Boston Focus, 3.21.25

Higher education: to fix your finances and your image, stop treating millions of kids like they are last ones picked for dodge ball

American higher education is under attack.

With UPenn now joining the ranks of schools experiencing federal clawbacks, there is no shortage of takes on the political and financial pressures American colleges and universities are under and what they should do about it.

Even the coverage of the attempted closure of the United States Department of Education (ED) by the Trump Administration glosses over the fact that higher education will likely be much more directly affected than PK-12.

Critics point to cultural isolation or economic populism, but there is a more realpolitik explanation for why we are where we are: it is easy to attack an institution that is unpopular.

Increasingly, more Americans have lost confidence in higher education.

For the past several generations, college was branded as a path to income mobility. Nearly 4 of 5 Americans no longer agree. A near majority of Americans believe colleges and universities are having a negative impact on the country.

In that context, there was an announcement this week by a local liberal arts college offering free tuition to any student with a family income less than $200,000. News, but the concept is not new, as many selective colleges from UVA to CalTech have already adopted similar policies. Given the sizable endowments of these schools, this policy change is not a surprise or even a stretch, but welcome, nonetheless.

However, there is a very simple intervention that would improve not only college and universities’ finances but also their public image.

They should admit more kids.

The college admissions process is experiencing two layers of heightening competition. Common applications, competing timelines and statuses, test optional policies, and the perception of competition itself have resulted in an explosion of applications for the most selective institutions in the face of declining overall enrollment.

Yields have never been lower. Take Northeastern University, formerly a well-respected, local college with a commuter base and now a near top-50 selective university that admits just one of 20 applicants. In the span of generation, Northeastern denials increased by 28,400%.

But this isn’t just an issue for “elite” institutions. There is also a macro mismatch between between supply and demand. National and local education policy has spent the last several generations extolling and funding increased college access to fuel the knowledge and now post-knowledge economy.

It worked. College enrollment has nearly tripled.

But the number of degree-granting institutions has not. They haven’t even doubled to keep pace.

This reveals the real driver of costs, particularly for elite institutions: scarcity.

You see this not just in higher education, but also in private PK-12 and even public PK-12, where families often talk about “winning the lottery” to get a prized, scarce seat in a “good” school.

The conventional wisdom is that what makes a school good is that it is hard to get into. Selective colleges assert their quality through low acceptance rates, not necessarily the positive impacts on its students, or their communities writ large. Spacious campuses, extra buildings, and low ratios further ingrain the false belief that exclusive equals good.

It doesn’t have to be this way. Suspend judgements you may have about the SAT and for a moment use it as a proxy for college readiness. The average SAT score for Harvard is reported to be around 1550. Sounds really high, but for the fact that ~20,000 American kids score 1500 or more each year. ~90% of these potentially qualified students are not offered admission to Harvard.

It is great that many schools like Harvard are choosing not to collect tuition from most families to make their schools more accessible. But that decision is limited to the small percentage of students they happen to admit. A more radical approach would be to simply let more kids in.

Even a 5-10% increase in freshmen classes would result in tens of thousands more graduates from the country’s selective schools. This wouldn’t solve our systemic problems, but it would provide a massive economic benefit for many children and families, and their increased incomes would fuel more general economic growth. And less selective schools could follow suit.

This is particularly important in Boston and Massachusetts, where we rely on “eds and meds” for our economic engine. It would improve people’s perceptions and protect bottom lines. Administrators would have to worry less about losing federal funds when they are cashing more tuition checks.

So, if there are any college presidents or staff members who happen to be reading this, please, the next time a donor or their family offers to build a new pool or an academic center, make a different choice.

Ask for a new dorm instead.

Schools

The big local education news just prior to the Mayor’s State of the City was the announcement of a tentative deal with the Boston Teacher’s Union (BTU). Details to come, but a protest was averted. Keep in mind that teacher strikes are costly and usually work.

A significant portion of the Mayor’s State of the City focused on education. Full text and annotated version here. In addition to the BTU contract, highlighted/new education initiatives included:

• White Stadium (federal trial to stop it started Tuesday)

• PreK

• School buses (this Substack actually shows performances has declined)

• Food (which the federal government cut)

• EMK expansion (still looking for a building)

• Madison Park expansion (City Council debated this Wednesday and has called for a new school building authority)

• Expanded summer learning

• New advanced math classes

• More free museums

There was some overlap in last night’s Boston School Committee meeting (full materials here). “Right-sizing” manifested in several closures and consolidations after several hours of public comment. The School Committee approved applying to the state for funding for the renovation of Madison Park. With a minimum spend of $500M, it would be 3x the city’s largest current capital investment (the renovation of the former Boston Public Schools headquarters on Court Street). On the operating side, updated budget materials and answers were shared (no mention of math initiatives). School Committee votes on that FY26 budget next Wednesday.

A lot of the preK growth in Boston has happened outside of BPS, with ~2,300 non-BPS seats (BPS preK enrollment is actually slightly down). Other school districts are prioritizing preK seats in consolidations and closures.

New online tools for Massachusetts families to track children’s literacy.

One of the better retrospectives on Massachusetts learning declines before and post pandemic.

METCO’s leader is stepping down.

Other Matters

Metro Boston’s population is now increasing, at nearly double the national rate.

Is a significant trend reversing? Probably not: this growth is attributed to immigration, which faces headwinds with the Trump Administration and new shelter policies.