Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not realize that legacy admissions started out as a way to exclude Jews and Catholics from elite universities, much like holistic admissions did.

At least today, holistic admissions often help URM. But, what does legacy admissions do for URM or the kid with no hooks from a middle class family?

I'm disgusted with how so-called elite universities espouse "diversity" and holistic approach to have diverse/broad spectrum of views in the student body, but a very large % of admits are from legacy, who are typically wealthy and white. This approach is basically "keeping the status quo".. "good ol' boys network".. "keeping it in the family".

It's disturbing that these elite institutions have retained a policy that was steeped in bigotry.

https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2021/12/15/groups-urge-colleges-abandon-legacy-admissions

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/17/harvard-university-students-smart-iq

IMO, the only reason why groups like the NAACP aren't fighting it is because URM do get a leg up. But imagine if those univ didn't give preference for URM.

If you look at the stats, it's not the URM kids who's taking spots from the MC/UMC white kid. It's the legacy admit kids who wouldn't have gotten in with the scores they have without that legacy hook.

None of this was on my radar before, but as my oldest is hitting senior year, we are looking at colleges and the whole admissions process a lot more, and what I'm finding is that the system built for and by rich white people still persists in institutions that claim they want diversity. It's just all smoke and mirrors.

Very disturbing.

Yes, everything is racist...If your kid doesn't get into Harvard please tell them it is because of rich white people. There are a lot of great schools out there that would be happy to have your child attend, maybe focus on those and stop complaining about racism and your kid not getting into schools they have yet to apply too.

Actually, whites are the only group underrepresented at Harvard.

No, whites are the majority at Harvard. Look it up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not realize that legacy admissions started out as a way to exclude Jews and Catholics from elite universities, much like holistic admissions did.

At least today, holistic admissions often help URM. But, what does legacy admissions do for URM or the kid with no hooks from a middle class family?

I'm disgusted with how so-called elite universities espouse "diversity" and holistic approach to have diverse/broad spectrum of views in the student body, but a very large % of admits are from legacy, who are typically wealthy and white. This approach is basically "keeping the status quo".. "good ol' boys network".. "keeping it in the family".

It's disturbing that these elite institutions have retained a policy that was steeped in bigotry.

https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2021/12/15/groups-urge-colleges-abandon-legacy-admissions

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/17/harvard-university-students-smart-iq

IMO, the only reason why groups like the NAACP aren't fighting it is because URM do get a leg up. But imagine if those univ didn't give preference for URM.

If you look at the stats, it's not the URM kids who's taking spots from the MC/UMC white kid. It's the legacy admit kids who wouldn't have gotten in with the scores they have without that legacy hook.

None of this was on my radar before, but as my oldest is hitting senior year, we are looking at colleges and the whole admissions process a lot more, and what I'm finding is that the system built for and by rich white people still persists in institutions that claim they want diversity. It's just all smoke and mirrors.

Very disturbing.

I don't understand this nonsense post. Everyone's a legacy somewhere - even at schools like Howard. Nobody cares about legacy simply because everyone is a beneficiary of this baked-in practice.

Are you a legacy admit?

Do you not understand that there are many universities that don't look at legacy admits? The majority that do are these elite institutions that espouse "diversity" and holistic admissions.

Here's the problem with legacy:

Mitch McConnell has never owned a slave. BUT, his ancestors did. He is indirectly a beneficiary of said slave owning family. These families sent their kids to elite universities. Bam.. legacy is born. This has played out time and again with families like the Bushes, Kushners, Trumps.

Family wealth begets family wealth. This is partly why black families have had a more difficult time getting out of poverty. 99% of them don't have legacies. The practice of legacy admit is a legacy of bigotry. Holistic admissions for URM is a more recent practice.

Most liberals know that "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" is much harder for a black family than a white family. Yet, elite liberals (perhaps like you) see nothing wrong with keeping it in the family, so to speak. In this regard, you are no better than rich conservatives.

This cycle basically "keeps it in the family" and makes it increasingly difficult for the middle class to become upwardly mobile. Unhooked families (which are the vast majority in the US) are competing for a tiny slice of the pie, while these rich, well connected families (which are a tiny % of the US population) have a bigger slice of the pie. You can say, "that's the way it's always been", but the problem is, liberal elites talk a good game about diversity and equity, but in practice, when it comes to legacy admissions, they don't want to practice what they preach. That's the problem I have with it.

MIT, CalTech, Cambridge, Oxford -- they don't take legacy into account. Are these vaunted institutions suffering for it?

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/16/top-universities-that-do-not-consider-legacy-when-admitting-students.html#:~:text=The%20six%20schools%20in%20the,the%20practice%20of%20legacy%20admissions.&text=MIT%20and%20CalTech%20do%20not%20consider%20legacy%20status.

Isn't it crazy that a country that has a monarchy, the House of Lords (assuming you know what and how members of the House of Lords get in) doesn't believe in legacy admissions, while a country that espouses individualism and meritocracy has legacy admissions in their elite universities?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not realize that legacy admissions started out as a way to exclude Jews and Catholics from elite universities, much like holistic admissions did.

