The first study of its kind, the Equality of Opportunity Project was granted special access to IRS tax records, allowing them to perform an in-depth analysis of economic diversity within higher education and track students’ social mobility in the years following graduation. From the Ivy Leagues to highly selective colleges to state universities, the 94-page study provides extensive data on numerous schools’ student demographics. Upon publication, the results were met with mixed feelings of shock and surprise from the CC administration and students alike.
“We got no warning or pre-reading, and were just as surprised as everyone else,” said Mark Hatch, Vice President of Enrollment. “We know our student body is affluent based on how many students don’t apply for any financial aid, but without access to tax returns and the other information provided by the Free Application for Federal Student Aide (FAFSA), we have no way of knowing the details. This is the first study that has revealed something as specific as the 1 percent.”
Citing the highest median family income amongst highly selective colleges at $277,500, with more than half of CC students falling within the top 5 percent of the income scale, the study speaks to the affluence of CC students. However, after further inquiry, it is clear that these numbers require a larger context beyond the scope of the New York Times article.
The data included in the Equality of Opportunity Project’s study reflects that of the graduating classes of the early 2000s—meaning students who started college in the late 1990s. Therefore, the study is not necessarily representative of current day demographics. “When you look into the actual study, you find that the data is actually rather old,” said Lyrae Williams, Associate Vice President and data analyst for the CC Office of Institutional Planning and Effectiveness. “The demographics of CC in the late ‘90s and early 2000s were very different from today. Since President Tiefenthaler arrived, the priorities of the school have shifted significantly along with the priorities of higher education.”
Such shifts include CC’s increased efforts to recruit applicants from lower-income families and the college’s capitol campaign. In 2012, shortly after President Tiefenthaler arrived, CC joined Questbridge, a non-profit that matches low-income, high achieving students with the U.S.’s leading colleges and universities. Questbridge students often come from low-income families and/or families from which they are the first generation to attend college.
“We understand the difficulties of having a less socioeconomically diverse campus,” said Hatch. “But we are committed to increasing our ability to financially aid those who cannot afford CC’s cost.” With regards to the annually increasing cost of attendance, CC’s capitol campaign is currently fundraising $80 million for the sole purpose of increasing the financial aid budget, which currently accounts for about one third of CC’s $700 million endowment.
In response to criticism that compares CC and other small, liberal arts schools to large universities such as UCLA and NYU—which were among the study’s list of most economically diverse universities—the CC administration stresses the vast differences between the two types of school.
“There are nearly 2,000 four-year colleges and universities in the U.S. Liberal Arts schools like Colorado College serve less than 1 percent of the population. We have very different missions than large state universities, and we serve drastically different audiences,” said Williams. “A large, public, state university is going to serve a more economically diverse student body, in part because of its sheer size alone.”
However, despite CC’s size and all the changes it has undertaken in recent years, current economic demographics reveal a similar pattern to that of the Equality of Opportunity Project cited from over a decade ago. For the most part, CC’s student body remains highly affluent. For the 2016-2017 academic year, only 40 percent of students applied for need-based financial aid. The remaining 60 percent paid full tuition, which, with room and board included, is estimated to cost $66,400 per year.
According to visiting Sociology Professor Laren Hannscott, the affluence of the CC campus cannot be isolated at an institutional level, but is largely rooted in the networks and resources available to students before they even step foot on campus. “There are different qualities of education all over the U.S. Who a school like CC considers ‘qualified’ is often correlated to an applicant’s socioeconomic status,” said Hannscott. As a small, liberal arts college in the middle of Colorado, CC’s potential applicant pool is significantly smaller than that of a large university and is far more dependent on legacy and alumni word of mouth. Likewise, with such emphasis on test scores, GPAs, and writing supplements, those with the resources to afford school choice, tutors, test prep, and the like have an inevitable advantage during the college application process. Not only do they have the resources to work within the system and exceed standards, but they also are more likely to resemble those who have succeeded at CC in the past, inadvertently indicating that they are less likely to transfer or drop out.
Furthermore, while CC is committed to meeting every student’s demonstrated financial need—as calculated by the FAFSA—the fact remains that those applicants for who money is not a limiting factor are more likely to attend if accepted. Provided in a combination of grants and loans, the “demonstrated need”-based financial aid may still be too little for less affluent families to justify taking on the average CC graduate’s $20,000 debt.
Ultimately, the unique aspects of CC—the Block Plan, small class size, and commitment to remaining a small, liberal arts institution—rack up a significant price tag. While the college has taken immense steps to creating and expanding the resources it can offer incoming students, the Equality of Opportunity Project has certainly given CC some things to consider.
When it comes to the New York Times article specifically, however, many CC students are left wondering: with the truth of the economic disparity on campus made glaringly visible, where do we go from here?
The data regarding upward mobility is that which is from the graduating classes of the early 2000s, which makes sense considering you cannot quantify upward mobility for students currently enrolled. The income data, however, is derived from current tax information and illustrates the current status of economic diversity at CC. It’s unfortunate that Mark Hatch and Lyrae Williams thought it would be appropriate to diminish the impact of this information so as to calm critics and donors.