Only
    • Meeting Locations
    • Guest Policies
    • Recording Minutes
    • Officers-Chairs
    • Membership >
      • Membership Nominations
      • Member Responsibilities
      • Committee Responsibilities
      • Change Request
      • Alternate Contact
      • Departure Notice
    • Bylaws
    • History
    • Holiday Party 2021
    • 75th Anniversary
    • 70th Anniversary
    • Photo 2012
    • Photo 2006
  • HOME
  • About
  • MINUTES
    • 2022-2023 >
      • 9-7-2022
      • 9-14-2022
      • 9-21-2022
      • 9-28-2022
      • 10-05-2022
      • 10-12-2022
      • 10-19-2022
      • 10-26-2022
      • 11-2-2022
      • 11-09-2022
      • 11-16-2022
      • 11-30-2022
      • 12-7-2022
      • 1-11-2023
      • 1-18-2023
      • 1-25-2023
      • 2-1-2023
      • 2-8-2023
      • 2-15-2023
      • 2-22-2023
      • 3-1-2023
      • 3-8-2023
      • 3-15-2023
    • 2021-2022
    • 2020-2021
    • 2019-2020
    • 2018-2019
    • 2017-2018
    • 2016-2017
    • 2015-2016
    • 2014-2015
    • 2013-2014
    • 2012-2013
    • 2011-2012
    • 2010-2011
    • 2009-2010
    • 2008-2009
    • 2007-2008
    • 2006-2007
    • 2005-2006 >
      • 5-17-2006
    • Subject Index 1943 - 2016
  • Programs
    • Spring 2023
    • Meeting Information
  • Members Only
    • Meeting Locations
    • Guest Policies
    • Recording Minutes
    • Officers-Chairs
    • Membership >
      • Membership Nominations
      • Member Responsibilities
      • Committee Responsibilities
      • Change Request
      • Alternate Contact
      • Departure Notice
    • Bylaws
    • History
    • Holiday Party 2021
    • 75th Anniversary
    • 70th Anniversary
    • Photo 2012
    • Photo 2006
the old guard of princeton

April 8, 2009

College Admissions

Jim Wickenden
President Wickenden Associates, Princeton, NJ

Minutes of the 26th Meeting of the 67th Year
The President called to order the 26th meeting of the 67th year at exactly l0:15 AM, and Don Edwards presented the invocation. Joe Giordmaine read the minutes of last weeks meeting to more 100 attendees. Tom Fuller introduced his guest Catherine McVay Hughes, as did Dave McAlpin his wife Sally and Nick Wilson, David and Chips Wilson. Membership Chair Charles Stonard promoted Edgar Buttenheim to Emeritus status. The President than reminded us of the location of next Wednesday's meeting.
 
Bud Lyle introduced our speaker Jim Wickenden, a long time friend. Jim was educated at Princeton and Harvard culminating in a PhD at Boston University. He was Dean Of Admissions at Princeton from 1978 to 1983. He then formed Wickenden Associates which has helped select Secondary School heads for over 300 institutions including PDS and Valley Forge Military Academy.
 
Jim said he was particularly happy to speak to the Old Guard because he has a wife of 47 years three daughters and sons-in-law and three grand children and none of them want to hear me talk. He went on to give a very interesting, informative, and humorous talk.
 
He mentioned he received a letter from a mother who said she had been through a divorce, the kidnapping of a child and she preferred both to the college admission process. He indicated that the admission process made some very good decisions, but also some mistakes. Mistakes included the admission of a fictitious applicant. He admitted that admission to Princeton is a function of meritocracy and politics. In 1983 11,000  applications were received at Princeton resulting in an acceptance rate of 13%. In 2008 over 22,000 applications and an admission rate of 9.8%. Jim indicated there were seven reasons for this:
  1. The U.S. News and World Report annual rating of outstanding schools.
  2. The demographic bubble has resulted in more people applying to college than ever before.
  3. reduced costs of transportation has helped more applicants to be able to afford to apply.
  4. Huge increase in foreign students applying.
  5. Increased financial aid including more grants versus loans.
  6. One standard application form.
  7. Submitting on line is much easier.
In 1983 Princeton used a rating system of 1 to 5; 1 meant the applicant would have SAT and achievement scores in the high seven hundreds. The fives had scores in the high 400's or low 500's. The faculty committee on admission decided how many in each group would be admitted to Princeton. The groups included engineering, alumni children, recruited athletes, students of color (not Asians), development cases (those with ability and inclination to give) and those gifted in the arts. These classes of applicants were not held to the same standards, it was not a fair process. 60% of those admitted had a rating of 2 or better. Bringing something to a residential community was important. Most accepted applicants were in the top 2-3% of SAT scores and the top 5% of their class.
 
The political aspects of acceptance applied to 40% of the class being members of the special groups. Math professors and Asian students wanted more of their kind admitted. College counselors added comments to applications such as " editor of the school magazine she salvaged it from distinction'', "although Jennifer is under considerable pressure from her   family to achieve high grades, she has resisted this pressure with a high-degree of success'', "underneath his flabby exterior is an enormous lack of character'',  "Sue has read many of the Greek tragedies in the original Latin".  Student applicant and parent comments included " reason you   should  admit me because I have never worked very hard and my brain is as good as new".  One parent after his son was turned down wrote " I will do my utmost to see that you are fired from whatever job you hold".   Another mother wrote   that since her son was turned down, " the one and a half million dollars my husband had bequeathed to Princeton will go to me instead".
 
Jim gave several examples of the substantial variations in advisor evaluations and student comments which make it very difficult to evaluate some applications. We didn't always admit the best candidates, but we could defend the decisions we made based on the evidence that we had.
 
Jim added that a bachelors degree is much less important today than it was in 1963 because there are three times as many. Many parents are too fixated on getting their child into a school that may not be appropriate. Try to get your child into a school where he or she will be in the top half of the class, doing what they are interested in and are good at, and will experience a range of enriching experiences.
 
A vigorous question period followed including that Princeton is better today because of coeducation. I interviewed Brooke Shields, Jim concluded with concern about why aren't more men going to college, while class size is increasing at Princeton there will not be more athletes, there's an increased number of international students being admitted, there's a much greater emphasis on those skilled in the arts and on economic and racial diversity, and at the present time more emphasis on full payers.

Respectfully submitted,
John Lasley

Search Old Guard Minutes using keywords: