The University of Illinois and Clout Admissions

If you've been following the news in recent weeks, you've probably seen articles on the "clout admissions" scandal at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. In short, some less qualified students were admitted because influential people called in favors.

The Chicago Tribune broke the story and has run a series of exposés on these unfair admissions policies. Yesterday a group of professors fired back, arguing not that the admissions process is acceptable, but that it is so common and widespread that the focus on Illinois is misplaced and artificially sensationalized. You can read the latest Chicago Tribune story here.

The professors, of course, are correct -- "clout admissions" are common. Legacy students get a slight advantage in admissions. Military academies such as West Point and Annapolis actually require a nomination from a member of congress. And we'd be naive to think that a recommendation from a person with significant political or financial influence would have no effect on a college's admissions policies.

The unfair practice of "clout admissions" is all about college finances. Tuition alone doesn't cover the costs at most colleges, even those with a $50,000 price tag. To balance the books, colleges need large donations; they need to build their endowments; and they need legislation that helps them minimize expenses.

Is there a solution to this problem, or should we just accept things as they are? Share your thoughts below.