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.