Legacy? Some are worried it would also mean the end Children of Faculty Admissions Boost?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Faculty/staff dependant boost is an employment perk for the parents. This is one of those things that are offered to sweeten the pot like many employees elsewhere who get annual bonuses, travel perks, etc.

Whether or not other hooks go away, this one is very unlikely to go away as it is one perk to help acquire and retain good staff and professors for the institution.

This is silly. The reason to work at an elite institution isn't just to get their kid in. The elite institution is attractive as an employer for the reason is it attractive as a school!

Universities are attractive as employers with the exception that faculty pay is relatively lower than for others with comparable education levels. Many choose to work at universities because the tuition/admissions benefits is an important piece of the overall package. Similarly, many government workers choose public sector jobs--despite lower pay--because they believe in public service, but also because they seek enhanced job security. Take away those benefits and other jobs become more attractive.

Nobody takes that job for the tuition benefit. That’s asinine. They take the job because they worked for years to get a PhD, few other options are available, and 300 other people will take that job if they don’t. Eliminating the tuition/admission benefit will not alter the structure of the academic job market, which has way too many PhDs chasing too few jobs.

[Anonymous]

I work at a highly ranked public flagship university. A few years ago we interviewed a faculty candidate who explicitly asked whether children of faculty get special consideration for admissions, and was told no (and subsequently turned down the job offer).

Is this a thing at private universities?

[Anonymous]

Profs' kids also have access to amazing research opportunities that other hs kids don't. They probably don't need a bump just for being profs' kids.
I've interviewed similar applicants in the DMV and Bay Area for a top school and their experience stands out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Profs' kids also have access to amazing research opportunities that other hs kids don't. They probably don't need a bump just for being profs' kids.
I've interviewed similar applicants in the DMV and Bay Area for a top school and their experience stands out.

This is true for kids who live in college towns in general, not limited to faculty kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. I know two kids of faculty who got into their parent’s elite school in this last round. Both were admitted off the wait list. Both had decent stats but not anything that would have had admission absent a very significant hook. Neither got into any other schools at the same level, though did get into some very good schools, just not same level as the ones where their parents teach.

I can’t see getting worked up about it, but it’s quite obvious to me that being a faculty child is a huge hook.

But they got in off the WL, so even then, not that big of a hook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am not in academia and in fact, have a rising Sophomore who will potentially be "competing" with faculty kids for spots.

I have zero issue with tuition breaks and/or admittance preference for faculty kids.

I also have no issue with recruited athletes but that's just me. My kid will not be one of them, before you ask.


Legacy? Boot it. Totally different than the above.

+1

Legacy is so very different

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Such blatant hypocrisy. At elite colleges the professors tend to be self-righteous about social justice & helping the downtrodden. Power to the people!! But threaten THEIR privileges and they respond like Thurston Howell III being offered a wine cooler.

It's not about privilege. It's a benefit/perk of the low paying jobs in academia to get a tuition break for your own kids. Most profs/staff would be just as happy if the tuition break carries over to other schools (and it does at some universities). They want the tuition break that they have been told is a perk of lower paying employment for years. Same with staff----most staff in academia would get paid more outside academia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of the arguments on this thread could also be applied to legacy admissions.

If Legacy goes, then faculty should start assuming that the perks for their kids are next.

These are two completely different things.

Legacy rewards kids for being born to parents who had parents who could afford to send them to an elite college during some pretty sad economic times (and conveniently dodged the draft)

Faculty hook and/or tuition break is an employment benefit - part of a benefits package and a contract. An earned benefit.

1. in both situations, it's kids being rewarded for their parent's accomplishment

2. do you think poor kids get on tenure track? Those professors usually have elite and expensive undergrad degrees as their starting point

No---#1 is false statement. They are being given reduced tuition, which is a benefit of their parent's employment. Many employees offer "scholarships" for employees kids who have at least a 3.X GPA.

What do you mean by #2? Plenty of professors who did not attend elite and expensive undergrads....

[Anonymous]

Right, because legacy involves privilege being passed on to the next generation of people based on nothing but their parents’ achievements. Whereas the faculty boost involves…wait, what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Faculty/staff dependant boost is an employment perk for the parents. This is one of those things that are offered to sweeten the pot like many employees elsewhere who get annual bonuses, travel perks, etc.

Whether or not other hooks go away, this one is very unlikely to go away as it is one perk to help acquire and retain good staff and professors for the institution.

This is silly. The reason to work at an elite institution isn't just to get their kid in. The elite institution is attractive as an employer for the reason is it attractive as a school!

Universities are attractive as employers with the exception that faculty pay is relatively lower than for others with comparable education levels. Many choose to work at universities because the tuition/admissions benefits is an important piece of the overall package. Similarly, many government workers choose public sector jobs--despite lower pay--because they believe in public service, but also because they seek enhanced job security. Take away those benefits and other jobs become more attractive.

YUP! People put their 20+ years in (or whatever is needed) in a Gov't job and the perks are decent benefits along the way, and an excellent pension---they don't take those Jobs for the pay, it's the full benefits package now and in the future

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Such blatant hypocrisy. At elite colleges the professors tend to be self-righteous about social justice & helping the downtrodden. Power to the people!! But threaten THEIR privileges and they respond like Thurston Howell III being offered a wine cooler.

