Kudos to NY Times - Call to end legacy Admissions
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Uh - almost every other institution in this country. This whiny, weepy hand-wringing over your lot in life is pathetic. Life isn't fair to you one time (and frankly, the reason it's unfair is only partially because you are white but mostly because you were evidently were stupid in high school) and your reaction that it's the end of the world and time to burn it all to the ground. |
Anonymous
Why won’t it last forever? So long as credential crazed parents exist, tuitions will keep going up. The only ways to get schools to reduce bloat and tuition is through public shaming and the threat of the loss of federal funds. Yet no politician does this. To the left, it would be seen as wrong to go after left leaning colleges. And the right loves its banks. It’s a racket. |
Anonymous
| What does the right loves its banks mean? Not being snarky, just don't get the point. |
Anonymous
That is true. But the regular admit rate is that low because there are a lot of people who don't have a prayer in hell of getting in and apply as a Hail Mary. Why not? I wonder if you compared a group of legacy applicants and a group non-legacy applicants with same stats (SATs, GPA, same ECs), would the difference be so stark? Or would be a 30% admit rate vs. a 20% admit rate? Every Harvard alum I know is kind of thinking their kid is going to get in. And the kids are generally realllllly smart. When I remind them that they are more likely not to get in (2 out of 3 rejected), they're all like "oh sh**, you're right." |
Anonymous
|
We disagree that legacy is a bad thing. We have no problem with it. If family members have a history and heritage of attending and supporting a school then that should be rewarded in the admissions process, especially private schools.
FWIW we have 4 kids in college. Our kids do NOT go to our Big 10 school and instead go to 3 different Ivies where, obviously, they didn't receive any preferential admissions treatment since they are not legacies. |
Anonymous
That's a fair point. One the NYT should appreciate as they continue to be managed by one same legacy family since the 19th Century. |
Anonymous
OMG, this nerd family isnt exactly humble, bragging on dcum LOL. College is a cakewalk and nobody cares where you went to college. It's almost as bad as bragging about how you were a football star in high school. |
Anonymous
| People -do- care about where you go to college if it is the difference between a generally accepted and well-recognized school, and a cash cow. The first one requires effort because acceptance requires more than money while the second requires only money. Although IMO some cash cows can actually produce value. I used to have a very negative opinion of the University of Phoenix but having worked with some graduates of the school my opinion of the school is improving rapidly. |
Anonymous
What is Mommy has been making big donations over the years to her alma mater? Some of that money will stop flowing. |
Anonymous
| I won’t defend legacy because I don’t generally dig it (though the poster above makes a good point) but I’d like to point out another legacy benefit that (I think) hasn’t been mentioned. Legacies enroll more often than non-legacies and so they are a safer admission bet. There’s a built-in belief in the institution based on family history. Helps yield and the often horrible adcom miscalculations (see: Oberlin, VT, etc.) |
Anonymous
| So good to see some people recognizing that this obsession is with a TINY number of schools. There are thousands of colleges. Why do these articles talk about what a SMALL FEW do as if everyone is doing it? All the schools outside of the top 50 or so are admitting almost all their applicants. |
Anonymous
Legacies are the major contributers in donations. Without them, there will be much less financial aids, and then there will be much fewer opportunities for the kids from middle class and poor families. You ok with that? |
Anonymous
This is exactly the logic of China, India, Brazil, etc. You people in the west had enjoyed the industry revolution and the wealthy from it, which resulted in the modern pollution to the environment. Now we are going through that stage and you start to ask us to stop and we need to save the environment. No, it's our turn to pollute to make it even. Guess Africa is waiting in the wings to make the same argument after that. This is why it's so difficult for the global environment protection. A bunch of short sights that only see me, me, me, now, now, now. |
Anonymous
Except continuing legacy admissions doesn’t result in all of us living on boats. |
Anonymous
Are you trying to pretend that these schools actually admit as many less wealthy applicants as they can? Or that they admit more than the occasional token poor It is obvious that legacy status benefits the wealthy, not the less so It is also obvious that legacy donations do not keep the school running |