{"product_id":"the-price-of-admission-updated-edition-isbn-9781400097975","title":"The Price of Admission (Updated Edition)","description":"\u003cb\u003eNATIONAL BESTSELLER\u003c\/b\u003e • \u003cb\u003e“A fire-breathing, righteous attack on the culture of superprivilege.”—Michael Wolff, author of the #1 \u003ci\u003eNew York Times\u003c\/i\u003e bestseller \u003ci\u003eFire and Fury,\u003c\/i\u003e in the \u003ci\u003eNew York Times Book Review\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e\u003cbr\u003e \u003ci\u003e \u003cbr\u003e\u003c\/i\u003e\u003cb\u003eNOW WITH NEW REPORTING ON OPERATION VARSITY BLUES\u003c\/b\u003e\u003ci\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c\/i\u003e\u003cbr\u003eIn this explosive and prescient book, based on three years of investigative report­ing, Pulitzer Prize winner Daniel Golden shatters the myth of an American meri­tocracy. Naming names, along with grades and test scores, Golden lays bare a corrupt system in which middle-class and working-class whites and Asian Ameri­cans are routinely passed over in favor of wealthy white students with lesser credentials—children of alumni, big donors, and celebrities. He reveals how a family donation got Jared Kushner into Harvard, and how colleges comply with Title IX by giving scholarships to rich women in “patrician sports” like horseback riding and crew.\u003cbr\u003e \u003cbr\u003eWith a riveting new chapter on Operation Varsity Blues, based on original re­porting, \u003ci\u003eThe Price of Admission\u003c\/i\u003e is a must-read—not only for parents and students with a personal stake in college admissions but also for those disturbed by the growing divide between ordinary and privileged Americans.\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cb\u003ePraise for \u003ci\u003eThe Price of Admission\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e\u003cbr\u003e \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003e \u003cbr\u003e\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e“A disturbing exposé of the influence that wealth and power still exert on admission to the nation’s most prestigious universities.”\u003cb\u003e—\u003ci\u003eThe Washington Post\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003e“Deserves to become a classic.”\u003cb\u003e—\u003ci\u003eThe Economist\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e\u003cbr\u003e \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003e \u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e“A delicious account of gross inequities in high places. . . . [Golden] is the Ida  Tarbell of college admissions. . . . A fire-breathing, righteous attack on the culture  of super-priviledge.”\u003cb\u003e—Michael Wolff, \u003ci\u003eNew York Times Book Review\u003c\/i\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e \u003cbr\u003e “Deserves to become  a classic. . . . Why do Mr Golden's findings matter so much? The most important reason  is that America is witnessing a potentially explosive combination of trends. Social  inequality is rising at a time when the escalators of social mobility are slowing.”\u003cb\u003e—\u003c\/b\u003e\u003ci\u003e\u003cb\u003eThe Economist\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/i\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003e “I didn’t want to believe  that rich families and celebrities buy places for their children in America’s best  colleges. But Daniel Golden’s evidence is overwhelming. This book should be read  by everyone who cares about preserving higher education as a route for developing  talent, not rewarding privilege.”\u003cb\u003e—Diane Ravitch, research professor of education,  New York University, and author of \u003ci\u003eLeft Back\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003e “If you did not attend or do not teach  at a prestigious university, do not play polo well enough to pass it on, and do not  have a cool million lying around to buy a place in the freshman class, your child  might not make it into the school he or she deserves to attend. Daniel Golden explains  why in this passionately written and bitingly acute book.”\u003cb\u003e—Alan Wolfe, professor  of political science, Boston College, and author of \u003ci\u003eOne Nation, After All\u003c\/i\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e \u003cbr\u003e “Daniel  Golden makes a trenchant and convincing case that admission to America’s elite universities  has too often turned into a system for reinforcing wealth and privilege, rather than  opening new opportunities. He names names—and test scores, and family donation levels.  In the wake of this book, the university establishment has some explaining to do.”\u003cb\u003e—James Fallows, national correspondent, \u003ci\u003eThe Atlantic Monthly\u003c\/i\u003e, and author of \u003ci\u003eBlind  into Baghdad\u003c\/i\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e \u003cbr\u003e “Anyone who believes that affirmative action for minority students  is the big threat to college admissions by merit should confront Golden’s evidence  that most elite colleges show much larger preferences for the privileged and the  connected. I hope the book helps move colleges toward more equitable practices.”