Bowdoin College is among the more than thirty institutes of higher education that are facing a class action lawsuit over alleged conspiracy to inflate tuition costs through the early admissions process.
Filed by a group of former current and former students, the suit argues the named universities “openly” engaged in practices “that entrench patterns of inequality of access while inflating the price of attendance.”
“Among these is the central practice challenged in this case: a horizontal agreement to reduce or eliminate competition through use of the early decision process,” the plaintiffs wrote.
Also named as defendants in the case are the Consortium on Financing Higher Education, the Common Application, and Scoir Inc., two platforms frequently used by prospective college students.
The Consortium on Financing Higher Education represents a group of select universities that are “committed to meeting the full demonstrated financial need of admitted students.”
This class action lawsuit alleges that the practice of Early Decision — which requires students to accept or reject a particular institution’s offer of admission and accompanying financial aid offers — allows colleges and universities to keep their tuition prices high.
The odds of being accepted through the Early Decision are generally much higher than for prospective students who go through the regular admissions process.
College Transitions reports that prospective students may have as much as a two to three time greater chance of being accepted if they apply Early Decision.
According to the plaintiffs in this case, so-called “price-sensitive” applicants are put at a disadvantage because they are either required to make a decision without being able to compare costs or forgo the advantage of being considered during the Early Decision process.
“Ultimately, Early Decision is enforced by mutual agreement between would-be competitors not to compete for students offered admission through Early Decision at other schools,” the plaintiffs write, calling Early Decision âa classic per se violation of the antitrust laws.”
While Early Decision agreements are not necessarily legally binding, the plaintiffs suggest that they are presented in a manner similar to that of a contract, instead imposing an “ethical” obligation.
Because these contracts are not actually legally binding, however, the plaintiffs highlight how colleges are then allowed to rescind their admissions offers if students fail to keep up their grades or are found to be engaging in prohibited conduct.
The plaintiffs go on to argue that schools “lose their incentive to compete on price for students admitted through Early Decision, driving up overall âtop lineâ tuition levels and reducing both need-based and merit-based aid for Early Decision admittees.”
“The result is that both Early and non-Early Decision students pay higher prices than they would have paid absent the conspiracy at the center of the Early Decision scheme,â the complaint said.
According to the Bangor Daily News, Doug Cook — Bowdoinâs Director of Communications — has indicated that the college is aware of the lawsuit and stands by its admission practices.
As a result of this lawsuit, the plaintiffs are reportedly seeking to have the courts bar higher education institutions from engaging in the practice of Early Decision, as well as to be awarded an unspecified amount financial compensation for tuition overcharges.
Forbes reports that this case marks the second major antitrust case that has been filed against institutes of higher education in recent years.
In 2022, several students alleged in a lawsuit against seventeen prestigious colleges and universities — all former members of the â568 Presidents Group” — that they had colluded with their âconsensus methodology” to give financial aid offers that served to artificially inflate the net cost of attendance.
The involved institutions have consistently denied any wrongdoing in the case, but ultimately agreed to settle for a sum of more than $300 million.
This current lawsuit was filed on Friday in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts where it will now be reviewed and considered.
