First, I’ve had an influx of new subscribers. Welcome and thank you for subscribing! I write with a clear but unjaundiced eye (I hope) about colleges’ priorities, how those drive admission decisions, and what all that means for your kid. In my day job, I do energy modeling and technical due diligence on energy assets, so there’s often an econ, math, or optimization angle.
I have a post in the works about how neatly one particular AI’s judgments of application essays line up with admission officers’. This article isn’t about that, though, because I’ve had some ideas about Claudine Gay knocking around in my head. As always, we’re staying firmly un-ideological here. The market for outrage clickbait is well supplied.
Rather than siding with Gay or Bill Ackman (or…KKR?), let’s consider what this whole mess tells us about Harvard’s priorities. Epistemic status: conjecture.
In particular, what was a big enough problem for Harvard to fire Gay? Or even to abstain from defending her?
Plagiarism? No. She just had to “correct these instances of inadequate citation.”
A Department of Education civil rights investigation? No. “Our extensive deliberations affirm our confidence that President Gay is the right leader to help our community heal and to address the very serious societal issues we are facing.”
Waffling about anti-Semitism in front of Congress? No. “Harvard’s work to combat antisemitism in our community is advancing with the highest commitment and attention from University leaders.”
Donors shutting off the spigot? Aha! Harvard “has been in conversation with alumni and supporters, and will continue to engage closely with them. They are a vital part of our community.”
Money
It sure looks like Gay was made to resign after major donors like Idan Ofer, Lev Blavatnik, Leslie Wexner, and Ackman himself announced they would stop giving Harvard money.
Also telling: Gay gets to keep her normal professor job. If plagiarism or prejudice did matter a lot to Harvard’s board, it would probably make some efforts to squeeze her out of that role too, tenure notwithstanding.
In some ways, it’s not a surprise that money was most important. Colleges, even Harvard, really care about making money.
Prestige
But in one important way, it is surprising that money tipped the scales! Harvard doesn’t have to operate from cash flow; it has a $51 billion endowment! There are still donors, like Ken Griffith, who will keep writing big checks. So why did the donor exodus spook the Harvard board into firing Gay?
My best guess is prestige — that endowment size is an important prestige marker for Harvard, so it doesn’t like to spend it.
So there are Harvard’s two priorities: money and prestige. Above, I said my confidence level in that judgment as it relates to Claudine Gay is low to middling. But I have high confidence, based on extensive deposition testimony from the Students for Fair Admissions lawsuit, that Harvard is trying to optimize for money and prestige in its admission decisions.
What does that mean for your kid?
In applications, he or she should dangle the traits that help colleges get more money and prestige. Here’s one of them for free: high test scores suggest the kid won’t wash out and so will bring four years of tuition checks (money) and buoy a college in the US News rankings (prestige). To learn about others, book a one-on-one consultation.
And what if your kid doesn’t care about Harvard?
Harvard evidently feels some pressure to keep up its endowment and brand. The US News rankings come out every year, after all. Other colleges with less money and weaker brand names feel those pressures even more keenly.
Also, your kid should cite sources properly in essays. Bill Ackman is an unpredictable guy.