It's not about privilege. It's a benefit/perk of the low paying jobs in academia to get a tuition break for your own kids. Most profs/staff would be just as happy if the tuition break carries over to other schools (and it does at some universities). They want the tuition break that they have been told is a perk of lower paying employment for years. Same with staff----most staff in academia would get paid more outside academia.

Most kids of college professors are not slackers. They are hard working in academics as that’s what their first role models in life do. They help lift up the college if the kids are willing to go there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of the arguments on this thread could also be applied to legacy admissions.

If Legacy goes, then faculty should start assuming that the perks for their kids are next.

These are two completely different things.

Legacy rewards kids for being born to parents who had parents who could afford to send them to an elite college during some pretty sad economic times (and conveniently dodged the draft)

Faculty hook and/or tuition break is an employment benefit - part of a benefits package and a contract. An earned benefit.

1. in both situations, it's kids being rewarded for their parent's accomplishment

2. do you think poor kids get on tenure track? Those professors usually have elite and expensive undergrad degrees as their starting point

No---#1 is false statement. They are being given reduced tuition, which is a benefit of their parent's employment. Many employees offer "scholarships" for employees kids who have at least a 3.X GPA.

What do you mean by #2? Plenty of professors who did not attend elite and expensive undergrads....

Can you point to any that offer 40 or 50k a year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Faculty/staff dependant boost is an employment perk for the parents. This is one of those things that are offered to sweeten the pot like many employees elsewhere who get annual bonuses, travel perks, etc.

Whether or not other hooks go away, this one is very unlikely to go away as it is one perk to help acquire and retain good staff and professors for the institution.

This is silly. The reason to work at an elite institution isn't just to get their kid in. The elite institution is attractive as an employer for the reason is it attractive as a school!

Universities are attractive as employers with the exception that faculty pay is relatively lower than for others with comparable education levels. Many choose to work at universities because the tuition/admissions benefits is an important piece of the overall package. Similarly, many government workers choose public sector jobs--despite lower pay--because they believe in public service, but also because they seek enhanced job security. Take away those benefits and other jobs become more attractive.

Nobody takes that job for the tuition benefit. That’s asinine. They take the job because they worked for years to get a PhD, few other options are available, and 300 other people will take that job if they don’t. Eliminating the tuition/admission benefit will not alter the structure of the academic job market, which has way too many PhDs chasing too few jobs.

Wrong

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of the arguments on this thread could also be applied to legacy admissions.

If Legacy goes, then faculty should start assuming that the perks for their kids are next.

These are two completely different things.

Legacy rewards kids for being born to parents who had parents who could afford to send them to an elite college during some pretty sad economic times (and conveniently dodged the draft)

Faculty hook and/or tuition break is an employment benefit - part of a benefits package and a contract. An earned benefit.

1. in both situations, it's kids being rewarded for their parent's accomplishment

2. do you think poor kids get on tenure track? Those professors usually have elite and expensive undergrad degrees as their starting point

No---#1 is false statement. They are being given reduced tuition, which is a benefit of their parent's employment. Many employees offer "scholarships" for employees kids who have at least a 3.X GPA.

What do you mean by #2? Plenty of professors who did not attend elite and expensive undergrads....

Go to any faculty page you want and you will find very elite and very expensive undergraduate degrees disproportionately represented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Faculty/staff dependant boost is an employment perk for the parents. This is one of those things that are offered to sweeten the pot like many employees elsewhere who get annual bonuses, travel perks, etc.

Whether or not other hooks go away, this one is very unlikely to go away as it is one perk to help acquire and retain good staff and professors for the institution.

This is silly. The reason to work at an elite institution isn't just to get their kid in. The elite institution is attractive as an employer for the reason is it attractive as a school!

Universities are attractive as employers with the exception that faculty pay is relatively lower than for others with comparable education levels. Many choose to work at universities because the tuition/admissions benefits is an important piece of the overall package. Similarly, many government workers choose public sector jobs--despite lower pay--because they believe in public service, but also because they seek enhanced job security. Take away those benefits and other jobs become more attractive.

Nobody takes that job for the tuition benefit. That’s asinine. They take the job because they worked for years to get a PhD, few other options are available, and 300 other people will take that job if they don’t. Eliminating the tuition/admission benefit will not alter the structure of the academic job market, which has way too many PhDs chasing too few jobs.

+1

Is OP the same OP trying to perpetuate myths about certain colleges?

Most colleges I know have dropped any tuition benefit in recent years, and those schools that still have it, only offer a very small percentage discount, and only after a minimum 5 or 10 years - which is actually a long time. Also, universities and colleges pay far lower salary than outsiders would ever imagine. People are professors for the "prestige" - not all professors would admit that.

In addition, if a university/college employee, at any level, has a student who applies to that school, that student must meet all criteria - tests, grades, extracurriculars, everything - that the school's parameters require. I have never known there to be any exception, having worked at several top colleges.

Some of DCUMLand are terribly misinformed, or just want to believe that they are a victim. Grow up. Acronyms are great, but they are not all real or true.