At least today, holistic admissions often help URM. But, what does legacy admissions do for URM or the kid with no hooks from a middle class family?

I'm disgusted with how so-called elite universities espouse "diversity" and holistic approach to have diverse/broad spectrum of views in the student body, but a very large % of admits are from legacy, who are typically wealthy and white. This approach is basically "keeping the status quo".. "good ol' boys network".. "keeping it in the family".

It's disturbing that these elite institutions have retained a policy that was steeped in bigotry.

https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2021/12/15/groups-urge-colleges-abandon-legacy-admissions

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/17/harvard-university-students-smart-iq

IMO, the only reason why groups like the NAACP aren't fighting it is because URM do get a leg up. But imagine if those univ didn't give preference for URM.

If you look at the stats, it's not the URM kids who's taking spots from the MC/UMC white kid. It's the legacy admit kids who wouldn't have gotten in with the scores they have without that legacy hook.

None of this was on my radar before, but as my oldest is hitting senior year, we are looking at colleges and the whole admissions process a lot more, and what I'm finding is that the system built for and by rich white people still persists in institutions that claim they want diversity. It's just all smoke and mirrors.

Very disturbing.

So that makes it okay? If helps URM, look the other way. If not, it's racist. Is that what you are saying?

I'm saying that these universities that espouse "diversity" are hypocrites for having a huge number of admits be legacies. At least with URM representation it does indeed support a diverse student body.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to get out more. Most legacy kids are very smart and accomplished.

Completely wrong. Most legacy kids are mediocre students, there is nothing exceptional or unique about them. I have seen this over and over again.

What’s your source because you’re wrong.

Here is my source
Kids bragging since middle school about how they will go to Harvard, Cornell , Princeton etc because their parents went there. Then the same kids not taking advanced classes in high school, then the same kids posting on social media that they can’t break 1400 on the SAT. Kids know who the smart kids are based on the classes they take and the activities they are involved in. My DC’s classmates expressed their shock on learning about certain kids getting accepted to Ivies, and the conclusion was they would have not gotten in if they didn’t have a legacy there. Many more qualified kids are passed on in favor of legacy kids. It is unfair. But there isn’t much you can do about it. Just tell your kids that Ivies do not take smart kids, smart kids can be found at any college. The whole idea that a high stats kid belongs at an Ivy or a highly selective college is wrong. The system is broken. It’s much more than stats. It’s about, race, gender, athletes, minorities, legacies, it’s not about the stats.

Its creepy that you stalk children on social media.

This never happened. A low stat kid is not getting in on legacy. Maybe if they are a super donor sure but that will never change. Every legacy at every top school is qualified. Again super donor kids, maybe not. But a legacy is not getting into Harvard with the stats you mentioned unless as a PP said they are an Adams or a Kennedy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to get out more. Most legacy kids are very smart and accomplished.

Completely wrong. Most legacy kids are mediocre students, there is nothing exceptional or unique about them. I have seen this over and over again.

What’s your source because you’re wrong.

Here is my source
Kids bragging since middle school about how they will go to Harvard, Cornell , Princeton etc because their parents went there. Then the same kids not taking advanced classes in high school, then the same kids posting on social media that they can’t break 1400 on the SAT. Kids know who the smart kids are based on the classes they take and the activities they are involved in. My DC’s classmates expressed their shock on learning about certain kids getting accepted to Ivies, and the conclusion was they would have not gotten in if they didn’t have a legacy there. Many more qualified kids are passed on in favor of legacy kids. It is unfair. But there isn’t much you can do about it. Just tell your kids that Ivies do not take smart kids, smart kids can be found at any college. The whole idea that a high stats kid belongs at an Ivy or a highly selective college is wrong. The system is broken. It’s much more than stats. It’s about, race, gender, athletes, minorities, legacies, it’s not about the stats.

Not all legacy kids are the same!! Some legacy kids get in over other, smarter legacy kids. It’s the biggest, most influential donors who have the clout to get their kids in. It has MUCH less to do with how accomplished the kid is.

Anonymous wrote:Legacy is great. It is one of the things that build a university and create and continue its identity. Generations of a family go there. The reward for the university is loyalty, donor money, boosters and supporters. Notre Dame families are a great example. So are Princeton and Harvard. Nothing unfair about it when looked at over time. Sure if you are first generation you are not getting the bump now but your kids will.

Says the legacy. LOL

Anonymous wrote:The promise of legacy admissions is a huge factor in a school's ability to fundraise from alumni. If this were truly eliminated, fundraising would crater, and so would the ability of elite schools to be need-blind for minorities and first-generation college students. Just like anything, there is a balance to this equation. To all of those who scream "racism" at anything that isn't perfectly equitable immediately, remember that we still live in a free market system (thankfully) where self-interest plays at least some role. And if you want out of that--well, I encourage you to check out the elite university system of the Soviet Union circa 1980 that admitted sons and daughters of Party members in numbers much higher than today's Ivy legacy rates.

legacy admissions is anything but "free market" in terms of merit. It's rich people hoarding "resources" for the rich.

