Reply to Legacy Admit is racist

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Legacy Admit is racist"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
[b]MIT, Caltech are just different.[/b]  Legacy is of little use to the college.  Hopkins has its money and they were not getting legacy in any numbers so easy to give up.  By a soul or an identity I will keep picking on Notre Dame.  I know multiple people who are four generations in.   The live it.  Yes they donate some.  But they are boosters.  They promote the school.  They are also one of the most loyal group of alumni towards each other.   Legacy builds that.  It connects the school to its past.   They value it.  You don’t.   Don’t go there then.  But it is not racist.   Is now being used by the student body of the 80s and 90s which were diverse.

The world didn’t start yesterday.  It all comes with history good and bad.  There is no clean slate.  Maybe there should be in publics.   [/quote]
Yes, those schools take in super smart kids, while Notre Dame is more like the "good ol boys" type school.. all about "who you know", not about "how smart and talented you are".

It's ironic that a university started by a Catholic priest would use legacy admission given how Jesus was all about reaching out to the poor.

Legacy started and continues to benefit wealthy white people.  That is the point.  The writer for the Notre Dame paper agrees.

https://ndsmcobserver.com/2020/02/its-time-to-rethink-legacy-admissions/

[quote]

Notre Dame leads top U.S. colleges in legacy admissions. Of our freshman class, children of alumni comprise 21.3%. In comparison at Harvard, the subject of rebuke on legacy admissions, children of alumni comprise 14.6% of the freshman class.

Correspondingly, Notre Dame struggles with racial and socioeconomic diversity. Just 35% of Notre Dame students are people of color; comparable Catholic and Midwestern universities all exceed that figure. Additionally, Notre Dame students are less likely to have family income in the bottom fifth — and more likely to have family income in the top fifth — than students at these universities.

[b]The connection is clear. Our alumni base is less racially diverse than our student body, and Notre Dame alumni tend to have higher incomes. Children of alumni typically reflect these whiter, wealthier backgrounds.

Prioritizing whiter, wealthier applicants places further barriers to the social advancement of marginalized groups. It also undermines the sort of campus discourse that “requires, and is enriched by, the presence and voices of diverse scholars and students.” [/b][/quote][/quote]

First -- don't listen to school newspapers that are filled with ultra left kids who know nothing about life.  The author of that will be the biggest defender of legacy in 25 years.  Second, you are taking the wrong  lessons.  Notre Dame kids are elite.  Legacy helps but only if you are the pool of people that could attend.  [b]Legacy is not against Catholic doctrine.  The opposite in fact.  It supports families and supports the institution.  [/b]Finally, it has nothing to do with race. Not at Notre Dame.  Not at the ivies.  But even if it does I am not sure anyone should care.  As PPs have said --- the classes are more diverse over the last 20 years and everyone gets legacy.  
[/quote]
What Christian doctrine supports giving the wealthy a leg up? That's news to me. Or are you saying that the Catholic doctrine cares more about "keeping it in the family" over Jesus' teachings about helping the poor and how "it is easier for the camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man go to heaven"?

So we should not listen to liberal students, but we should listen to rich, mostly white people who espouse being liberal but not when it comes to this?

It has a lot to do with race because, by and large, legacy admits are mostly white.  Are there  nonwhite legacies? Sure.. but the vast majority are white.

These universities care more about "keeping it in the family" than actually helping society. A degree from a prestigious university would do more for a lower/middle class student than for a rich kid.  It's really shameful.[/quote]

Go look at the total number of athletes at colleges and you’ll realize that hook is stacked to advantage middle and upper class white kids. I’m not talking about the sports that bring money in at some colleges and universities (basketball and football), I’m talking lacrosse, water polo, equestrian, fencing, sailing, soccer, tennis, squash, swimming, diving, softball, baseball, fieldhockey, ice hockey, cross country, skiiing, wrestling, rugby, golf, and track and field.  Most of these sports have high barriers to entry.  I mean look at all the public squash courts and public golf couses that provide you with an affordable set of gloves.  Then there are all those inexpensive ice rinks in warmer places where pond hockey isn’t available. The abundance of free lacrosse fields with plenty of sticks, pads, and helmets available for kids to play pickup lacrosse even if their parents can’t afford the equipment. 
[/quote]

But the whiners who rejected will still whine. If you can't get in with those built-in advantages, oh well.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics