New study explains why many elite colleges won’t give up legacy admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I used to give regularly (around 200) to my top 20 alma mater that my siblings also attended. They waitlisted my nephew and sent m brother a letter that basically said let’s talk bigger donation. It ticked me off. My family has some big unexpected ongoing expenses this year. The combination caused me to stop giving.

Where is this? Ivy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kentanji Brown Jackson was first generation Harvard. Her husband was I believe from a multigenerational Harvard legacy family. From everything I have read and heard about him, I don’t think he was an admit that only got in because of legacy like George W. Bush (look at his grades) or the Trump children at Penn. Legacy doubles down on prior privilege. I mean if your great-grandfather or grandfather went to Yale and your Dad went, you are benefitting from a legacy preference that dates back to a time tjose schools actively discriminated against applicants based on race or religion. A time when their grandmothers couldn’t go. Athletics is just another way of building in privilege. Just look at the makeup of the athletic teams and the sports. A lot of wealthy sports are represented. Squash, sailing, water polo, fencing, etc. There’s no recruiting for the debate team, robotics team, band, etc.

There absolutely is recruiting for debate and band. One college counselor told us the easiest way to get into a top school was to play an obscure instrument.

HAHAHA - that is definitely not true - but that guy was more than glad to take your money. LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I used to give regularly (around 200) to my top 20 alma mater that my siblings also attended. They waitlisted my nephew and sent m brother a letter that basically said let’s talk bigger donation. It ticked me off. My family has some big unexpected ongoing expenses this year. The combination caused me to stop giving.

Something sort of similar happened with my family. Parents are alums of a top 30 large/well endowed university, give 5-10k a year. My dad met with the development office a couple of years ago. They initiated the meeting, wanted him to give a bigger donation. When he mentioned 2/4 of his kids attended his alma matter and I got rejected and went to a top 40 school, they said he should have reached out to the admissions/development office when it happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kentanji Brown Jackson was first generation Harvard. Her husband was I believe from a multigenerational Harvard legacy family. From everything I have read and heard about him, I don’t think he was an admit that only got in because of legacy like George W. Bush (look at his grades) or the Trump children at Penn. Legacy doubles down on prior privilege. I mean if your great-grandfather or grandfather went to Yale and your Dad went, you are benefitting from a legacy preference that dates back to a time tjose schools actively discriminated against applicants based on race or religion. A time when their grandmothers couldn’t go. Athletics is just another way of building in privilege. Just look at the makeup of the athletic teams and the sports. A lot of wealthy sports are represented. Squash, sailing, water polo, fencing, etc. There’s no recruiting for the debate team, robotics team, band, etc.

People are not saying that every legacy would not have gotten in otherwise. They are saying it shouldn't be considered in admissions. At a school that doesn't use legacy (Hopkins for example), noone can ever say you got in because of legacy status. (Note - this is not to say that you don't benefit in so may other ways from life experience of being a legacy...ways in which will already give you a boost over 90% of the population)

But you're not competing against 90% of the population. You are competing against 40,000 other high school seniors, and 98% of them had much the same privileged "life experiences" as you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I used to give regularly (around 200) to my top 20 alma mater that my siblings also attended. They waitlisted my nephew and sent m brother a letter that basically said let’s talk bigger donation. It ticked me off. My family has some big unexpected ongoing expenses this year. The combination caused me to stop giving.

Something sort of similar happened with my family. Parents are alums of a top 30 large/well endowed university, give 5-10k a year. My dad met with the development office a couple of years ago. They initiated the meeting, wanted him to give a bigger donation. When he mentioned 2/4 of his kids attended his alma matter and I got rejected and went to a top 40 school, they said he should have reached out to the admissions/development office when it happened.

They said

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kentanji Brown Jackson was first generation Harvard. Her husband was I believe from a multigenerational Harvard legacy family. From everything I have read and heard about him, I don’t think he was an admit that only got in because of legacy like George W. Bush (look at his grades) or the Trump children at Penn. Legacy doubles down on prior privilege. I mean if your great-grandfather or grandfather went to Yale and your Dad went, you are benefitting from a legacy preference that dates back to a time tjose schools actively discriminated against applicants based on race or religion. A time when their grandmothers couldn’t go. Athletics is just another way of building in privilege. Just look at the makeup of the athletic teams and the sports. A lot of wealthy sports are represented. Squash, sailing, water polo, fencing, etc. There’s no recruiting for the debate team, robotics team, band, etc.

There absolutely is recruiting for debate and band. One college counselor told us the easiest way to get into a top school was to play an obscure instrument.

HAHAHA - that is definitely not true - but that guy was more than glad to take your money. LOL

They do recruit for an instrument. My neighbor was recruited for one and eventually played in the orchestra.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They express it in reverse.

Alumni are liable to stop donating if their children are rejected.

My spouse and I attended the same college as did my father and his brother. We give every year and have since graduation, and we would stop if DS is rejected. We'd continue if DS declined, but I'd see a rejection as the school severing the link.

My spouse and I both attended the same school and we donate every year - our children aren't even applying - they don't want to go. We will still donate because we are supporting the school, not paying so that we will be given special favors for our children.

It's an interesting dynamic for the universities. Admitting a student vs upsetting an alum and cutting the funding source. I've seen it play out a few ways.

There are certainly instances of "pay for play" and generations of financial support beyond the means of most and kids going to schools because it was pre-ordained.

I've also seen it lead to multiple "break ups" of alums with colleges, especially where kids don't really want to go to the same school as mom/dad, and that comes across in the application / demonstrated interest etc. to a school being careful about yield protection. I've even heard of schools waitlisting indifferent kids and then asking the family for "more commitment". In some cases the kids are duds and don't meet the new bar; in others the kids are great and ended up at equivalent or better schools who are now getting the donations.

