Debate: Affirmative Action vs Legacy
 

The whole Michigan court case have me been wondering. There is an argument for and against affirmative action. Now, what is the argument for the legacy argument in some elite university. I'm talking about some elite universities that would take students that they wouldn't take otherwise but do because of his family connection to the university. Now is that morally as acceptable as affirmative action?

No, but since those with "connections" have the advantage of class and privilege behind them, this particular brand of affirmative action is overlooked.

not trying to knock the system. . .
but sometimes SORORITIES do the same thing. . .

so before we cast stones. . .we should look at our own NPC Rush (the rules and voting) which makes us look discriminative and prejudice even though some of us aren't. . .


it's only a matter of time before they say the same thing about us. . .

White Chocolate, you're right...

But I think the spirit of both legacy issues is to admit someone whose parents have contributed to and who already have a love for the school/GLO. IMO it should be a little "push." If someone's dumb as a post I don't think they should be in a school legacy or not.

Probably has more to do with "Alumni Support." You can read that as "Money."

up for discussion.

Gosh I was just reading about this on the O'Reilly link. :p

Delt Alum is right about the financial support- according to the article.

What amazed me were the different areas that they consider when giving out those points. One example was 20 points if you were a minority and only 12 if you aced the SAT. I also think if you were in athletics you were given 12 points (I can- NOT believe it is equal to acing the SAT):rolleyes:

Anyway, I thought this was also happening in California (UCLA??? I could very well have the wrong school-too lazy to look it up) except instead of dishing out added points on the basis of being a minority, they were looking at hardship. I guess if you could write a cover letter about how sad your life had been and how many obstacles you had overcome, you got the gold ring-admittance!

Bottom line-I don't think it's right! Admittance should be based on performance!

JAM, I think DA was talking about how the parents buy their kids into institution like Yale, Harvard, Princeton. I know kids from high school that had b- average and sat score of 1050 and got into Harvard because her father and her grandfather were alum and contributed a lot of money. But then i see another kid who had an b+ average with 1200 in the sat and got denied.

Arya,

Both, actually.

Either you're telling a story of BS or that's a statistical outlier. Colleges release information on legacy statistics. At Yale, for example, the SAT score difference is negligible...2 points lower on average for legacies. These schools do NOT deny the money issue but they also see it more as an issue of loyalty. Children of alumni will not reject offers of admission as highly, they will be active alumni and help plan future events, as well as help fundraise. Considering the fact that Harvard, Yale, and Princeton give excellent aid packages, it is that money that is raised through alumni that makes that possible.

And about the kid with the B+ and the 1200, I don't mean to sound harsh, but he'd have trouble getting into a top tier school let alone Harvard with those scores.

And affirmative action isn't just to meet quotas, it's to bring diverse viewpoints to the table. At least that's what some admissions boards say.

-Rudey

OK - so let's use a real-life example (yep, I'm violating my own rule against anecdotal evidence...)

A kid I know very well, in fact went to high school with, applied out of a top-50 high school, a fairly well-known magnet school. His GPA was over 3.8, and he scored a 35 on the ACT and a 1600 on the SAT. Blah blah he had other figures, including a couple sports letters and etc. Didn't get into Yale.

Another one, this one top in his class, AP State Scholar out of Iowa, 35 and 1560, etc - Waitlisted at Harvard.

Why did these happen?

Because 4 legacies to Yale (out of 90 graduating students) and 4 legacies to Harvard got in early admission. Half of these had similar academic credentials, so they obviously deserved the nod over those w/out legacy status . . . the others, however, were significantly below these two who did not get in. (PS - before you decide to call bullshit, PM me for more details/contact info)

Personally, I think it should be considered 'the breaks' for these types of schools - if you apply to Harvard, well, they have the right to deny students with superlative records, that's part of the deal (and part of why you apply to these places). However, to argue that 'it never happens' or 'money is never an issue' seems a bit as poor as saying 'money is the only issue' or 'it always happens.'

The legacy info for Yale certainly reflects that the mean isn't different from the mean for the college as a whole - but statistical outliers happen. Personally, I don't think it is right to lump in legacy status with affirmative action - I buy the loyalty bit, although I'm sure some won't agree with me. It's the same thing as when we give legacies a chance - we owe it to the kid's dad, or whoever, to give that opportunity.

