Should legacy admissions be eliminated?

[msc545]

Legacy admissions are when a college gives preferential treatment to applicants who have a parent or other relative who attended the same school. The idea is that the college wants to continue its relationship with families who have a connection to the school, and that this connection will help the applicant succeed. Some people see legacy admissions as unfair, since it gives an advantage to those who already have a family connection to the school.
Others argue that legacy admissions help maintain the school's traditions and culture.

Eliminate Legacy Admissions

Keep Legacy Admissions

[LaFemmeFatale_1]

I’ll not discuss how fair or unfair it is, it might be unfair to me, but might sound perfectly fair in the eyes of those children. Fairness is not common in life for a lot of people and I think, for their best interest, instead of complaining , they should become game changers to mold the rules in their favor,

saying something is unfair only helps us find excuses to fail instead of finding the fuel to succeed. So, I don’t think it’s unfair to me.

I’ll look at this from the perspective of those parent’s child who gets that legacy admission.
I think it’s pointless for this student himself, when you get used to having things go your way just BECAUSE of your parents, that doesn’t really help you build a character of your own.

Have I had managed an university, Ideally, I’d not give a single care who their parents are, instead I would strictly judge according to this child’s performances and he would have to compete with others the same way other potential students have to. But that being said, I am an idealist and I don’t manage a university.

[richardcory]

The problem we have now is universities that are really businesses masquerading as public service organizations.

If we created / improved our public universities - taking money otherwise spent on loans to provide free tuition and board, and made admissions merit based, we might be able to break the monopoly of the private universities.

In my experience the value of a prestigious university is not based on contacts with wealthy people, its based on contacts with capable people. Its also based on the environment created by being surrounded by other people who are excited and interested in their fields.

[BoopBoopBeep]

I think it's morally abhorrent... but I'm also a pragmatist. If you have a family that has consistently blessed you with a generous endowment, do you want to risk losing that funding by kicking their kid out? How many deserving kids would be impacted by the science lab shutting down or whatever?

It's like politics (or counterinsurgency). You have to make deals with sketchy people for a bigger-picture win. You do that or you go home and choke on your own vomit because people suck so much.

[msc545]

Maybe with a numerical limit to how much of that you do? Perhaps try to select kids that have a good academic history? (So many do not and pass anyway).

[BoopBoopBeep]

It's hard to say. $10M USD a year to keep my idiot kid employed as a lifelong student? I can do a lot with 10M. When people are naming buildings after you that is very different from filling out an annual envelope with a 1k check.

No less offensive though.

[msc545]

The problem with legacy students is that they are often unprepared for the very difficult work, and they can complain very effectively to their families if you dare to give them a low grade, which they often deserve. Their admission is far from merit-based and their sense of entitlement is grossly inflated...

[BoopBoopBeep]

Yeah it's potentially lose-lose for the recipient of the money (the uni) because they have to dance a dance either way with delicate sponsors. Lose it when he doesn't get in vs lose it when he flunks out

[msc545]

Usually, he doesn't flunk out no matter how bad he is - there is this thing called the "gentleman's C grade" for these guys. :(

[BoopBoopBeep]

True, but in some circles a non-3.8+ GPA might as well be an F.

[msc545]

Yes, I went to a school like that. It was either an A or an F.

[RealMarek]

Having seen such institutions first hand, I can tell you the only purpose of legacy admissions is to protect our elites (may they be cleared out). The same applies to abandonment of standardized testing in favor of essay questions and DEI statements on applications. These, as well as grade inflation if one thinks about it, are no more apt to help minorities than they are to help midwit elite children who have been schooled in intersectional terminology during prep school. We can see the high & low vs. middle alliance in action when it comes to elite institutions.

[genericname85]

i think the argument to keep them would be that since they are "legacy" meaning their parents already succeeded in life after attending that school, that makes it much more likely than a new attendee to succeed, cause they don't have the familial experience and support structure. so i think it is a good way to facilitate success as long as there's still some reasonbale room for new comers.

[exitseven]

I am of two minds on this. I can understand the tradition but at the end of the day nepotism is not fair.

[KrakenAttackin]

The reality is legacy admissions are a key source of intergenerational fund raising and legacy gifting, and they aren't going anywhere.

I think education institutions should have to use 5% of their endowments annually just like any other 501(c)3.

[slatyb]

They do this because it increases donations. Is it fair to other applicants? No. Is it possible to be completely fair? No. None even knows what that would mean.

[Anonymous]

legacy admissions are a source of revenue too lucrative to ignore.

[lightbulb27]

never heard of, no comment.