FERPA: A Window into the Admissions Processes of Selective Colleges

I was thinking about the lecture from class about crossing class boundaries and how different students from different backgrounds interacted at Amherst College in Elizabeth Aries's book, and remembered this article that I read earlier this year. The author of the article is a student at Yale, and was able to read her admissions files by using a quirk in the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). She learned that although admission is need-blind (income is not considered in admissions decisions), a large amount of data was collected to determine her social background such as "[her] parents’ jobs and where they’d gone to college; a series of drop-down menus allowed admissions officers to note the percentage of students at [her] high school that were minorities and those that went on to a four-year college. There was a checkbox to note whether or not [she] lived in a low-income census tract." Yale makes a concerted effort to admit students from vastly different areas and backgrounds, especially those from inner-city and rural public schools. An admissions officer noted that the author would be a good admit from Minneapolis public schools, but she notes that she is nowhere near an accurate representation of her school district, "which is just 33% white, where 65% of students fall under federal poverty measures, and where almost a third of students are English-language learners."

The author says she herself is white and middle class, the daughter of parents who both went to Princeton, and that the other people she knows of from her school district at Yale are from the exact same demographic—white and middle class with parents who have graduated college—despite the fact that most people from that district do not fit that profile. Even though we discussed how higher education in elite institutions has become more open to those not of the old money elite, I think it's notable that this case, though possibly not representative of the whole, the admissions officers still have biases based on their own habituses (habiti?) regarding who should be excepted. Even though by the letter colleges are admitting more people from minority and disadvantaged backgrounds, I think it's important to try to make sure that personal biases aren't actually coming into play.

Is Concert Dress Code Class Discriminatory?

I'm still in a band frame of mind right now, so I'll discuss something that happened this past Sunday that made me think of class in a context I hadn't considered before. I was prepping the stage before our concert this past Sunday and got a text message from one of my friends in the band saying he didn't have the all-black attire that was the dress code for the concert, and asked if he could wear something else. I said the answer was no, and that it would be better if he borrowed a friend's clothes to use for the day. After the concert, he remarked that he didn't have the money to spend on a set of clothes that he would only use once. I realized I hadn't been thinking about concert dress that way before, but in retrospect it does seem like an aspect that is unintentionally exclusionary toward people with less spending money to throw around.

I've been playing in school bands for the past ten years, and not once have I encountered a person who wasn't able to pull together the necessary articles of clothing in time for the concert. The policy of every single conductor I've had was that if you weren't in concert dress on the day of the concert, you couldn't perform. Does this mean that school bands are class exclusive, dissuading people who are not of the appropriate social class from joining in the first place? If there are students struggling to make ends meet financially, and can't spend money on concert dress or music lessons, do they even consider joining a band an option? You don't need money to join in the first place, but you do need it if you want to continue for a significant period of time, or progress to a level where it no longer becomes necessary (unless you have friends or family who are willing to provide the resources necessary in lieu of any money being spent). Maybe this isn't the case, and it isn't a significant obstacle, but it certainly seems like it might be; being a part of a band might be another component of the middle class education framework designed to exclude those who don't fit the mold.

Class Intersection: A Day at the BSO

I'm a member of both the Jazz Ensemble and the Wind Ensemble, and having all of our concerts this past weekend reminded me of some of the times when I went along with a group of friends to see the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra perform at Meyerhoff Concert Hall in Mount Vernon. In hindsight, BSO concerts were events where a lot of class mixing occurred; the BSO has a great student discount program, where they can pay $20 for access to an entire year of BSO concerts, and as a results a lot of college students go to BSO concerts on a regular basis. However, the main demographic in attendance is always elderly, affluent white people wearing authentic fur coats and leather shoes. So you can imagine why there would be a little bit of tension when both groups meet at the same location (normally expressed in the form of raised eyebrows and disapproving faces).