The UK doesn't have "legacy" admits. Are you saying that Oxbridge is collapsing and doesn't have smart rich people wanting to attend?

Legacy is great. It is one of the things that build a university and create and continue its identity. Generations of a family go there. The reward for the university is loyalty, donor money, boosters and supporters. Notre Dame families are a great example. So are Princeton and Harvard. Nothing unfair about it when looked at over time. Sure if you are first generation you are not getting the bump now but your kids will.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to get out more. Most legacy kids are very smart and accomplished.

Completely wrong. Most legacy kids are mediocre students, there is nothing exceptional or unique about them. I have seen this over and over again.

I have seen the opposite again and again. Most elite college grads marry other elite college grads, and the kids are incredibly smart. When they don’t get into a parent’s college, they end up at another top college.

However, when the elite college grads marry someone not as smart, then yes, at least one of the kids is not so smart.

Anonymous wrote:I did not realize that legacy admissions started out as a way to exclude Jews and Catholics from elite universities, much like holistic admissions did.

At least today, holistic admissions often help URM. But, what does legacy admissions do for URM or the kid with no hooks from a middle class family?

I'm disgusted with how so-called elite universities espouse "diversity" and holistic approach to have diverse/broad spectrum of views in the student body, but a very large % of admits are from legacy, who are typically wealthy and white. This approach is basically "keeping the status quo".. "good ol' boys network".. "keeping it in the family".

It's disturbing that these elite institutions have retained a policy that was steeped in bigotry.

https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2021/12/15/groups-urge-colleges-abandon-legacy-admissions

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/17/harvard-university-students-smart-iq

IMO, the only reason why groups like the NAACP aren't fighting it is because URM do get a leg up. But imagine if those univ didn't give preference for URM.

If you look at the stats, it's not the URM kids who's taking spots from the MC/UMC white kid. It's the legacy admit kids who wouldn't have gotten in with the scores they have without that legacy hook.

None of this was on my radar before, but as my oldest is hitting senior year, we are looking at colleges and the whole admissions process a lot more, and what I'm finding is that the system built for and by rich white people still persists in institutions that claim they want diversity. It's just all smoke and mirrors.

Very disturbing.

So that makes it okay? If helps URM, look the other way. If not, it's racist. Is that what you are saying?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to get out more. Most legacy kids are very smart and accomplished.

And they still don’t get into the parent’s alma mater. Overwhelming these days, only the n

^^
Megadonor and VIP children get that admit.

Anonymous wrote:You need to get out more. Most legacy kids are very smart and accomplished.

And they still don’t get into the parent’s alma mater. Overwhelming these days, only the n

Anonymous wrote:I did not realize that legacy admissions started out as a way to exclude Jews and Catholics from elite universities, much like holistic admissions did.

At least today, holistic admissions often help URM. But, what does legacy admissions do for URM or the kid with no hooks from a middle class family?

I'm disgusted with how so-called elite universities espouse "diversity" and holistic approach to have diverse/broad spectrum of views in the student body, but a very large % of admits are from legacy, who are typically wealthy and white. This approach is basically "keeping the status quo".. "good ol' boys network".. "keeping it in the family".

It's disturbing that these elite institutions have retained a policy that was steeped in bigotry.

https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2021/12/15/groups-urge-colleges-abandon-legacy-admissions

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/17/harvard-university-students-smart-iq

IMO, the only reason why groups like the NAACP aren't fighting it is because URM do get a leg up. But imagine if those univ didn't give preference for URM.

If you look at the stats, it's not the URM kids who's taking spots from the MC/UMC white kid. It's the legacy admit kids who wouldn't have gotten in with the scores they have without that legacy hook.

None of this was on my radar before, but as my oldest is hitting senior year, we are looking at colleges and the whole admissions process a lot more, and what I'm finding is that the system built for and by rich white people still persists in institutions that claim they want diversity. It's just all smoke and mirrors.

Very disturbing.

I don't understand this nonsense post. Everyone's a legacy somewhere - even at schools like Howard. Nobody cares about legacy simply because everyone is a beneficiary of this baked-in practice.

Anonymous wrote:Legacy gets you the leg up if you are full pay and ED. That's how the top schools maintain their tuition revenue base.

Some of these schools have such a large endowment that they could let every student in their school go for free for 10 years.

These are supposed to be nonprofits, about education, but it's just a money making scheme for the rich people.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2021/10/31/ballooning-ivy-league-endowment-forecasted-to-top-1-trillion-by-2048/?sh=5545c60c3a37

Our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com forecast that the collective endowment of the Ivy League could surpass $1 trillion by 2048. This buildup of wealth for supposedly charitable educational purposes will trigger a host of public policy, legislative, and legal arguments. For example, Harvard alone could have $300 billion, or nearly $60 million per undergraduate student in endowment assets, by 2048.