We were dismayed to read the editorial from The Daily Orange Editorial Board in Monday’s Daily Orange regarding the approach to admissions at Syracuse University. The underlying assumptions about pedagogic goals and strategies for their attainment are faulty, and the assertions about diminished quality of admitted students are not supported by fact.

The editorial suggests that SU’s acceptance rates have risen ‘alarmingly’ and that ‘the chancellor and her top officials moved SU’s recruitment strategy in a direction focusing more on inclusiveness, ultimately diminishing selectivity and perhaps prestige.’ The data over the past 10 years tells a different story. In 2002, the acceptance rate at SU was 80 percent. In 2010, the rate was 59.7 percent.

Perhaps of greater concern in reading the editorial is the apparent assumption that a more inclusive and diverse campus is in some way incompatible with greater selectivity and academic excellence. Again, as many of our schools and colleges can attest, we have statistically become more selective and more diverse by every measure of that word. And we are proud of it.

Median SAT scores have remained constant over the past 10 years, and the average high school GPA has risen. Our campus community has become more international in composition and has greater breadth nationally. Increased enrollment of Pell-eligible students reflects a yield rate that is higher than for all students. While achieving economic diversity in the student body, this actually lowers admission numbers and increases our selectivity.

We deans applaud and support Chancellor Nancy Cantor and her administration’s vision and strategy toward admissions. While the strategy is focused on undergraduates, we believe our graduate and professional programs are significantly enhanced by a campus community that includes a diverse undergraduate student body. Moreover, some of us have pursued similar admission strategies aimed at increasing diversity and inclusiveness in our graduate programs.

Our university has always stood for inclusiveness. We accepted women long before it was fashionable, and many students came to Syracuse when other institutions turned them away because they were a different race or creed. Syracuse committed to educating the GIs; it has had a long history of educating international students. Those inclusive values have built this institution, and they continue. Long may those values guide us!

John F. Kennedy reminded us that ‘if a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.’ Universities have an obligation to open their doors of opportunity to all citizens who share its values and hunger for education; it is our social obligation. To do less is to fail society.

So what does the above have to do with the acceptance rate at Syracuse? The admission enterprise is complex. While it is true that Harvard and Princeton accept 10 percent or less of applicants, each will also aver that about half of the students who apply to those institutions qualify for admission. These schools also value a diverse class. If a school wants a diverse class, it needs lots of qualified applicants. Harvard also creates opportunities for many students. Its average financial aid package is more than $41,000 per year, according to its website.

In fact, having 50 to 60 percent of applicants qualified for admission at Syracuse can be a strength, not a weakness. The way to reduce our acceptance rate is to attract even more qualified applicants. Sounds strange, but that’s the algebra.

As deans, we are acutely aware of the improvement in the quality and the diversity of our students in parallel with a reduction in the admission rate. Several of the undersigned are alumni as well, and we all share the desire to have Syracuse University continue its clear rise in quality, both in fact and in the estimation of others. A scan of the extent of activity across campus reflects a changed reality. Beyond the sheer increase in the number of applications, we have achieved a revitalized campus and a faculty supported in unprecedented ways. Our pool of bright, agile, engaged and diverse students is the hallmark of an institution of which to be truly proud.

 Hannah Arterian

Dean, College of Law

Douglas Biklen

Dean, School of Education

Lorraine Branham

Dean, S.I. Newhouse School of Pubic Communications

Ann Clarke

Dean, College of Visual and Performing Arts

Bethaida González

Dean, University College

George Langford

Dean, College of Arts and Sciences

Elizabeth Liddy

Dean, iSchool

Diane Murphy

Dean, College of Human Ecology

Mark Robbins

Dean, College of Architecture

Melvin Stith

Dean, School of Management

Laura Steinberg

Dean, L.C. Smith College of Engineering and Computer Science

Suzanne Thorin

Dean, Bird Library

Michael Wasylenko

Dean, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs

Published on February 22, 2011 at 12:00 pm