Harvard Civil Rights Project
August 23, 2002
With reauthorization time nearing in Washington for the Higher Education Act, expect renewed discussion of whether the federal government should add a "merit" component to its billions of dollars in need-based aid for college students. In my view, this idea warrants serious consideration as a way of creating incentives for young people to study harder and learn more in high school, an effect that would likely trickle down into the middle and elementary schools. We have a far better chance of "leaving no child behind" if young people see a tangible reward attached to academic achievement-the more so if they come from low income families. But this idea faces stiff opposition from a cadre of purists who contend that financial neediness alone should determine one's eligibility for (and the amount of) aid to attend college. That point of view is argued in a new report from the Harvard Civil Rights Project, which examines the merit-based scholarship programs that have been spreading from state to state (and are now operational in at least a dozen of them). Predictably, given the "social engineering" orientation of that Project, this report concludes that giving non-poor people financial assistance as incentive and reward for doing well in high school is a socially dysfunctional thing to do, that it increases stratification, doesn't boost "access," etc. You can find it on the web at http://www.law.harvard.edu/groups/civilrights/publications/meritaid/synopsis.html. You may also want to read about the testy response it evoked from several higher education experts at a recent conference of the National Governors Association. Their basic contentions: popular programs such as Georgia's HOPE Scholarships, merit-based though they are, have drawn lots more resources into student financial aid and much of that money has gone to assist students who are far from wealthy but don't qualify for federal assistance. You can read an article about this debate at http://chronicle.com/daily/2002/08/2002082902n.htm (subscribers only) ("Speakers Rebut Criticism of State-Based Merit Aid, Saying Plans Help Needy Students," by Jeffrey Selingo, The Chronicle of Higher Education, August 29, 2002). Among the comments is this bit of silliness from the usually sensible David Breneman, dean of education at the University of Virginia: "I can't remember a time when the instincts of politicians have been so at odds with what most economists seem to think is sensible policy." Please raise your hand if you would like our public policies henceforth to be shaped by economists instead of elected officials.
