Is there anything positive about legacy admissions?

[Anonymous]

The answer is very clear : nothing positive for the vast majority of families and students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The answer is very clear : nothing positive for the vast majority of families and students.

So what? Athletic admissions offers nothing positive either. Same with international students. Or Questbridge. Whether it benefits you is a weird yardstick to choose

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The answer is very clear : nothing positive for the vast majority of families and students.

So what? Athletic admissions offers nothing positive either. Same with international students. Or Questbridge. Whether it benefits you is a weird yardstick to choose

Good that you agree with me. The fact that something is wrong doesn’t make legacy admissions good. That’s what is called a fallacy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The answer is very clear : nothing positive for the vast majority of families and students.

So what? Athletic admissions offers nothing positive either. Same with international students. Or Questbridge. Whether it benefits you is a weird yardstick to choose

Good that you agree with me. The fact that something is wrong doesn’t make legacy admissions good. That’s what is called a fallacy.

No I don’t see how that’s a legitimate yardstick - find some other reason that the fact that you don’t get the benefit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The answer is very clear : nothing positive for the vast majority of families and students.

So what? Athletic admissions offers nothing positive either. Same with international students. Or Questbridge. Whether it benefits you is a weird yardstick to choose

Good that you agree with me. The fact that something is wrong doesn’t make legacy admissions good. That’s what is called a fallacy.

No I don’t see how that’s a legitimate yardstick - find some other reason that the fact that you don’t get the benefit

Sure, deciding college admissions by last name sounds fair. We don’t need any additional information for deciding admissions.

[Anonymous]

For the school, if Dad went there, two kids go there, and Grandpa is looking for a tax-deductible donation, those warm fuzzy feelings can translate into big donor dollars.

[Anonymous]

At our private school it is really neat to see the generations of students from one family. At the alumni gatherings you see kindergarteners there with their alumni grandparents and great grandparents. This definitely increases the sense of history and community of the school. Let’s face it, I’m sure legacy helps with donations too, which benefits all students. It’s a selective school and I’m new to this area and my kid is not a legacy and had to get in without legacy ties. But I understand why when things are equal the school would want to favor the legacy applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The answer is very clear : nothing positive for the vast majority of families and students.

So what? Athletic admissions offers nothing positive either. Same with international students. Or Questbridge. Whether it benefits you is a weird yardstick to choose

Good that you agree with me. The fact that something is wrong doesn’t make legacy admissions good. That’s what is called a fallacy.

No I don’t see how that’s a legitimate yardstick - find some other reason that the fact that you don’t get the benefit

Sure, deciding college admissions by last name sounds fair. We don’t need any additional information for deciding admissions.

Deciding it by how fast you can row is? Or because you live in Montana? There is no “fair” way to do college admissions in this country

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The answer is very clear : nothing positive for the vast majority of families and students.

So what? Athletic admissions offers nothing positive either. Same with international students. Or Questbridge. Whether it benefits you is a weird yardstick to choose

Good that you agree with me. The fact that something is wrong doesn’t make legacy admissions good. That’s what is called a fallacy.

No I don’t see how that’s a legitimate yardstick - find some other reason that the fact that you don’t get the benefit

Sure, deciding college admissions by last name sounds fair. We don’t need any additional information for deciding admissions.

Deciding it by how fast you can row is? Or because you live in Montana? There is no “fair” way to do college admissions in this country

The last name is certainly the best. Super unbiased.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At our private school it is really neat to see the generations of students from one family. At the alumni gatherings you see kindergarteners there with their alumni grandparents and great grandparents. This definitely increases the sense of history and community of the school. Let’s face it, I’m sure legacy helps with donations too, which benefits all students. It’s a selective school and I’m new to this area and my kid is not a legacy and had to get in without legacy ties. But I understand why when things are equal the school would want to favor the legacy applicants.

I think if the school is a non competitive small private, when legacy doesn’t imply generational wealth or influence, it is really nice. But for these big3, when they are so competitive, then legacy does imply some sort of prior advantage and inherited privilege.

[Anonymous]

In principle, children of parents who attended an Ivy League school already have an advantage, since they are likely to grow up in well-educated households. It’s not clear that they really need legacy admissions. In principle, they could still gain admission to a good school on their own merits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The answer is very clear : nothing positive for the vast majority of families and students.

No, it is not clear, it is your opinion. I am fine with legacy admissions.
You all want to strip what make these schools special, and when they are no longer special, you are going to move on to the next set of schools that are prestigious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The answer is very clear : nothing positive for the vast majority of families and students.

No, it is not clear, it is your opinion. I am fine with legacy admissions.
You all want to strip what make these schools special, and when they are no longer special, you are going to move on to the next set of schools that are prestigious.

If legacy students are truly talented, they will be admitted to top universities on their own merits. So what exactly is the problem with eliminating legacy admissions? Unless, of course, one believes they are not actually that talented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The answer is very clear : nothing positive for the vast majority of families and students.

No, it is not clear, it is your opinion. I am fine with legacy admissions.
You all want to strip what make these schools special, and when they are no longer special, you are going to move on to the next set of schools that are prestigious.

If legacy students are truly talented, they will be admitted to top universities on their own merits. So what exactly is the problem with eliminating legacy admissions? Unless, of course, one believes they are not actually that talented.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The answer is very clear : nothing positive for the vast majority of families and students.

Families and students don't run the universities so that's irrelevant.