[Anonymous]

I've even heard of schools waitlisting indifferent kids and then asking the family for "more commitment".

The only way to stop this form of financial terrorism is for all of us to refuse to provide any further alumni donations!

[Anonymous]

We stopped giving to Notre Dame after our youngest was rejected several years ago. The kid ended up at UVA, so obviously wasn’t a slouch. A courtesy waitlist wouldn’t have killed them. It didn’t really matter to us that the kid had no interest in attending. We still took it as a real slap in the face.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's complete BS. It's a practice that they used as a way to not increase the Jewish population, and now it's a practice they use as a way to not increase the Asian American population.



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/23/elite-schools-ivy-league-legacy-admissions-harvard-wealthier-whiter

Disturbing to think they are still using a method created by white supremacists back in the 1920s as an excuse to say, "oh, we need rich people's money so we can admit more URM".

If they lowered the cost, coupled with the amount these univ have in their endowments, the would not need to rely on legacy donations.

Rich parents is how Trump and Bushes got into ivy leagues. Let that sink in.

And the Kennedy’s and the Gores and the Kerry’s and…. There are a heck of a lot more not so bright kids of wealthy alumni that are Democrats in the Ivy League. Let that sink in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's complete BS. It's a practice that they used as a way to not increase the Jewish population, and now it's a practice they use as a way to not increase the Asian American population.



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/23/elite-schools-ivy-league-legacy-admissions-harvard-wealthier-whiter

Disturbing to think they are still using a method created by white supremacists back in the 1920s as an excuse to say, "oh, we need rich people's money so we can admit more URM".

If they lowered the cost, coupled with the amount these univ have in their endowments, the would not need to rely on legacy donations.

Rich parents is how Trump and Bushes got into ivy leagues. Let that sink in.

And the Kennedy’s and the Gores and the Kerry’s and…. There are a heck of a lot more not so bright kids of wealthy alumni that are Democrats in the Ivy League. Let that sink in.

I'm totally against legacies, but those ^ people are much brighter than Trump or GWB, MUCH more. So, that list doesn't mean what you think it means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

After grad school, we have given $200/yr every year.

Also started giving to my undergrad at that time $100/yr and spouse gives same to another grad school they attended.

It is hard to believe this level of giving would give you a leg-up on having your kid admitted. Are you really on their radar screen if you give less than five figures a year?

DP. For most schools, the number of alumni that give at all, much less regularly, is surprisingly low. I’ve given at a lower level and at the 6-figure level (to different schools), and IME, the schools do track who gives regularly at lower levels. At one school, I gave every year, beginning at three figures and going up to four for more than 20 years, and they do track and recognize that. I also received a handwritten note from the development office when my DC was in HS basically saying, “call us if you need anything.” This is a school that regularly gets 7 figure donations. I have also given at 6 figures to a different school (that has a huge endowment), and that gets you a development officer who is your best friend and who will come take you to lunch, invitations to special high dollar donor events, etc. My DC attends the first school, fwiw (although the second is definitely a possibility for graduate school).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's complete BS. It's a practice that they used as a way to not increase the Jewish population, and now it's a practice they use as a way to not increase the Asian American population.



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/23/elite-schools-ivy-league-legacy-admissions-harvard-wealthier-whiter

Disturbing to think they are still using a method created by white supremacists back in the 1920s as an excuse to say, "oh, we need rich people's money so we can admit more URM".

If they lowered the cost, coupled with the amount these univ have in their endowments, the would not need to rely on legacy donations.

Rich parents is how Trump and Bushes got into ivy leagues. Let that sink in.

And the Kennedy’s and the Gores and the Kerry’s and…. There are a heck of a lot more not so bright kids of wealthy alumni that are Democrats in the Ivy League. Let that sink in.

I'm totally against legacies, but those ^ people are much brighter than Trump or GWB, MUCH more. So, that list doesn't mean what you think it means.

You’ve apparently never met any of the second and third generation Kennedy or Gore kids. Not the sharpest tools in the shed. And I wouldn’t be staking anything on the intelligence of Al Gore or John Kerry, either. Their careers just show how far the right connections and Ivy League credentials can get you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's complete BS. It's a practice that they used as a way to not increase the Jewish population, and now it's a practice they use as a way to not increase the Asian American population.



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/23/elite-schools-ivy-league-legacy-admissions-harvard-wealthier-whiter

Disturbing to think they are still using a method created by white supremacists back in the 1920s as an excuse to say, "oh, we need rich people's money so we can admit more URM".

If they lowered the cost, coupled with the amount these univ have in their endowments, the would not need to rely on legacy donations.

Rich parents is how Trump and Bushes got into ivy leagues. Let that sink in.

And the Kennedy’s and the Gores and the Kerry’s and…. There are a heck of a lot more not so bright kids of wealthy alumni that are Democrats in the Ivy League. Let that sink in.

I'm totally against legacies, but those ^ people are much brighter than Trump or GWB, MUCH more. So, that list doesn't mean what you think it means.

You’ve apparently never met any of the second and third generation Kennedy or Gore kids. Not the sharpest tools in the shed. And I wouldn’t be staking anything on the intelligence of Al Gore or John Kerry, either. Their careers just show how far the right connections and Ivy League credentials can get you.

No one can be as dumb as Trump. At the least, those people know how to speak like intelligent beings.

[Anonymous]

All of you against legacy admissions, please remember you can contact your schools to let them know your opinions (it is unlikely to change otherwise). Also, remember to have your children leave your school affiliation off their applications. Don't worry, the admissions office won't look you up to provide an unfair advantage you don't want for your kids if it isn't indicated!