\u003cb\u003e—Gary Orfield, professor of education and social policy, Harvard Graduate School  of Education\u003c\/b\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003e “Daniel Golden pulls back the curtain on the world of selective college  admissions, where the already privileged are the truly preferred. With vigorous prose  and artful anecdotes, Golden tells a chilling story of double standards and double  crossings. He reminds us that when elite college admissions go to the highest bidders,  we all pay the price.”\u003cb\u003e—Lani Guinier, Bennett Boskey Professor, Harvard Law School,  and author of\u003c\/b\u003e\u003ci\u003e\u003cb\u003e Lift Every Voice\u003c\/b\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003e \u003c\/i\u003e“If you or your child is applying to a selective  college this year, here's a reading assignment: Pick up a copy of \u003ci\u003eThe Price of Admission\u003c\/i\u003e , a new book by \u003ci\u003eWall Street Journal \u003c\/i\u003ereporter Daniel Golden. It'll either give you  a useful view into how the elite admissions game works or just leave you disgusted  about the whole enterprise. Actually, probably both. Mr. Golden's subject is the  root unfairness in the way elite colleges choose who wins the coveted spots in their  freshman classes. . . . Mr. Golden, himself a Harvard alum, details the ways colleges  chase after the children of the rich and powerful, like paparazzi pursuing Paris  Hilton.”\u003cb\u003e—Joshua Benton, \u003ci\u003eDallas Morning News\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003e “\u003ci\u003eThe\u003c\/i\u003e \u003ci\u003ePrice of Admission\u003c\/i\u003e is perfect for those curious about what goes on in  college admissions offices because it shatters assumptions about acceptance to elite  colleges. . . . \u003ci\u003eThe Price of Admission\u003c\/i\u003e forces the reader to wonder how affirmative  action can be deemed controversial when favoritism of the white and wealthy is overly  prominent in elite colleges. . . . [F]or those interested in the injustices in higher  education, this book is a must-read.\"\u003cb\u003e—\u003c\/b\u003e\u003ci\u003e\u003cb\u003eKansas City Star\u003c\/b\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003cbr\u003e \u003c\/i\u003e“If you're ‘shocked’ by this, you  haven't been paying close attention.”\u003cb\u003e—\u003c\/b\u003e\u003ci\u003e\u003cb\u003eBoston Globe\u003cbr\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e \u003cbr\u003e \u003c\/i\u003e“Golden has fun making trouble  in the best journalistic sense. . . . \u003ci\u003eThe Price of Admission\u003c\/i\u003e is a powerful reminder  that the public will increasingly require selective colleges to defend their preferences;  that not all are prepared to make their complex case well; and that some of their  practices, finally, seem indefensible today.”\u003cb\u003e—\u003ci\u003eHarvard Magazine\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eDaniel Golden\u003c\/b\u003e is a senior editor at ProPublica. He was previously a managing editor at Bloomberg News, the deputy Boston bureau chief of \u003ci\u003eThe Wall Street Journal\u003c\/i\u003e, and a reporter for \u003ci\u003eThe Boston Globe\u003c\/i\u003e. The recipient of many journalistic honors, including the Pulitzer Prize and three George Polk Awards, he holds a Bachelor of Arts from Harvard College.\u003c\/p\u003e1    HOW THE \"Z-LIST\" MAKES THE A-LIST: Harvard's Payback for Big Donors         On a mild evening in early spring, corporate executives, lawyers, oil  barons, money managers, high-priced consultants, and heirs to Brahmin  fortunes strolled unrecognized across Harvard Yard from their suites at the  Charles Hotel or Harvard Inn. Hardly a black or Hispanic face could be seen  as the gray-suited, gray-haired businessmen--some leaning on walkers, others  spry and ruddy-faced, with athletic builds honed on Harvard crew or tennis  teams--and women in silk scarves and slimming black pants made their way  through an unmarked door into Annenberg Hall. There was no campus  announcement of the gathering, and no press coverage allowed.    Bouquets of forsythia and tulips decked out the usually spartan freshman  dining hall. The visitors enjoyed cocktails, wine, and appetizers--beef  tenderloin, crab cakes, asparagus spears--as well as the attentions of  Lawrence Summers, then Harvard's president. Several guests chatted about the  latest show by the Hasty Pudding Club, the student theatrical society that  puts on a musical burlesque every spring featuring Harvard men in drag.    