Is there anything positive about legacy admissions?

[Anonymous]

I'll ask again, because you didn't answer the question. Who claimed that MIT is "such a bad school" or that they are "really having fundraising problems"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll ask again, because you didn't answer the question. Who claimed that MIT is "such a bad school" or that they are "really having fundraising problems"?

So you agree that a university can be as successful as MIT without legacy admissions, right?

[Anonymous]

Answer the question. Who claimed that MIT is "such a bad school" or that they are "really having fundraising problems"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Legacies keep the alumi donation pipeline full. With no legacies donations would plummet. It is that simple.

There's no evidence of this: an alternative hypothesis is that legacy boosts lead to admissions of kids who wouldn't have been admitted were it not for the legacy boost, thereby perpetuating the supremacy of otherwise less than stellar kids. And maybe one of the kids who would have been admitted, if selection were fully merit based would be the next billionaire who could keep college coffers full.

It's a pretty straight forward assumption. Most people would donate less if their child was rejected.

The even bigger issue for schools is that alumni are walking billboards. They have a much larger impact an application rates than you realize.

None of this is measurable by a study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Answer the question. Who claimed that MIT is "such a bad school" or that they are "really having fundraising problems"?

I am glad that you agree that legacy admissions are not necessary for a successful university.

[Anonymous]

I haven't agreed to anything, and you haven't answered the question. Who claimed that MIT is "such a bad school" or that they are "really having fundraising problems"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven't agreed to anything, and you haven't answered the question. Who claimed that MIT is "such a bad school" or that they are "really having fundraising problems"?

Good that I convinced you.

[Anonymous]

You haven't convinced me of anything, and you still haven't answered a simple question. Who claimed that MIT is "such a bad school" or that they are "really having fundraising problems"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You haven't convinced me of anything, and you still haven't answered a simple question. Who claimed that MIT is "such a bad school" or that they are "really having fundraising problems"?

I thought so. Since mit is a good school without legacy not sure what else is to discuss.

[Anonymous]

And still not answering a basic factual question. Who claimed that MIT is "such a bad school" or that they are "really having fundraising problems"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And still not answering a basic factual question. Who claimed that MIT is "such a bad school" or that they are "really having fundraising problems"?

Why do you think why I said that ? What does your logic tells you? Maybe you also had a legacy admission and cannot answer.

[Anonymous]

I'll answer you question when you show me who claimed that MIT is "such a bad school" or that they are "really having fundraising problems"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'll answer you question when you show me who claimed that MIT is "such a bad school" or that they are "really having fundraising problems"?

Think harder.

[Anonymous]

I did not say the contested statements. I did say MIT gets more per year in government money than it dies from alumni. Truth. See https://facts.mit.edu/operating-financials/

The endowment is about 10 times larger than MIT annual government funding $24.6B in 2025 compared to $2.3B government funding. See above for breakdowns. The endowment provides financial aid. Almost half the government money is Lincoln Lab contracts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I did not say the contested statements. I did say MIT gets more per year in government money than it dies from alumni. Truth. See https://facts.mit.edu/operating-financials/

The endowment is about 10 times larger than MIT annual government funding $24.6B in 2025 compared to $2.3B government funding. See above for breakdowns. The endowment provides financial aid. Almost half the government money is Lincoln Lab contracts.

So with endowment plus government grants it’s possible to circumvent the need for legacy admission. Very clever approach.