Exeter's Achievement Gap
At Exeter, we love to think that hard work equals success. We complain about our six-class days, our sleepless nights, our long sports games, our club responsibilities—anything that encourages to believe that after all of this effort, we deserve a reward. Consequently, this mindset of Exeter’s false meritocracy means that once you arrive at Exeter, no matter where you come from, it’s apparently an even playing field. We tend to believe that we live in a bubble free from the hardships we face in the real world, meaning success on this campus can be achieved by anyone who works hard enough. Thus, while we hold such elitist standards of success (e.g. a prestigious college education), we often ignore the barriers that underrepresented students face to achieve these ideals.
In fact, the levels of support for each student differ widely on our campus. Upon starting First Generation Exeter (GenEx), a mentorship and support program for first-generation American, first-generation college and low-income (FGLI) students, I noticed a common sentiment: FGLI Exonians feel that they have to be so much more than just students on this campus. They have to be their own parents on top of being students, figuring out how to navigate the elite educational world all on their own. FGLI students often lack the financial means of receiving extra testing tutoring and the information necessary to construct a college plan earlier like their peers. They don’t have the connections to obtain critical summer opportunities or need to work to raise money for their families during these breaks. Students of course need to learn to be proactive and self-sufficient in seeking out help, but the educational system demands several times more of this self-motivation from FGLI students. Studies for the National Association for College Admission Counseling show that first-generation students lack critical social capital and are less likely than their more experienced peers to reach out for the support they need on campus. Furthermore, the disparities in achievement are actually widening. In 2011, the Stanford Center for Education Policy Analysis published a study that proved that the income achievement gap has actually risen by 30 to 40 percent just in the past decade.
FGLI students are not asking for a “perfect life handed to them on a silver platter.”
In addition to this lack of knowledge about the educational world, having a financially distressed background takes a toll on both the mental and physical health of high-achieving students. In an opinion piece in The New York Times, Gregory E. Miller, Edith Chen and Gene H. Brody detail a study that found that at age 20, lower-income college kids had “greater obesity, higher blood pressure and more stress hormones” than their peers from similarly disadvantaged backgrounds that did not make it to college. Additionally, their health was “worse than that of peers in more affluent, educated neighborhoods.” On top of the daily load of Exeter’s academic stress, FGLI students face financial stress from back at home and often feel a great deal of guilt for leaving their families behind. This added pressure translates to a quantifiable health gap that most likely affects the academic performance of these students.
Yet, while these statistics portray the harsh realities that FGLI students face at elite institutions, both faculty members and students often seem hesitant of admitting that these same matters exist at Phillips Exeter.
My immigrant parents make about $30,000 a year to support a family of four, and neither of them hold college degrees; this aspect of my identity has fundamentally shaped my experience here at Exeter. This is why this past year, I chose to apply to the Gates Millennium Scholars Program. The highly competitive scholarship program is a very prestigious honor for high-achieving, low-income high school students, as it pays the full cost of their college tuition, provides them with a support system and network of peers and potentially pays for their grad school as well. Upon spending months on the application, which requires eight essays, high grades and test scores and two recommendations, I was understandably upset when I found out I was disqualified after a teacher failed to submit his recommendation in time.
The day after I heard the news, I detailed to a faculty member why I wanted to be considered for the scholarship. After witnessing the valuable support that prep programs provide for underrepresented students on this campus, I wished to be a part of that system of security for once in my life. The faculty member e-mailed back, “But don’t think that these prep programs, or even the Gates, is a magic bullet. Indeed, sometimes I’ve believed that those programs have inadvertently hurt Exeter students—by making opportunities for internships and mentoring so easy, students haven’t developed the inner initiative, stamina, and flexibility that life requires.”
In the same e-mail, he tells me, “Yes, it has been hard, but life is hard. Nothing will be handed to you in the future, just as it hasn’t been here at Exeter. Not even attending Harvard will necessarily make everything easier, as even that university cannot present you with the perfect life on a silver platter.”
In this hurtful experience, I came out with a better understanding of the harmful stereotypes and beliefs that pervade our campus. Although prep programs, such as Prep 9 and Jack Kent Cooke, work hard to reduce barriers for disadvantaged students, faculty members still believe that they just make it “so easy” for students—perhaps too easy for students. Apparently, because these students rely on the support of these programs, they have not “developed the inner initiative, stamina and flexibility” to succeed in life. Much of the backlash that surrounds the founding of GenEx has similarly pertained to thoughts that the program is unnecessary; according to its critics, the undue program only further coddles students such that they “won’t be able to survive in the real world.” Some faculty members seem to believe that these underrepresented students simply need to “try harder,” and they will achieve success like their more privileged peers.
Instead of expecting FGLI students to merely survive at Exeter, we must encourage them to thrive.
I want to make it clear that FGLI students are not asking for much. They are not asking for a “perfect life handed to them on a silver platter.” In Exeter’s false but vicious meritocracy, we often see the need for support as a sign of weakness. The idea is that if we can’t make it on our own, we don’t belong here. But FGLI students are not asking for their lives to be easier than those around them. Having grown up all their lives in distressed situations, they are simply asking for a more fair meritocracy on this campus. Even starting small, such as having an affinity group for FGLI students on campus like GenEx or Phillips Andover’s Outliers club makes a considerable impact. In fact, a Stanford scholar found that just talking about social class helped first-generation college students reduce the social-class achievement gap by as much as 63 percent. We need a better understanding of the barriers FGLI students face and more compassion for their backgrounds, which means we as a school community need to have more honest conversations about social class privilege.
But initiatives like GenEx are difficult to start and sustain when faculty and students do not see a need for them. Hence, it is also imperative that the school perform a comprehensive study of our achievement gap, as it can provide undisputable data to support the need for these initiatives. In the hopes of making Exeter a more equitable educational institution, we must understand that we cannot fix a problem until we know that it exists. Considering limited time and resources, if the study were to reveal that Exeter did not even have an achievement gap, the school could then put its funds and energy into more urgent causes. But a comprehensive study of the achievement gap could also uncover broader trends of which demographics are disadvantaged by the achievement gap, which would make it evident that there are more complex reasons than pure effort as to why these students are not performing as well as their peers. A study could also reveal which areas of support for students the school lacks most, suggesting the most efficient ways to invest our money in targeted support programs that help unlock the most student potential.
In recent years, elite colleges have made great strides in supporting their FGLI students. First Generation Student Union at Harvard and First Generation Low-Income Partnership at Columbia, for example, greatly aid FGLI students at these universities—the Ivy Leagues even host an inter-Ivy conference called 1vyG every year for their first-generation college students. The results are clear: Harvard boasts a 98 percent graduation rate of its underrepresented students while Tennessee State University, which sets aside considerably fewer resources and less attention for these students, has a frighteningly low first-generation graduation rate of 23 percent. It’s time Exeter followed in the footsteps of its collegiate siblings and created a more equitable educational system. Rugged individualism and this strict focus on meritocracy won’t get us anywhere if we are not unlocking the fullest potential of each and every one of our talented students. Instead of expecting FGLI students to merely survive at Exeter, we must encourage them to thrive.