Years ago a guy who worked with me at a TV station wanted to become a doctor. Problem was that he had barely graduated from journalism school.

His father, a very wealthy man, underwrote a "chair" at a medical school.

Guess what? The guy I worked with is a doctor.

I wouldn't be a patient of his.

Rob, I'm kinda confused at what you're getting at here. I don't know the cases of those that you claim had significantly lower SATs, but maybe there is more than what you saw, or those students chose to let you see.

People bring up the SAT factor often. To an average American parent, your child is a genius if he breaks 1400 and off the charts if he goes over 1500. Well hey, if you can't break 1400 you've got a huge disadvantage when applying to competitive schools. If you break 1500, congrats...now you can at least step to the starting line little ones. There are so many kids with high SATs, great extra curriculars, high GPAs that never make it just because they don't stand out. Considering the fact that the mean SATs on legacies and regular admits are so similar, then it wouldn't be going too far to that those legacies were able to make themselves stand out as well. By the way, legacies still get rejected at a VERY high rate. In the case of Yale, the dean just personally reads their applications to make sure they get more attention (or call it what you will).

Going even further, it's necessary to separate legacies into different groups. One select group, I'm sure, has "bought" their way into the university by donating large amounts of money. I've heard certain rumors from my more "boarding school" friends who claim there are "buy-in" numbers at certain schools (Penn had something like $500K minimum 5 years ago) but these are still rumors. Not too many people can even afford to fall into that category - legacy or not. And such people could donate tons of money regardless of whether they were legacies. Call them rich...not legacies.

-Rudey

Naw, that's not really what I'm getting at - I was simply trying to show in an anecdotal manner that there are cases where kids who would have been more "deserving" (which is ridiculously subjective) lose spots to legacies, but that often legacies are just as qualified. The cases I brought up were to show both of these occuring.

The point was merely to state that it's just as wrong to deny it ever happens as to state that it happens "often", which simply isn't true. I suspect most who bitch about not getting in b/c they weren't a legacy are likely bitter about not getting in more than anything.

As far as making a comparison between the kids, you'll just have to trust me on that I guess (although I can break it down over PM if you'd like) - they were kids I knew very well, it was a weird high school like that. However, I can tell you that the Harvard wait-list got into 2 schools that one legacy did not, and only one of those was 'ivy-caliber' (Columbia) . . . but this isn't really taking the conversation anywhere, so I'll end the hijack now.

//edited b/c grammar is for the best - and to finish

Another anecdote...
 

Legacies are not automatically admitted to a competitive college especially Ivy Leagues. A friend from my youth had aspired to be the fourth generation in his family to attend an unnamed Ivy League, but he didn't have the SAT's and was rejected. His parents, grandfather, uncles, and great-grandfather were alumni, but that didn't help him at all. He wasn't a dumb guy by any means and attended a highly selective university, just not an Ivy League.

I think that probably sums it up pretty well.

I doubt, for instance, that the "next" George Bush will have any problem getting into Yale, whatever his high school credentials are.

yep yep yep!!!

Also, Ayra, scores hardly tell a story of the whole person. Although it seems like this person you know was admitted because her family is a strong contributer to the school and will contunue to be, most schools like that can fill their classes with 1600 A students and still have a full waiting list. We all know that there is more to a person than tests, and I imgaine they deny many people with better scores to accept people whith lower ones but with other qualifications.

-M

Ha ha ha ha ha ha, I find it hard to believe that they would accept anyone with a 10 somehting on the SAT's too! Maybe if their Dad had built a building and they were a star football player..... but then again, maybe not.

And it's not a secret that there is opportunistic inequality in this country. There always was and there always will be.
We need to stop worrying about it in places we can't stop it (like private institutions), and start thinking about how we can make things more equal in public elementary and secondary schools, where it makes a BIG difference.
-M

Anecdotally, I know a specific person that went to the University of penn with a 950 SAT score and decent grades as a legacy.

Well good for him.

Obviously that doesn't prove a general trend lol.

However, I can make some general coments.