Then the Harvard band, perched in a balcony overhead, struck up \"Ten  Thousand Men of Harvard,\" and the group sat down to a candlelit dinner. Wine  refills put the crowd in an expansive mood, and they frequently interrupted  Summers's after-dinner speech with applause. The sole exception was when he  outlined his initiative to boost enrollment of students from families  earning less than $40,000 a year by making their Harvard educations free. He  appeared to wait for an ovation that never came. I interpreted the awkward  silence to convey a message, perhaps even a threat: If you make room for  more low-income students by rejecting our children, we'll stop giving our  millions.    The April 8 dinner kicked off the 2005 annual meeting of what is likely the  wealthiest advisory group in higher education: Harvard's Committee on  University Resources. Little known and rarely mentioned in the media, COUR  is not actually a committee in the usual sense--it doesn't formally make or  advise on university policy--but Summers or any other Harvard president  needs its support. It consists of Harvard's biggest donors, who form the  financial backbone of an endowment that totaled $25.5 billion as of fiscal  2005, making it the nation's largest, more than $10 billion ahead of  second-place Yale's.    Committee membership has tripled in the past fifteen years, propelled by the  university's record-setting $2.6 billion fund-raising campaign, which lasted  from 1994 to 1999 and relied heavily on multimillion-dollar gifts. \"As a  member of COUR, you will be asked to play a leading role in the proposed  campaign,\" committee chairman Robert G. Stone Jr. told members in 1991 in  the first issue of its newsletter. By 2004, COUR's 424 members, handpicked  by university fund-raisers, included ten of Forbes magazine's four hundred  richest Americans, led by Microsoft chief executive Steven Ballmer (2005 net  worth: $14 billion), oil tycoon Robert Bass ($3 billion), and banker David  Rockefeller ($2.5 billion). Most are alumni of Harvard's undergraduate  college or its graduate programs, but not all; Bass, for instance, went to  archrival Yale, followed by business school at Stanford.    To qualify for membership, donors must generally have given at least $1  million to Harvard--or be expected to do so--although a few smaller donors  were picked for their prowess in raising large sums from wealthy classmates  and business associates on Harvard's behalf. The seventy-three members of  the group's inner circle, the executive committee, have typically given or  raised at least $5 million, and sometimes much more.    A free dinner and a newsletter aren't the only signs of Harvard's gratitude  to COUR members. The school summons top faculty to the committee's annual  meeting to expound on such topics as nanotechnology and the science of  aging. It names athletic facilities, research centers, faculty chairs,  fellowships, and scholarships after donors.    And, in the most valuable reward of all, Harvard gives a massive admissions  edge to their children, who flourish in a selection process that lacks  conflict-of-interest rules and systematically favors the wealthy and  well-connected. Although Harvard bridles at any suggestion that its slots  are for sale, I found numerous instances in which a child's acceptance  closely preceded or followed a major gift from the parents, giving at least  the appearance of a quid pro quo. Most notably, a politically connected New  Jersey real estate mogul with no Harvard ties pledged $2.5 million to the  university only months before his elder son--a student below Harvard's usual  standards--was admitted.    Harvard admits fewer than one in ten undergraduate applicants, turning down  more than half of candidates with perfect SAT scores. Nine-tenths of its  freshman ranked in the top 10 percent of their high school classes. Its  graduate and professional schools boast similarly high standards: Harvard  law school, for instance, accepts only 11 percent of applicants.    Children of major donors enjoy far better odds. By examining Who's Who  entries, alumni records, and other sources, I found that 218 of 424 COUR  members, or more than half, have had at least one child at Harvard. Many  donors send more than one child to Harvard, bringing the total number of  COUR members' offspring who have enrolled there over the years to at least  336. Nearly three hundred of these children attended Harvard as  undergraduates, with most of the rest attending the law and business  schools, which provide an entree into the corridors of American power.    Since, by my count, at least eighty COUR members either do not have children  or their children have not reached college age, the number of COUR offspring  who have gone to Harvard works out to 336 children of about 340 eligible  members--an astonishing enrollment rate of one child per major donor. Given  that the typical married couple in the United States has one or two  children, that wealthy women tend to have fewer children than the average,  and that many children of COUR members never apply to Harvard at all, a  conservative conclusion would be that the university welcomes well over half  of applicants from the families of its biggest donors.    