Have GW’s undergraduate programs reached a glass ceiling of intellectual talent? Or, in the spirit of last Thursday’s Hatchet front page, are we getting dumber?

The glaring headline “Intelligent students decrease” greeted the GW community and the throngs of admitted high school seniors and parents here last week for spring visits. These three words likely instilled a specific fear in many readers and have reinvigorated the debate about affordability and student caliber at GW.

A report presented at the Faculty Senate, entitled “The Decline in Elite Freshmen Admissions,” is forcing into question the quality of GW students. The findings are based on fewer early decision I and early decision II applicants, a decline in mean SAT scores for the University Honors Program and a decrease in the number of enrolling National Merit Scholars. While these declines could be tied to a cut in merit-based financial aid from the University in the past year, other factors must be taken into account.

Early decision at GW is a binding agreement, and considering the downturn in the economy and the University’s over $50,000 per year price tag, students and families who have doubts about being able to afford GW without financial aid are advised to steer clear of early decision. Thus, a decline in applicants in the early decision stage does not necessarily equate to a decline in extremely qualified students interested in GW.

It is also important to remember that the University Honors Program has recently changed its structure, which has affected the type of student who might be attracted to the program. The decline in mean Honors Program SAT scores could be indicative of this shift, rather than of a general decline in student quality.

Similarly, pointing to a decrease in enrolling National Merit Scholars as a sign of a deteriorating student body makes an absurd generalization about what makes a talented, qualified student. The National Merit process relies initially on the scores of the PSAT, which brings its own issues about standardized testing and the merits of defining students’ abilities by those scores.

Affordability and academic prestige should continue to be hot-button issues at GW, but correlation should not be mistaken for causation. There are many diverse factors that contribute to college admissions numbers, and it may be too soon to start lamenting the state of the GW student body’s intelligence.