How long before legacy admissions are gone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soon, I hope, especially if the SC strikes down affirmative action.
Very difficult to rationalize giving a thumb on the scale to children of alumni (who generally skew wealthier and have received more advantages) than to underrepresented minorities.

Last year a lawmaker in NY introduced a bill that would ban legacy preferences at all NY colleges (public and private) but a quick Google search doesn't bring much up, so I guess that's dead or stalled.

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2021/S8498

I kind of wonder that if affirmative action is illegal (rather than just not mandated), how it is that legacy admissions (which are also naturally based on origin) are legal? I'd love to hear a lawyer explain that one (clearly I'm not a lawyer).

The protected classes are generally race, sex, color, ethnicity, and national origin. No discrimination/preferential treatment for or against (except is limited circumstances). Legacy status is not covered by the applicable laws or precedents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why it is in the interest of the university for legacy admissions to continue - outside of donations?

People like the prestige that goes along with being on the same dorm floor as a Kennedy or Biden, or to attend class with Sarah Jessica Parker’s kid, or Bill Gate’s kid. You get it, right?

SJP's kid was first gen, not legacy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whole point of legacy preferences is to attract donations. The schools that have parted ways with it are so loaded that annual gifts from alums don’t really matter now. I do wonder if “development” cases are considered something different from legacy for those schools that no longer give legacy preference - normally a legacy edge is associated with generous giving. Schools also see legacy preference as preserving the culture.

I think most schools esp schools that rely heavily on fundraising and don’t have oversized endowments will be very loathe to give it up if not legally required

The schools that don’t have big endowments and need lots of little alumni donations are the ones generally with high acceptance rates where being a legacy doesn’t matter as much.

[Anonymous]

I don’t see legacies going anywhere as a result of the Supreme Court decision. Schools will adjust by using low income or first ten as hooks once urm is not allowed.

[Anonymous]

Legacy admits will go away when money no longer matters. It is statically shown that the more family members that attend the school the more likely that family is to donate. I suppose some schools have a large enough endowment they no longer care about what alumni think but that will be the exception not the rule. There is a student population dip coming too. There will be schools revisiting legacy admits once the competition for students becomes more of an issue.

[Anonymous]

Legacy & donating is a thing at small “unknown” LACs too. Many families have a tradition of attending certain schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Legacies and athletes are more likely to donate. Grads who don’t fall into those categories don’t understand the importance of donating.

I was an athlete. Educate me, what is the importance of donating to a school with an enormous endowment when there are other causes I can support?

[Anonymous]

How long before they get rid of sports like every other country in the world and focus on academics at academic institutions?

[Anonymous]

SATs are biased, grades are inflated, seems like legacy status is one of the few things left.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole point of legacy preferences is to attract donations. The schools that have parted ways with it are so loaded that annual gifts from alums don’t really matter now. I do wonder if “development” cases are considered something different from legacy for those schools that no longer give legacy preference - normally a legacy edge is associated with generous giving. Schools also see legacy preference as preserving the culture.

I think most schools esp schools that rely heavily on fundraising and don’t have oversized endowments will be very loathe to give it up if not legally required

The schools that don’t have big endowments and need lots of little alumni donations are the ones generally with high acceptance rates where being a legacy doesn’t matter as much.

I’m involved in collecting “little alumni donations” at a school with an egregiously large endowment and egregiously low acceptance rate. Greed is never satisfied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole point of legacy preferences is to attract donations. The schools that have parted ways with it are so loaded that annual gifts from alums don’t really matter now. I do wonder if “development” cases are considered something different from legacy for those schools that no longer give legacy preference - normally a legacy edge is associated with generous giving. Schools also see legacy preference as preserving the culture.

I think most schools esp schools that rely heavily on fundraising and don’t have oversized endowments will be very loathe to give it up if not legally required

The schools that don’t have big endowments and need lots of little alumni donations are the ones generally with high acceptance rates where being a legacy doesn’t matter as much.

I’m involved in collecting “little alumni donations” at a school with an egregiously large endowment and egregiously low acceptance rate. Greed is never satisfied.

It still counts towards rankings right? If that goes away maybe they wouldn’t care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why it is in the interest of the university for legacy admissions to continue - outside of donations?

Donations are what matter. $$$

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Legacies and athletes are more likely to donate. Grads who don’t fall into those categories don’t understand the importance of donating.

I was an athlete. Educate me, what is the importance of donating to a school with an enormous endowment when there are other causes I can support?

Being grateful for the education you received and wanting to pay it forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Legacies and athletes are more likely to donate. Grads who don’t fall into those categories don’t understand the importance of donating.

I was an athlete. Educate me, what is the importance of donating to a school with an enormous endowment when there are other causes I can support?

Being grateful for the education you received and wanting to pay it forward.

I paid for the education I received. There are a lot of competing causes out here.

[Anonymous]

If the SC eliminates affirmative action then legacy needs to go as well. There are millions of people that were systematically denied the ability to be a legacy. Many colleges well into the 1970s only admitted a token number of URMs.

If AA is outlawed but not legacies then we are outright giving an advantage to the majority. Don’t see how this would make any sense.