Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I actually don't have a problem with the Children of Faculty admissions and/or tuition perks particularly for private institutions. I think it much the same as any business that offers an employee preference and/or discount. I have worked for both kinds: ones that allowed employees first dibs on a new product or service (often at a discount) and ones that specifically prohibited it. Items or services with limited runs, much like a hard cap on enrollment might be, c/would often sway whether or not employees benefited. What I have never seen (nor am I suggesting college do), is treating one employee differently than another of the same employment level. So, for example, all tenured professors dependents get in but not just Prof A's does while Prof B's doesn't.
At least that's where I sit at the moment but could, as most times, be convinced otherwise. The one (private) university I know of with such a tuition policy has it apply to all full-time employees after a three-year waiting period. And, yes, that includes everyone down to the (full-time) cafeteria and maintenance crew. To the best of my knowledge, though, the dependent must be admitted on their own merits (but I sincerely guess they receive a substantial and positive head-start).
Why should the child get a boost against their peers for their parent's accomplishments?
The whole point of getting rid of AA and legacy boosts are to not discriminate based on immutable characteristics. Parental employment is an immutable characteristic for the child.
What private business do is irrelevant here. Universities are bound by federal law as they take millions in tax money every year in the form of student loans and research grants.