Through their easy access to Harvard, the children of COUR members don't  just gain intellectual polish. They also acquire a prestigious career  credential and high-powered friends and spouses, consolidating their  families' place in the American aristocracy. \"Last year we completed a  double 'hat trick' when my youngest daughter, Morgan, married Harvard  classmate John Stafford,\" investment banker Ralph Hellmold, a member of the  Committee on University Resources, boasted to his Harvard classmates on  their fortieth reunion in 2002. \"Thus, each of my three daughters has not  only graduated from the college, but married her own Harvard man.\"    Executive committee member James O. Welch Jr., former vice chairman of RJR  Nabisco Inc. and a Harvard alumnus who endowed a professorship in computer  science, leads the way in the admissions sweepstakes, with six sons who  graduated from Harvard. Welch declined comment. Similarly, Finn M. W.  Caspersen's generosity has not gone unrewarded in admissions to Harvard Law,  a school whose preference for children of well-heeled alumni was satirized  in Legally Blonde. The heroine of the hit 2001 comedy, played by Reese  Witherspoon, learns from a classmate that her dim-witted ex-boyfriend,  Warner Huntington III, \"got wait-listed when he applied. His father had to  make a call.\"    Caspersen, a Harvard Law alumnus who also sits on the COUR executive  committee, formerly headed consumer lending giant Beneficial Corp., which  specializes in making high-interest loans to consumers with poor credit. He  and his wife have endowed several faculty chairs at the law school and  donated to its library, where the rare-book room is named after them.  Caspersen, who now runs a private investment firm, chairs a $400 million  fund-raising campaign that the law school launched in 2003. Four Caspersen  children--Finn junior (who also has a Harvard bachelor's degree), Erik,  Samuel, and Andrew--have enrolled at Harvard Law. The Caspersens declined  comment.    Professor David R. Herwitz, who served for years on the law school's  admissions committee, told me that Caspersen's sons were fine students and  \"totally admissible.\" He added, \"Any school, particularly one with a long  tradition, becomes something of a family. What kind of a crazy world would  it be if people who had gone to the school and made contributions would be  told: your kid is very close, but not close enough?\"         Undoubtedly some children of COUR members were superb candidates whom  Harvard might have admitted even if they were unhooked. For others, the  preferences of privilege outweighed test scores or grades below Harvard  norms. These fortunate candidates with marginal credentials--like many  minorities aided by affirmative action--are often saddled with self-doubt,  wondering if they deserved their Harvard admission.    Most COUR children at Harvard have been legacies--a group to which Harvard  acknowledges giving at least a small admissions boost. Harvard accepts one  third of alumni children, nearly four times its overall admission rate.  Legacies constitute 13 percent of the student body. William Fitzsimmons,  dean of admissions and financial aid at Harvard, who has been a guest  speaker at COUR meetings, told me that he personally reads all applications  from alumni children. He said the average SAT score of legacies admitted to  Harvard falls just a couple of points below the school's overall average,  and that he uses legacy status as a tie-breaker between comparable  candidates. Asked how he defends a policy so little rooted in merit,  Fitzsimmons, a 1967 Harvard graduate, said the school's alumni \"volunteer an  immense amount of their free time in recruiting students, raising money for  their financial aid, taking part in Harvard Club activities at the local  level, and in general promoting the college.\" He added, \"They often bring a  special kind of loyalty and enthusiasm for life at the college that makes a  real difference in the college climate . . . and makes Harvard a happier  place.\" Therefore, he said, \"when their sons and daughters apply, we review  their applications with great care and will give a 'tip' in the admissions  process to them.\"    Loyalty and volunteerism aside, the biggest reason for Harvard's legacy  preference is money. Alumni donations drive Harvard's endowment, and the  ability and willingness of graduates to donate to the university influence  the size of the preference given to their progeny. The better than  one-in-two admission rate for COUR members' children in my survey indicates  that children of big alumni donors enjoy more than the tie-breaker edge  Fitzsimmons describes. This finding corroborates a 1991 study by David  Karen, now a professor at Bryn Mawr College, which concluded that alumni  children at Harvard lose most of their admissions advantage if they apply  for financial aid. In other words, if alumni want their children to have an  admissions edge at Harvard, they should become bankers, lawyers, or  dentists--not social workers, teachers, or ministers. \"My interpretation was  that if you couldn't parlay a Harvard degree into an income sufficient to  pay for your kid's education, Harvard was less likely to make the same  mistake twice,\" Professor Karen told me.    