Is there anything positive about legacy admissions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So far the only positive for legacy admissions is potentially more funding for elite colleges, but not sure there is anything else that is good for the society as a whole.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yes, so you should stop stating your opinions as if they're fact. Stating "most people would donate less if their child was rejected" does not mean that legacy admissions are the best option for universities, and the most elite universities don't need their alumni to be walking billboards for them--they're already at sub-5% admittance rates. It could be that cchools could do better if they picked the best applicant, and that best applicant was more successful and could donate more than the legacy student.

The elite schools are at sub 5% admittance rates BECAUSE of their alumni. "Best" as you say, is subjective. Best to Americans means reputation, cache, prestige, and perceived smarts, if the elite schools just focus on a cut off line based off test scores and grades, they will soon no longer be elite, because the elite of the U.S. will not want to go to these schools.

That’s your opinion, not a fact. As mentioned earlier in this thread, plenty of countries (ex: England, France, India, Korea, China) have elite universities with admissions that are entirely merit based that are perceived as elite.

I would love to see the stats on US citizen admissions to the elite universities in those countries. They also have very different funding mechanisms.

The educational environment for kids is incredibly miserable in Asia. I see this first-hand as I live in Singapore. It is exhausting to witness the intensity with which families are pursuing US university options. The kids have after school and Saturday tuition all designed to optimize test scores and grades. And yes, all of the selection tests are trainable with enough effort. They no longer measure anything other than test prep.

They’ve even managed to add in certifications to after school art, theater, and music programs. The credentialism is out of control.

I'm sure you can find those stats using a handy tool that "the kids" call Google. You just need to look at numbers and read more rather than state opinions without evidence. Perhaps because you live in Singapore, you have not realized that plenty of American kids are also in Saturday and/or Sunday academic enrichment classes and activities. It's competitive here too. But your anecdote is not data anyway--plenty of desirable schools (ex: Oxford and Cambridge) do not have legacy admissions despite being in a country with its own aristocracy.

+1 The USA is the only advanced country I have heard of that rewards kids with a substantial preference for elite college admissions just because their parents went there.

[Anonymous]

^^ The preference is slight, not substantial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yes, so you should stop stating your opinions as if they're fact. Stating "most people would donate less if their child was rejected" does not mean that legacy admissions are the best option for universities, and the most elite universities don't need their alumni to be walking billboards for them--they're already at sub-5% admittance rates. It could be that cchools could do better if they picked the best applicant, and that best applicant was more successful and could donate more than the legacy student.

The elite schools are at sub 5% admittance rates BECAUSE of their alumni. "Best" as you say, is subjective. Best to Americans means reputation, cache, prestige, and perceived smarts, if the elite schools just focus on a cut off line based off test scores and grades, they will soon no longer be elite, because the elite of the U.S. will not want to go to these schools.

That’s your opinion, not a fact. As mentioned earlier in this thread, plenty of countries (ex: England, France, India, Korea, China) have elite universities with admissions that are entirely merit based that are perceived as elite.

I would love to see the stats on US citizen admissions to the elite universities in those countries. They also have very different funding mechanisms.

The educational environment for kids is incredibly miserable in Asia. I see this first-hand as I live in Singapore. It is exhausting to witness the intensity with which families are pursuing US university options. The kids have after school and Saturday tuition all designed to optimize test scores and grades. And yes, all of the selection tests are trainable with enough effort. They no longer measure anything other than test prep.

They’ve even managed to add in certifications to after school art, theater, and music programs. The credentialism is out of control.

I'm sure you can find those stats using a handy tool that "the kids" call Google. You just need to look at numbers and read more rather than state opinions without evidence. Perhaps because you live in Singapore, you have not realized that plenty of American kids are also in Saturday and/or Sunday academic enrichment classes and activities. It's competitive here too. But your anecdote is not data anyway--plenty of desirable schools (ex: Oxford and Cambridge) do not have legacy admissions despite being in a country with its own aristocracy.