Before every concert, there is always a cocktail party in the lobby, where all of the ladies and gentlemen socialize before the main event (what they talk about I'm not sure, but they all seem like they know each other from somewhere, like the entire lot of them are old friends—it reminds me of those scenes from old books and movies set in Europe where the social elite would all go to the opera). Juxtapose those people in suits and dresses with the college kids in jeans and T-shirts and the result is a lot of furtive glances of disapproval and some hushed whispers by the elders, as if we were corrupting an institution that they held sacred but didn't want to tell us to our faces. (These are only the reactions that I had, mind you—I make no guarantees as to the truth of them, it's just how I felt at the time.) When I went, I enjoyed myself a lot because I had taken enough music classes in my lifetime to have the cultural capital necessary to appreciate it all, but I did feel very out of place among a large amount of people that I am sure had way more money than I did. The BSO is open to all students, but it does feel a bit like an exclusive club, because only some classes have the cultural capital necessary to appreciate the music. Even though the BSO does a lot of community outreach, I have a hard time imagining an inner-city student in a Baltimore public school going to a BSO concert out of his/her own free will and enjoying it.

Occupty Wall Street

Today I'm going to refocus back to the domestic issues of class and discuss the other movement I mentioned yesterday: Occupy Wall Street. The movement began in Zuccotti Park in September, 2011 in New York City's financial district as a protest against corporate influence on democracy, and against the growing income disparity between the nation's top 1% of earners and the remaining 99% below. I found this (somewhat sensational) article that discusses the inequality that the movement is protesting against, and its underlying social causes. It first makes the point that the movement's "We are the 99%" banner is well-grounded by some science, citing a report by the Congressional Budget Office that

"...between 1979 and 2007 the top 1 percent saw their average real after-tax household income grow by 275 percent and that much of this increase had taken place in the past few years of the new millennium. It also noted that between 2005 and 2007, the after-tax income received by the 20 percent of the population with the highest income exceeded the after-tax income of the remaining 80 percent."

It also cites another study, which says that not only is the American middle class shrinking, but the increasing income divide between the upper and lower earners in American society is creating increased segregation between affluent and low-income neighborhoods. The author states that many social-democratic or socialist societies in countries in Europe, as well as Canada, "have systems of social distribution and  public provisioning for social security, and for  public goods such as education and health" that "ineffective" democracies such as America lack, and blames it on America's political right's view of redistributive measures of income and care as socialist, in direct contrast with America's ideology of the individual working hard to achieve personal wealth.

I'm not sure I agree with everything the author is saying (but admittedly him calling America's democracy ineffective is rubbing me the wrong way), but he does seem to be making a cogent argument that the inequality issues and class divide America is facing is fundamentally rooted in our political and economic systems. In recent years the movement has become a mere trickle of its former self, but it did bring to light important issues regarding the social structure of America. I don't think socialism, like the author seems to be suggesting, is an appropriate answer to the problem; I think it's possible to work within the democratic, capitalist framework we have already if enough individuals are able to organize themselves and give a voice to the issues.

But what do you think? Let me know in the comments!

Pussy Riot: Exposing Russian Class Divisions

Returning to the topic of class on an international scale, when we were discussing the Occupy movement in class I was reminded (probably because someone else mentioned it) of Pussy Riot, the band in Russia that made headlines for performing in a church and getting arrested. I know the message was feminist and definitely anti-Putin (or at least anti-establishment), but I wasn't really considering social class when I first heard about it. Now, however, I've come across this article that does a great job analyzing the issue sociologically. One of the main points it makes is the rejection of Pussy Riot by a large segment of the Russian population is because of a class difference between that message's target audience and the majority of post-Soviet Russia.

Pussy Riot made national headlines in 2012 when the band performed a mock "prayer" in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow. They were kicked out in less than a minute, but later released their "full" performance on the Internet, in which they appealed to the Virgin Mary "to become a feminist and oust Putin and condemn Orthodox priests as KGB agents." There was an incredible amount of backlash directed at the performers, and two were convicted of "hooliganism motivated by religious hatred and of offending the right of believers to hold their rituals," and sent to a prison colony for two years. However, the band did find some support in Russia, both for its feminist and political messages, and much more in the West:

"It exposed a watershed  between a creative or new class of urban intellectuals and globally connected elites, whose life options are immersed in the technological, economic, and cultural transformations of the information/digital economy and whose goals embrace visibility, autonomy and self-expression and, on the other hand, the “masses” immersed in a more material economy and lifestyle. Their “wrath” at post-socialist economic inequalities translated into a rejection of Pussy Riot, whose protest centered around non-traditional issues and cultural codes and who became identified with global capitalism."

