Thread by @James_S_Murphy

A modest proposal: Stop using the term "elite colleges."

The word "elite" is almost always a stand-in for the schools with the lowest admit rates, as reported in US News. That's it.

Elite doesn't, however, just mean "most selective." It also means "the best." That's why it's perfectly fine to call Lebron or Katie Ledecky elite athletes. They are among the best performers in their sports, according to very clear metrics.

The metrics for determining what is the "best" in education are not so clear cut. For example, do we look at outcomes? Well then the school that a lot of people would call the most elite comes in 4th among schools in the greater Boston area.

Are the "best colleges" investment funds, designed to attract the "best students" with the promise of growing their already considerable assets? Or are the "best colleges" investors, enrolling students who don't arrive with advantages but lifting them up economically?

If we're looking at investors, the 20 most-selective colleges are, according to a well-known @DLeonhardt article, far from the best. Here's how they do in a ranking of colleges' success in moving students from the bottom 40% to the top 40% (or from being poor to middle-class).

The 20 most-selective schools rank so low on social mobility because they enroll few low-income students. It's important to note that when they do, these most-selective schools are the best at moving low-income students into wealth (top 1%). h/t @John_N_Friedman

I also want to note that the school that is the absolute best in moving students from poverty to the 1% is @UCBerkeley--which didn't get included among the "elite" schools in the article. Because it's not among the most selective. #kindofmypoint

When we call these 20 most selective schools "elite" it not only obscures the many accomplishments of so many other colleges, it feeds the very beast that created people like Rick Singer. Calling them "elite," based on admit rate alone, also pushes up applications.

Using the term "elite college" stops us from thinking about what makes for a good school. And it wades into the complicated mire of resentment that shapes a lot of our politics without questioning what the meaning of the term is. And it's marketing.

We don't need the term "elite college." Barron's already made up a more accurate one: "Most Competitive." Or "Most Selective." Heck, I'd even take "prestigious," since it indicates that these are the schools people *think* are the best rather than indicating they are.

I get the appeal of "elite colleges" as a shorthand: "I don't think they're 'elite' but readers do & I can quickly identify the subject since everyone knows what I'm talking about & *I* don't actually mean it."

But it's pretty lazy & harmful. So, maybe don't use it. Please.

unroll @threadreaderapp