Elite Colleges’ Quiet Fight to Favor Alumni Children

[Anonymous]

I like how the New York Times focuses on UVA in the article, putting to rest the claim by so many UVA bashers that it’s not a prestigious school and that its reputation doesn’t extend beyond the DMV. The Times frequently lumps UVA in with the nation’s top privates. You don’t see it doing that with Maryland lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like how the New York Times focuses on UVA in the article, putting to rest the claim by so many UVA bashers that it’s not a prestigious school and that its reputation doesn’t extend beyond the DMV. The Times frequently lumps UVA in with the nation’s top privates. You don’t see it doing that with Maryland lol.

Please stop. Don't feed this troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people lament legacy advantages, but simultaneously want them for their own kids. Including the politicians.

Fully support it. Private colleges should be able to pick who they want for whatever reasons they want.

+1. Some schools want to be family traditions. Personally, I was crafting a class I would much rather have a kid who wants to be at my school than another kid who applied based on ranking and doesn't really care if they're at much school or another similar school.

But it's up to the private school to decide. Legacy admissions means the future alumni are more likely to donate and continue to support the university. Sure, it's not fair, but life is not fair. Many people get jobs based on who they know---is that fair? No, but networking is a way of life. Some people are automatically born into a better network, others have to work harder to build it. THat's happened for generations and isn't likely to end.

That’s what all people say when it benefits them. MIT and Amherst and JHU and the UC system for example have gotten rid of legacy preference and seem to be doing just fine financially. And federal funds are used by the schools. So not completely private.

Of which sort? Like taxpayer funded Federal Pell Grants, SEOG, and federal student workstudy?



Completely private. Government funding of that sort does not convert private universities into state actors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like how the New York Times focuses on UVA in the article, putting to rest the claim by so many UVA bashers that it’s not a prestigious school and that its reputation doesn’t extend beyond the DMV. The Times frequently lumps UVA in with the nation’s top privates. You don’t see it doing that with Maryland lol.

This is true. You don’t see many articles mentioning UMD.
UMD would do better if it had a better campus. No one wants to hang out in college park

[Anonymous]

For all of you that are okay with legacy preference, are you okay with affirmative action? Same thing but in reverse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people lament legacy advantages, but simultaneously want them for their own kids. Including the politicians.

Fully support it. Private colleges should be able to pick who they want for whatever reasons they want.

Same, also why I support diversity efforts. Colleges should craft classes they want, be they legacy, women, black, hispanic, asian, LGBTQ. Preferences should be allowed at every level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For all of you that are okay with legacy preference, are you okay with affirmative action? Same thing but in reverse.

I am ok with both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people lament legacy advantages, but simultaneously want them for their own kids. Including the politicians.

Fully support it. Private colleges should be able to pick who they want for whatever reasons they want.

+1. Some schools want to be family traditions. Personally, I was crafting a class I would much rather have a kid who wants to be at my school than another kid who applied based on ranking and doesn't really care if they're at much school or another similar school.

Why would you say that?
Nobody goes to college because of family tradition
People apply because it is a good school and ranking reflects that
Family tradition kids to be at that school is the same as that of every other person

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For all of you that are okay with legacy preference, are you okay with affirmative action? Same thing but in reverse.

Not even close to the same. Legacy preference will work at one school. Affirmative action will work at virtually every school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of legacy preference does absolutely nothing. The same pool of privileged applicants will just spread themselves across the range of selective schools instead of getting funneled into the ones their parents attended. It won't create additional opportunities for another else when viewed in the aggregate.

They will get into schools they’re qualified to attend. Maybe it will be selective, maybe it won’t. Imagine if there were no special side doors or loop holes or handshake deals- some of these kids would have to go to average schools. They’re not all smart.

You are overestimating the impact of legacy at the most selective schools.

You are underestimating it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For all of you that are okay with legacy preference, are you okay with affirmative action? Same thing but in reverse.

I'm fine with private schools doing both and public schools doing neither

[Anonymous]

Legacy is a problem, but kids getting into schools because of sports is an even bigger problem. Those two student populations take a significant number of spots at top schools. A kid could be busting their ass, and an athlete who has a weaker transcript & test scores will get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people lament legacy advantages, but simultaneously want them for their own kids. Including the politicians.

Fully support it. Private colleges should be able to pick who they want for whatever reasons they want.

+1. Some schools want to be family traditions. Personally, I was crafting a class I would much rather have a kid who wants to be at my school than another kid who applied based on ranking and doesn't really care if they're at much school or another similar school.

Why would you say that?
Nobody goes to college because of family tradition
People apply because it is a good school and ranking reflects that
Family tradition kids to be at that school is the same as that of every other person

There are a lot of SLACs that are family tradition and those kids prefer to be at that school rather than the school down the rode that's a spot higher on the rankings. Most school prefer to have students that want to be there not students that just go to the best school that they get into

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Legacy is a problem, but kids getting into schools because of sports is an even bigger problem. Those two student populations take a significant number of spots at top schools. A kid could be busting their ass, and an athlete who has a weaker transcript & test scores will get it.

If it's that easy, teach your kid how to play lacrosse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people lament legacy advantages, but simultaneously want them for their own kids. Including the politicians.

Fully support it. Private colleges should be able to pick who they want for whatever reasons they want.

yes then pay full tax like any other private companies.