+1 The USA is the only advanced country I have heard of that rewards kids with a substantial preference for elite college admissions just because their parents went there.

+1 it’s an anomaly for international standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ The preference is slight, not substantial.

No it's not a "slight" preference unless you don't understand how numbers work. A paper on this topic by two Harvard professors shows that legacy students with the same SAT score as a non-legacy student are roughly five times more likely to be admitted to the elite university their parents attended.
https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2023/07/24/1189443223/affirmative-action-for-rich-kids-its-more-than-just-legacy-admissions
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/3/27/iop-chetty-deming-admissions/
https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Nontech.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ The preference is slight, not substantial.

No it's not a "slight" preference unless you don't understand how numbers work. A paper on this topic by two Harvard professors shows that legacy students with the same SAT score as a non-legacy student are roughly five times more likely to be admitted to the elite university their parents attended.
https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2023/07/24/1189443223/affirmative-action-for-rich-kids-its-more-than-just-legacy-admissions
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/3/27/iop-chetty-deming-admissions/
https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Nontech.pdf

I would say that is a quiet corrupt admission system. I think the bribes in the college scandal were a bit more transparent. You pay thousands of dollars to coaches and you get an admission to let’s say USC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yes, so you should stop stating your opinions as if they're fact. Stating "most people would donate less if their child was rejected" does not mean that legacy admissions are the best option for universities, and the most elite universities don't need their alumni to be walking billboards for them--they're already at sub-5% admittance rates. It could be that cchools could do better if they picked the best applicant, and that best applicant was more successful and could donate more than the legacy student.

The elite schools are at sub 5% admittance rates BECAUSE of their alumni. "Best" as you say, is subjective. Best to Americans means reputation, cache, prestige, and perceived smarts, if the elite schools just focus on a cut off line based off test scores and grades, they will soon no longer be elite, because the elite of the U.S. will not want to go to these schools.

That’s your opinion, not a fact. As mentioned earlier in this thread, plenty of countries (ex: England, France, India, Korea, China) have elite universities with admissions that are entirely merit based that are perceived as elite.

I would love to see the stats on US citizen admissions to the elite universities in those countries. They also have very different funding mechanisms.

The educational environment for kids is incredibly miserable in Asia. I see this first-hand as I live in Singapore. It is exhausting to witness the intensity with which families are pursuing US university options. The kids have after school and Saturday tuition all designed to optimize test scores and grades. And yes, all of the selection tests are trainable with enough effort. They no longer measure anything other than test prep.

They’ve even managed to add in certifications to after school art, theater, and music programs. The credentialism is out of control.

I'm sure you can find those stats using a handy tool that "the kids" call Google. You just need to look at numbers and read more rather than state opinions without evidence. Perhaps because you live in Singapore, you have not realized that plenty of American kids are also in Saturday and/or Sunday academic enrichment classes and activities. It's competitive here too. But your anecdote is not data anyway--plenty of desirable schools (ex: Oxford and Cambridge) do not have legacy admissions despite being in a country with its own aristocracy.

+1 The USA is the only advanced country I have heard of that rewards kids with a substantial preference for elite college admissions just because their parents went there.

+1 it’s an anomaly for international standards.

+100 "No other way to do this," says the only country where universities admit students this way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yes, so you should stop stating your opinions as if they're fact. Stating "most people would donate less if their child was rejected" does not mean that legacy admissions are the best option for universities, and the most elite universities don't need their alumni to be walking billboards for them--they're already at sub-5% admittance rates. It could be that cchools could do better if they picked the best applicant, and that best applicant was more successful and could donate more than the legacy student.

The elite schools are at sub 5% admittance rates BECAUSE of their alumni. "Best" as you say, is subjective. Best to Americans means reputation, cache, prestige, and perceived smarts, if the elite schools just focus on a cut off line based off test scores and grades, they will soon no longer be elite, because the elite of the U.S. will not want to go to these schools.

