Social Legacy Admission: Harvard Under Fire For Helping Elite Skip The Queue

Arkain2K

Si vis pacem, para bellum
@Steel
Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Messages
33,424
Reaction score
5,686

Harvard under fire for helping elite skip the queue

By Robin Levinson King | 25th November 2023



Harvard University is facing a crisis after a landmark court case exposed how it gives the relatives of alumni a leg-up. Its so-called legacy admissions policy is now in the crosshairs of lawmakers who say it perpetuates inequality.

For centuries, the streets of Harvard's red-bricked campus have borne the heels of America's future leaders, from Teddy Roosevelt to Mark Zuckerberg. The ability of the oldest university in the US to propel students into the upper echelons of politics, business and tech has made admission highly coveted. But the way it chooses who gets the golden ticket is being closely scrutinised.

Earlier this year, a landmark Supreme Court decision dismantled affirmative action, making it illegal for Harvard and other universities to give admission preference to under-represented minorities.

Harvard said the change would make it harder for it to recruit a diverse student body. But the court proceedings also blew open what many had long suspected - that the school gives preference to the children of alumni.

The policy, known as legacy admissions, is practised by dozens of elite American universities, including the eight schools in the Ivy League, as well as many other private and elite public universities. It means if a close relative attended that university then you might be preferred to an applicant of similar strength whose parents did not.

While most class privileges in US society are bestowed with a wink and a nod - it's all about who you know, what you wear, how you sound - the court case laid bare how institutions use legacy status to let some applicants skip the queue. And that has led many, from state legislators to Harvard students themselves, to call for the policy to end.

When Allison Hunter first found out she got into Harvard University, she didn't quite believe it.

"I never would have thought it would have been something that in my lifetime, I would have been able to accomplish," she said.

But a mentor convinced her to apply, and now she is the first person from her Atlanta high school to attend the hallowed institution.

"You have to think of yourself as capable," she reflected.

For years, the school had greatly amped up its efforts at inclusion. In 2023, the school charged $54,269 a year in tuition, but it is free to students whose families earn below $65,000, and families earning up to $150,000 pay no more than 10% of their income each year. The school has also increased the non-white and Hispanic students from 17% to over 50% of the student body over the past four decades.

Donyae Jenkins, another Harvard student, said that after the Supreme Court ruling, "a lot of black and brown students may feel that this is somewhere they don't deserve to be".

Both Allison and Donyae disagree with affirmative action being struck down, especially when legacy admissions live on because the policy tends to favour students who are well off and white. Documents filed in the Supreme Court case revealed that Harvard gives points to "ALDC" candidates, who are legacy applicants, athletes, relatives of donors, and children of faculty or staff. While only 5% of applications come from ALDC students, they make up about a third of acceptances. About 70% of those applicants were white.

"They [the children of alumni] are also getting what some may call special admission into the college," Donyae said.

That special advantage, data shows, is a rocketship into the stratosphere of America's elite.

A recent paper published by Opportunity Insights, a research group based out of Harvard University and Brown University, found that legacy applicants were four-times as likely as non-legacy applicants with the same test scores to be admitted.

The study looked at 15 years of admissions data at 12 private "Ivy-Plus" colleges (the eight colleges in the Ivy League, plus the University of Chicago, Duke, MIT, and Stanford).

When these same legacy students applied to other top universities where they did not have legacy status, that advantage disappeared, the study found.

Students who attended "Ivy Plus" colleges were 60% more likely to earn in the top 1% and three times more likely to work at prestigious employers in medicine, research, law, finance, and other fields compared with students who attended what they called "flagship" public universities.

"Students on these campuses today will be the leaders across a wide range of fields in society tomorrow," said John Friedman, a professor at Brown University (also part of the Ivy) who co-authored the research.

"If we want children from all backgrounds to feel like they have a shot at a trajectory to get to those leadership positions, we need these universities to be admitting students in a way that supports broader equality of opportunity."

Their findings are backed up by others. A 2019 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that 75% of white students who were recruited to Harvard as ALDCs "would have been rejected" if they had been treated as white students without those connections.

Many scholars have traced the roots of legacy admissions to the beginning of the 20th Century when universities wanted to keep their institutions beyond the reach of the country's growing immigrant population. While times have changed, and Harvard has made a commitment to greater diversity and equity, legacy admissions remain.

