In Princeton’s admissions, not all public schools are equal

In the ‘Prince’ survey of the Class of 2029, 63.9 percent of students reported having attended a public school — of those students, 78 percent came from non-selective schools. The University often includes this statistic alongside its other metrics of diversity; presumably, it is supposed to be impressive, even though 83 percent of K-12 students in the United States attend a public school.

But even within those public schools, some are far better represented than others at Princeton.

Let’s take New Jersey as a microcosm for the nation. As our analysis shows, a small subset of New Jersey public schools are dramatically overrepresented at Princeton. Given Princeton’s flaunting of its high percentage of public schoolers, the University should broaden the range of schools from which it admits — even if this means devoting resources to actively recruiting from more underserved public schools.

To measure the disparities in Princeton’s admissions between feeder schools, which we define as schools that send a disproportionate number of students to Princeton, and non-feeder public schools, we analyzed Princeton’s admissions from New Jersey feeder schools for the Classes of 2003–2016. We can’t be certain of how admissions have changed in the last 15 years — which high schools have been represented more, and which ones less. However, given that the percentage of public school students has not substantially increased, remaining around 60 percent, from the Classes of 2016–2029, it seems unlikely that Princeton has significantly diversified the schools that it admits from.

In 2024, The Daily Princetonian collected data on “the 250 schools that have sent the most students to Princeton” for the Classes of 2003–2016. For the Class of 2016, over two-thirds of incoming first-years from New Jersey came from one of the 39 schools — 26 public and 13 private — on the list of Princeton’s top 250 feeder schools.

If Princeton admitted a similar percentage of public school students from New Jersey as it did nationwide, then in the Class of 2016, about 74 percent of New Jersey public school students at Princeton likely came from the same 26 high schools — or eight percent of New Jersey public schools.

These public schools tend to serve affluent communities. When weighing the number of students that each school sent to Princeton in the Class of 2016, the average median household income of the ZIP codes of the public non-magnet schools’ is currently $183,320. This is greater than the median household incomes of 89 percent of New Jersey ZIP codes, and 1.81 times the income of the median New Jersey household.

Students from these schools, like all Princeton students, are doubtlessly impressive. But that doesn’t mean they should be overrepresented nine times over. According to University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83, about 30 percent of applicants and 50 percent of accepted students each year score an “Academic 1” on their Princeton application, which is the best possible academic rating that a Princeton applicant can get. Clearly, a high percentage of applicants are well-qualified to attend Princeton. Given that many of the students rejected from Princeton are academically qualified to attend, at least some of these students must come from underrepresented public schools. Princeton needs to make more room for these students in future classes.

Support nonprofit student journalism. Donate to the ‘Prince.’ Donate now »

How can we keep Princeton accountable? The University should publish an annual report listing the high schools from which it admits, detailing the percentage of students that come from Title I schools, and enumerating the median household income of the ZIP codes of these high schools.

Some might argue that these statistics just reflect a lack of interest — students from disadvantaged schools simply “don’t apply to Princeton.” In a previous ‘Prince’ article, Allison Slater Tate ’96, a college consultant, said, “Sometimes it takes one kid getting in and going from a school, and if that kid does well, [University admissions] can see that they were prepared. They can kind of trust [the high school] more.”

But representing an entire high school and facilitating connections with Princeton should not be the responsibility of a single child. Trust is a two-way street, and Princeton must not be passive. Rather than waiting for this student to apply, Princeton should actively seek them out.

As our colleague Frances Brogan has argued in the past, admissions officers need to visit disadvantaged and Title I schools in the interest of prioritizing geographic diversity. And while it is exceedingly important for these officers to reach out to underrepresented states and regions, it’s also important for admissions officers to target poorer ZIP codes and underrepresented schools in states that are overrepresented too, such as New Jersey.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered to your doorstep or inbox. Subscribe now »

Princeton bears a responsibility — in line with its socioeconomic diversity goals — to visit disadvantaged schools and find students who have the potential to perform well at Princeton, but would not otherwise attend. Visits from admissions officers for college fairs could generate student interest and propel more students to apply. The more opportunities these students have to familiarize themselves with Princeton, the more trust they’ll have in Princeton, too.

Raf Basas ’28 is an assistant Opinion editor from Elk Grove, Calif. You can reach him at raf.basas[at]princeton.edu or @raf.basas on Instagram.

Vitalia Spatola ’28 is a staff Opinion writer from South River, N.J., a small town she hopes Princeton will visit soon. You can reach Vitalia at vs2172[at]princeton.edu.