That’s your opinion, not a fact. As mentioned earlier in this thread, plenty of countries (ex: England, France, India, Korea, China) have elite universities with admissions that are entirely merit based that are perceived as elite.

I would love to see the stats on US citizen admissions to the elite universities in those countries. They also have very different funding mechanisms.

The educational environment for kids is incredibly miserable in Asia. I see this first-hand as I live in Singapore. It is exhausting to witness the intensity with which families are pursuing US university options. The kids have after school and Saturday tuition all designed to optimize test scores and grades. And yes, all of the selection tests are trainable with enough effort. They no longer measure anything other than test prep.

They’ve even managed to add in certifications to after school art, theater, and music programs. The credentialism is out of control.

I'm sure you can find those stats using a handy tool that "the kids" call Google. You just need to look at numbers and read more rather than state opinions without evidence. Perhaps because you live in Singapore, you have not realized that plenty of American kids are also in Saturday and/or Sunday academic enrichment classes and activities. It's competitive here too. But your anecdote is not data anyway--plenty of desirable schools (ex: Oxford and Cambridge) do not have legacy admissions despite being in a country with its own aristocracy.

+1 The USA is the only advanced country I have heard of that rewards kids with a substantial preference for elite college admissions just because their parents went there.

+1 it’s an anomaly for international standards.

+100 "No other way to do this," says the only country where universities admit students this way.

Hilarious ! 😂

[Anonymous]

The only way I can see people defending legacy admissions, is that their kids have that possibility and don’t want to loose it. For talented kids, the legacy admissions are completely irrelevant. Most likely those kids will attend the college they want. At the end of the day I don’t see any cost for the society from eliminating legacy admissions.

[Anonymous]

Think about it. Legacy admissions in schools, legacy admissions in elite colleges. This works perfectly for the aristocracy if they don’t want to mingle with middle class families with limited influence and no refined manners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only way I can see people defending legacy admissions, is that their kids have that possibility and don’t want to loose it. For talented kids, the legacy admissions are completely irrelevant. Most likely those kids will attend the college they want. At the end of the day I don’t see any cost for the society from eliminating legacy admissions.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole point of going to an elite school is to rub elbows with the “privileged few.” Otherwise we would just administer an IQ test and take the top X%.

That is exactly how Asian top universities select students, India, South Korea, China, Singapore, etc

Sounds like a good place to send your kid to school, if that’s what you are looking for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole point of going to an elite school is to rub elbows with the “privileged few.” Otherwise we would just administer an IQ test and take the top X%.

That is exactly how Asian top universities select students, India, South Korea, China, Singapore, etc

Sounds like a good place to send your kid to school, if that’s what you are looking for.

Sure, with no unfriendly xenophobic parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole point of going to an elite school is to rub elbows with the “privileged few.” Otherwise we would just administer an IQ test and take the top X%.

That is exactly how Asian top universities select students, India, South Korea, China, Singapore, etc

Sounds like a good place to send your kid to school, if that’s what you are looking for.

Ah yes, the famous answer of those who have no justification for their selfish views. “If you don’t like it leave.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It might eventually disappear :

https://www.wsj.com/us-news/education/legacy-college-admissions-preferences-backlash-772c88be?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=AWEtsqfclKtZWTRMwfA1qxSsNm_1Fq6fBBmExYI8FmuNEMEbNDvHOM6WrToN&gaa_ts=68fd8a7c&gaa_sig=dMhAzGZBjWqB-ztwD6qSBcXmyYnGZrxdo2TsPOEiHMSGPPTM6opr7GGQf1UJHtuzaaFAAgJy7Uu02iFqIQFLzg%3D%3D

Just because of the legacy admission, I will encourage my kids to apply to colleges WITHOUT legacy admissions. I think it’s more consistent with my view of true social inclusion.

They need to get rid of Legacy since they got ris of Affirmative Action. Can’t wait!