In defending the practice, the school said it "helps to cement strong bonds between the university and its alumni" that last a lifetime.

It also noted the "generous support" that alumni provide which helps make financial aid possible to increase diversity and excellence, the school wrote in a report released in 2018.

"Although alumni support Harvard for many reasons, the committee is concerned that eliminating any consideration of whether an applicant's parent attended Harvard or Radcliffe would diminish this vital sense of engagement and support."

That money is no small change. With an endowment of $50bn, Harvard has the largest university endowment in the world. Oxford and Cambridge, which do not practice legacy admissions, have endowments of about $7bn, respectively.

Harvard's deep pockets have helped it crown the country's elite, but some accuse it of using this power not to create a better society, but to maintain the status quo. And they say legacy admissions have got to go.

Massachusetts's state legislature is considering a bill that would levy a fee against the school and other schools that grant legacy admissions benefits.

"One of the things that binds Americans together, whether you're from Maine, Massachusetts, California, or Texas, is this idea of meritocracy," says the bill's co-sponsor, state Senator Pavel Payano, who was born in the Dominican Republic.

"These elite universities are essentially focused on having individuals that don't look like me, individuals that are not working-class people attend their school, and I don't think that's right."

Harvard is also now the subject of a civil-rights probe by the US Department of Education, after a lawsuit alleged the school gave overwhelming preference to white, wealthy students by prioritising legacy and donor applicants.

Michael Kippins, a litigation fellow at the legal non-profit Lawyers for Civil Rights that filed the lawsuit, told the BBC he thinks that the admissions policy is unjustified.

"They discriminate against applicants of colour, and there's a disproportionate impact on applicants of colour, that unjustly harms their chances of being admitted to Harvard," he said.

There are signs of a sea change. Wesleyan University and Amherst College, two elite private institutions, have both ended legacy admissions.

Harvard University President Claudine Gay has said that in light of the Supreme Court's decision on affirmative action, "everything was on the table".

"I can't, nor do I think it is actually productive to try to predict where that conversation is going to go," she told the Harvard Crimson, the student paper. "But I think it's a real signal of what a watershed moment we're facing in higher ed, that we're thinking and having conversations at this level of expansiveness."

The school did not respond to the BBC's repeated requests for comment.

On a recent visit to the campus, some students said the blowback against legacy admissions was overdone.

"I just think that they (legacy students) deserve a spot on this campus just as much as the rest of us," said Kennith Taukalo, who did not himself have legacy status.

But others did wonder if there was a better way.

"Other places in the world are still able to create that academic environment of excellence without this legacy admission," said Phd student Louise Rossetti, from the UK.

"I'm sure there's other ways in which funding could be brought to the university without creating shared disadvantage to students."

 
I read this last week.

I mean, it's been an open secret forever, I think it's referenced in most wide-ranging US comedies that you basically buy the university whatever it needs to get your kids in, right?

What's weird is that people who are shut out by legacy systems like this will defend it to the death.
 
I read this last week.

I mean, it's been an open secret forever, I think it's referenced in most wide-ranging US comedies that you basically buy the university whatever it needs to get your kids in, right?

What's weird is that people who are shut out by legacy systems like this will defend it to the death.

Damn I thought everyone knew this..

Nothing will happen, the other legislators, judges and senior executive leaders want their kids to continue to cut in line.

That said, alumni donations gonna take a hit if this goes through.
 
Damn I thought everyone knew this..

Nothing will happen, the other legislators, judges and senior executive leaders want their kids to continue to cut in line.

That said, alumni donations gonna take a hit if this goes through.

They are too busy blaming the 2 black kids that get in instead of the 100 legacy kids.
 
I am not seeing how this is a problem or not expected. Alumni donations drive universities. Duh, they are going to go out of their way to accommodate wealthy alumni. The entire student body or any university benefits when some deep pocketed guy pays for a building or lab. I think this is kind of a misplaced hit on Harvard over the fact that "Rich people have a leg up on life", which is true in every aspect of society, not just at Harvard.
 
They are too busy blaming the 2 black kids that get in instead of the 100 legacy kids.

Roughly 50% of the students are not white according to the article. That’s slightly more than 2.
 