 It is partly because Pussy Riot chose to  publicize itself via new the Internet and social media that it found the support of the educated, tech-savvy, new elite of Russia — while also alienating itself from the masses.

Gattaca: The Class of Genetics

Quite a large number of sci-fi books and movies deal with concepts of social class, but one that came to mind recently was Gattaca, which can be found here. The plot takes place in a version of the future where eugenics has progressed to such a degree that parents can choose exactly which hereditary traits they want to appear in their children's genetic profile. As such, DNA is the predominant metric of social class, with those who have the "best" DNA at the top of the social hierarchy, and those with inferior profiles lower down. The story follows Vincent, a genetic "in-valid" conceived through natural means, who grows up with myopia and a congenital heart defect as a result. His parents, regretting their decision, decide to have another child using genetic selection. While growing up, Vincent's brother Anton always seems to best him in every way, especially at a game of chicken that they played where they competed to see who could swim out into the sea the farthest. However, one day, Vincent beats Anton and saves him from drowning. Eventually, the siblings go their separate ways. Vincent has always wanted to be an astronaut, but because of his genetic profile he is only allowed to perform menial labor.

Featuring Uma Thurman, Jude Law, and that other guy.

Vincent overcomes this discrimination by purchasing the identity of Jerome Morrow, a swimmer who only gt a silver medal in the Olympics despite a superior genetic profile, and who became paralyzed after jumping in front of a car in a suicide attempt while out of the country. Jerome supplies Vincent with genetic material to pass the genetic tests that are routinely applied. Vincent gets a job at Gattaca Aerospace as a navigator on their next launch after passing a urine test. A murder in the space program complicates affairs (you can watch the movie yourself if you want to see what happens), but eventually Vincent crosses paths with his brother again, and Anton, feeling insecure about how Vincent managed to make it farther than he did despite his own genetic superiority, challenges him to one more game of chicken, and loses.

Clearly the moral is that genetics aren't a determinant of success, but a society where class isn't based upon income or behaviors is interesting to think about. The closest thing I think we discussed in class was the rise of the new educated elite overthrowing the "old money" upper class when the college education system became more open-access, but even education is something acquired, not something intrinsic to a person like DNA. Not that we haven't tried making it that way — there have been plenty of times where eugenics was popular in the US as a way of controlling the traits of the population (and it seemed like a good idea to Nazi Germany, too). That's not a reality that I'd look forward to, but it does make me wonder if social class might be based on something completely different in the future.

Table Manners: Hallmark of the Middle Class?

I was mulling over the reading by Paul Fusell we had in class a while back and came across this sentence in Chapter 2: "The middle class is where things like table manners assume an awful importance..." This reminded me of my own middle class background, but prior to reading this I hadn't really associated things like emphasis on table manners with the middle class; I just thought that they were something naggy parents forced their kids to endure so that they would grow up to eat like civilized adults. If anything, I thought it was a hallmark of higher classes because of all the different utensils at fancy restaurants (you're supposed to start from the outside and work your way in!). But upon hearing that generally the higher up you get above middle class the less you really care about table manners and place settings, the logic behind why they would be middle class traits made more sense. The upper classes used to emphasize such things, and the middle classes sought to emulate them, but the upper classes were class secure and stopped caring when the fancy struck them. However, the reputation of proper table manners as something genuinely upper-class stuck, and that is why ultimately those in the middle class place more emphasis on them today.

This also reminds me of a pet peeve of mine; I was taught what proper place setting was by my parents, but for some reason my little brother always used to do everything backwards, and it bugged me like crazy. He put the knife and spoon on the left side of the plate, and the fork on the right, and I couldn't stand it! I have OCPD as it is, and when I walk into my room I can immediately tell and be annoyed if one little thing isn't in its proper place, so a small thing like that just grated against my soul. Ironically, my parents didn't seem to care. My brother doesn't do that much anymore, but whenever I see an incorrect place setting I still die a little on the inside; I guess my habitus will forever be fundamentally middle class!