Rudey is correct, There are a lot of high SAT scores. Especially in the last few years. Keep in mind that the SAT was renormed a few years ago giving students an extra 150 points.

Also, most of the students with top SAT scores take prep courses if only to cover their bases. For one of my friends, 4 months of test prep was the difference between a 1000 and 1400 SAT's.

As a student government officer I have had some pretty candid conversations with administrators. And the small print that most people don't see when looking at average SAT scores is the statement:

"Where the SAT was a factor in admission."

There is a perception of prestige in having high SAT scores. So in groups where SATs are lower, they will drop them from their statistic. Thats one of the reasons that every few years the Ney York Times or someone will run an article about how College's lie about average SAT scores.

In the case of legacies its in their best interests to make them out to be the same as every other candidate. but I don't have access to the direct evidence that would prove that contention.

Interesting thread.

Those of us who bump old threads usually like to contribute something that updates or challenges the information presented.

UVA17 is both announcing her/his return and claimed biracialism (Affirmative Action).

Thank you, Sen's Revenge, I will. :)

As far as the elite universities taking "legacies", I believe (like several other posters) that this practice is largely money driven. To a lesser extent, I believe it is also a matter of the legacy being a "known quantity". It's one more way to winnow down the applicant pool.

There are so many qualified students who apply to the elite universities. If every student who was actually capable of completing a degree were accepted, there simply wouldn't be enough room for everyone.

For example, 29,005 people applied to UVA for this fall. 8,528 were accepted. What about the 71% who weren't offered a spot? I don't feel like looking it up (if it can be found on the Internet anyway), but I'd be hard pressed to believe that most of them weren't capable of spending four productive years in Charlottesville.

With 29,005 applicants, the admissions committee is forced to look beyond grades, activities and standardized test scores for that little lagniappe that makes the student pop off the page. Things like every male relative from 1900 on attending the University...well, that's a big pop!

The college admissions game is, to be honest, a nightmare. It's so arbitrary that any little "in" an applicant has is fair game. That goes for legacy status, skin color, athletic ability or any other thing that makes them stand out.

My two cents; mock away! :)

Oh for goodness sake, Phil :rolleyes: Do you sit in front of your screen 24/7 waiting for me to post?

You know, we adopted a dog from the Humane Society last year and we were curious to find out what breed little Rufus is. So my dad sent away to a company for a doggie DNA identification kit. Turns out Rufus is Poodle, Yellow Lab and Cocker Spaniel. I digress..... Anyway, if you'd like, I'd be happy to buy you one of those kits for your own use. Who knows, maybe you too have a little salt mixed in with the peppa?

Oh, but that would ruin your whole "Angry Black Woman" shtick, wouldn't it? Never mind! :)

Might one ask why you are bound and determined to torpedo your own recruitment?

Perhaps you have wisely decided not to go through after all; in that case, what could possibly be an explanation for your anger and rudeness? Hurling "insults" and taking a condescending tone while in front of a keyboard speaks volumes re: personality and character.

Or, perhaps you are the troublemaker Buddha taught us to watch for, as a test of our own lovingkindness and mindfulness.

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

(As another GCer posted: testing to see if UVA17 is code for username who has to always have the last word)

Sure...it is your world....

It is wonderful that 10 years later you are able to update us that legacy is often money driven and the college admissions process is complex. Can't get anything past you, self-proclaimed UVA PNM. :)


GC would be even more boring if usernames didn't battle for the last word. I'm more amused that UVA17 thinks there is something shockingly profound about a Black person having white people in the immediate or distant lineage. The average Black person in certain countries does. UVA's family and history classes have failed.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/4ca188f36...lfumo1_500.gif

http://25.media.tumblr.com/b9e12883c...rnlao2_500.gif

Does that mean you don't want the doggie DNA kit? :)

I agree with that. I also recently found out that (at my alma mater) it's not just legacy status, but whether the alumni parents are active donors over a period of time.

If you just donated last year and your legacy is applying this year, you just might get bumped to the general pool and perhaps denied if you have weak credentials otherwise.

So yes, it helps, but (like in some orgs!) it could also hurt if you haven't taken all the steps or understand the system.