I am not seeing how this is a problem or not expected. Alumni donations drive universities. Duh, they are going to go out of their way to accommodate wealthy alumni. The entire student body or any university benefits when some deep pocketed guy pays for a building or lab. I think this is kind of a misplaced hit on Harvard over the fact that "Rich people have a leg up on life", which is true in every aspect of society, not just at Harvard.

Legacy also counts children of staff.
 
Should be like anything else. sure your name may get you a chance in the door, but if you suck shit once there, your gone.
 
Is Harvard not a private institution? It's none of our business.
They are but.... they receives hundreds of millions of $ from the US government.

In 2021, Harvard University’s federal funding increased to $625 million.

Federal funding, which accounted for approximately 67% of total sponsored revenue in fiscal year 2021, increased 1% to $625 million.

--
Legacy admissions is just nepotism.
 
This isn't a problem, it was clearly affirmative action that was the problem. These kids obviously just deserve to go there more through their inherently better quality of being born to rich people.
 
They are but.... they receives hundreds of millions of $ from the US government.

In 2021, Harvard University’s federal funding increased to $625 million.

Federal funding, which accounted for approximately 67% of total sponsored revenue in fiscal year 2021, increased 1% to $625 million.

--
Legacy admissions is just nepotism.

That's quite ridiculous with their endowments. Harvard should receive no Federal $ and they should start spending their $50 Billion worth. The Fed / Gov't should not be dictating to private universities and the private universities should not be taking all that Federal money.
 

The Legacy of Legacy​

By Mark F. Bernstein | December 2023 Issue

In Princeton families, the Tiger connection often extends across generations, and many alumni, secretly or not, hope that their children will someday follow them to Princeton. It may seem like a small thing, but it matters. Legacy preferences — the boost an applicant receives for being the child of an undergraduate or graduate alum — can provide a thumb on the scale in the hypercompetitive field of college admissions.

According to an essay by Princeton professor Shamus Khan published in The New York Times in July, the University accepted around 30% of applicants with a legacy connection in 2018, compared to 5% of applicants overall. As a group, legacies are more likely to be white and to come from wealthy families than others in their entering class. Academically, they seem to be qualified. The Daily Princetonian, citing Class of 2023 and Class of 2026 surveys, found that legacy admits had higher SAT scores and earned higher undergraduate GPAs than their non-legacy classmates. And make of this what you will: They were also more likely to work in public service or for nonprofits after graduation.

Although the legacy preference in American higher education dates back a century, and has been controversial for nearly as long, it has come under even greater scrutiny since the Supreme Court last summer banned colleges from explicitly considering race, ethnicity, or national origin in admission decisions. Fearing that entering classes will be less diverse as a result, critics have called for ending the legacy preference on the grounds that it provides an unfair leg up to applicants who are already advantaged. Defenders counter that the legacy preference helps bind alums to the University and should not be ended in the name of diversity just when a growing number of minority alums are beginning to take advantage of it.

Even before the Supreme Court’s ruling, several colleges and universities, including Johns Hopkins, Pomona, Amherst, and Wesleyan, decided to end their legacy preference. Since last summer, the Department of Education has opened a civil rights investigation into whether Harvard’s legacy preference discriminates against Black, Hispanic, and Asian applicants, and Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley *82 has introduced legislation that would prohibit its use at institutions receiving federal funds. At Princeton, the Board of Trustees created an ad hoc committee to review the University’s admission policies, including legacy admissions, in light of the Supreme Court’s decision.

 
Last edited:
That's quite ridiculous with their endowments. Harvard should receive no Federal $ and they should start spending their $50 Billion worth. The Fed / Gov't should not be dictating to private universities and the private universities should not be taking all that Federal money.

Then I hope you also disagree with the pushes in Red States to allow private schools to be funded with public money.
 
This isn't a problem, it was clearly affirmative action that was the problem. These kids obviously just deserve to go there more through their inherently better quality of being born to rich people.

It's a problem if you are using tax dollars. Then it has to be equality before the law and any discrimination must be based on merit rather than immutable characteristics. If they feel the need to virtue signal they can do it with endowment money. Even then it's stupid because too many people that benefit from affirmative action end up washing out and never reengaging with higher ed, because they were promoted beyond their abilities. They would have been better off going to a less prestigious but perfectly fine institution that is a better fit for their academic chops
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,108
Messages
55,467,898
Members
174,786
Latest member
plasterby
Back
Top