The boost for children of alumni on the University Resources committee can  amount to far more than a couple of SAT points. Harvard alumnus and Boston  venture capitalist Craig L. Burr, a member of the Committee on University  Resources, gave his alma mater at least $1 million in the mid 1990s; his  son, Matthew, applied in 1998. Matthew Burr ranked fourth in his class at  the Groton School but had an SAT score of 1240. Three-fourths of Harvard  students have SAT scores of 1380 or higher, and the average freshman score  is about 1470. Matthew applied to one other college, Williams, which  rejected him.    \"I just don't test well,\" Matthew told me. He wrote an application essay  about a family safari to Kenya--a likely tip-off, if one were needed, of the  Burrs' wealth to admissions readers. His Groton counselor, he said, made it  clear to him that his family connection would \"help out\" with Harvard  admissions.    Craig Burr told me his donation to Harvard had \"absolutely nothing to do\"  with his son's acceptance. \"Matthew did not need any help because he had  phenomenal grades,\" he said.    \"I was qualified in getting in to Harvard,\" Matthew said. \"At the same time,  I do think legacy helped me. I don't think legacy is a fair criterion for  people to get into college. But for me, that was the way it was.\"    Like Matthew Burr, Jessica Zofnass had excellent grades in prep school but  an SAT score (1410) below the Harvard average. Jessica, who enrolled in 2004  (followed by her sister Rebecca in 2005), is the daughter and granddaughter  of Harvard alumni; her father, COUR member Paul Zofnass, endowed a  scholarship in environmental studies. \"I don't think I got into Harvard for  my SAT scores,\" Jessica told me. \"Hopefully it wasn't just legacy. More of  what I did at Choate [Wallingford, Connecticut, prep school Choate Rosemary  Hall] was being well rounded, captain of a lot of sports teams, president of  the French Club.    \"It's really exciting for me to be here. But it's a very unjust society if  the people who already have the benefits and the advantages and already have  a wonderful life get an additional leg up. I'm very torn. If I were born  into a family that was less advantaged, I would feel very bitter about the  legacy status.\"    Paul Zofnass, a financial consultant to environmental firms, donated between  $250,000 and $500,000 to Harvard in 2003-4, when Jessica was a senior at  Choate, and says he is also \"very committed\" to raising donations from his  Harvard classmates. Zofnass told me Jessica \"clearly had the credentials for  someone to get into Harvard. I've also known plenty of kids who were every  bit as good as her and they didn't get in. Why? My involvement helped a  little bit. Had I had nothing to do with Harvard, she probably would have  gotten in, but I'm not sure.\"    Another COUR member's son, a Harvard undergraduate, told me that he  graduated in the middle of his prep school class with an SAT score in the  1300s--\"not too good by Harvard standards,\" he acknowledged. His father, an  alumnus, donated more than $1 million to the 1990s campaign, plus half a  million in his son's freshman year. Still, the student said he felt no  qualms over his admission.    \"Definitely legacy was a factor, but I don't feel like someone else should  be here instead of me,\" he said. \"I don't feel guilty. A lot of people I  know at Harvard are very, very, very, very intelligent, but they just sit on  their asses. With my work ethic and potential, test scores that may be a  little less than some others shouldn't get in the way of possibilities for  me and my life.\" He said his father donated to Harvard out of love for the  institution, not to sway admissions.    Most of these upper-class legacies went to prep schools, where they  participated in aristocratic pastimes such as squash, crew, and sailing.  Largely played by affluent whites, these sports offer a college admissions  entree unavailable to most public school and inner-city students. Some of  the COUR children were skilled enough--and had the right pedigree--to  impress Harvard coaches who submit lists of potential recruits to the  admissions office.With new reporting on Operation Varsity Blues The Book College Admissions Officers Don't Want You to Read","brand":"Crown","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":46300153970917,"sku":"NP9781400097975","price":18.0,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":false}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/1842\/7735\/files\/9781400097975.jpg?v=1767741060","url":"https:\/\/k12savings.com\/es\/products\/the-price-of-admission-updated-edition-isbn-9781400097975","provider":"K12savings","version":"1.0","type":"link"}