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

[avenue94]

That push is a clear giveaway to private schools because of lobbying. It is akin to private prisons. They want to funnel public taxpayer money to get rich.

It's that but mostly just because those most likely to use vouchers are wealthy families.

 

[Arkain2K]

Yale to review its legacy admissions preference: ‘Everything is up for discussion’​

In his first public comment on the subject since the fall of affirmative action, University President Peter Salovey said that the future of legacy admissions preferences at Yale is under deliberation.
By Molly Reinmann | Oct 27, 2023

On a panel during Yale College’s Family Weekend earlier this month, University President Peter Salovey answered a question about the future of legacy admissions at Yale.

In his answer — the first time any University administrator has spoken publicly on the matter since the fall of affirmative action earlier this year — Salovey explained that he and other University officials have been undergoing deliberations that include the future of legacy admissions.

“We are trying to ask, ‘Is [legacy admissions] getting in the way of diversifying our applicant pool, or is it not?’” Salovey said on the panel. “And then we will make the decision on the basis of that, rather than what the political pressure is. But the political pressure is not completely irrelevant. So we will see. Everything is up for discussion this year, in this new era of admissions. But no decision yet.”

Eleven percent of the Yale College class of 2027 are legacies, according to the admissions office’s First-Year Class Profile. This number marks a slight decrease in legacy population from the class of 2026, which has 12 percent legacy students, and the class of 2025, which has 14 percent legacy students.

In July, the Department of Education began a probe into donor and legacy admissions preferences at Harvard. The investigation follows a federal complaint filed by Lawyers for Civil Rights on behalf of three Black and Latine advocacy groups in Boston alleging that legacy admissions practices at Harvard violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by favoring white applicants.

According to studies cited in the complaint, nearly 70 percent of Harvard’s donor-related and legacy applicants are white. Rates of admission are nearly seven times higher for donor-related applicants than for non-donor-related applicants and nearly six times higher for legacies than for non-legacies.

Salovey noted that he is unsure whether eliminating legacy admissions would contribute to more diversity in matriculating Yale classes.

If Yale did not have a slight preference for legacy applicants, Salovey said, those applicants would be replaced by students whose parents simply went to a different elite college, rather than students who come from significantly different backgrounds.

A February analysis by the News suggests that removing legacy preference would increase racial diversity.

Salovey added that the alumni population whose children are now applying to Yale as legacies is “far more diverse” now than it has been in the past. The News’ February analysis found that at least through 2034, there are likely to be far more potential white legacy applicants than legacy applicants of color.

“Last June’s Supreme Court decision prompted us to give careful thought to a great many aspects of our holistic admissions process,” Salovey wrote in an email to the News. “One such aspect of this process is the way in which we take into account that an applicant’s family member attended Yale. This aspect of our admissions process certainly hasn’t been excluded from our continuing deliberations.”

The issue of legacy and donor preference has gained particular attention with the end of race-conscious admissions, although many competitive universities moved away from the practice years before.

Selective schools that dropped legacy admissions in recent years — before the Supreme Court’s June ruling against affirmative action — include Johns Hopkins University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Carnegie Mellon University and Amherst College.

Wesleyan University announced in July, nearly a month after the Supreme Court axed affirmative action, that it was dropping its preference for legacy applicants.

When the News reached out for comment, a Wesleyan spokesperson pointed to a July 19 public statement from the university’s president, Michael Roth.

“An applicant’s connection to a Wesleyan graduate indicates little about that applicant’s ability to succeed at the University, meaning that legacy status has played a negligible role in our admission process for many years,” Roth wrote in the statement. “Nevertheless, in the wake of the recent Supreme Court decision regarding affirmative action, we believe it important to formally end admission preference for ‘legacy applicants.’”

While other elite universities have begun to disavow legacy admissions, no schools in the Ivy League have yet renounced the practice.

In an interview with the Harvard Crimson earlier this month, university President Claudine Gay said “everything is on the table” in regards to legacy admissions in Cambridge.

“I can’t, nor do I think it is actually productive to try to predict where that conversation is going to go,” she said. “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.”

A Dartmouth spokesperson told the Boston Globe in July that the university will continue to consider legacy and donor status when evaluating applicants for admission.

With the comment, Dartmouth became the first Ivy League school to publicly announce its formal continuation of legacy admissions.

“A legacy connection will continue to be one factor among dozens that Dartmouth considers when evaluating applicants; those categories include academic performance, qualitative information from essays and recommendations, extracurricular engagement, geography and academic interests, among others,” the spokesperson said.

Salovey’s new comments mark the first time Yale has publicly addressed the question of legacy and donor-biased admissions since the fall of affirmative action.

Before the affirmative action ruling, Yale’s Dean of Undergraduate Admissions and Financial Aid Jeremiah Quinlan publicly expressed opposition to a proposed statewide ban on favoring children of alumni in the admissions process.

In February 2022, a bill — HB 5034 — was submitted to the Connecticut General Assembly proposing the end of legacy admissions in the state as a means of making college admissions more equitable.

In a written statement addressing the bill, Quinlan opined that, while Yale hopes to become more accessible to first-generation low-income students, he does not believe that issuing a statewide ban on legacy admissions is a means to that end. He argued that while universities could independently decide to bar legacy preference, a state restriction would pave the way for “other intrusions on academic freedom.”

“Even without [legacy] preference, students with more resources will still have an advantage in college admissions, just as they have an advantage in securing a good job and in many other aspects of daily life. Instead, the state should support schools in their efforts to identify, recruit, and graduate low-income and first-generation students,” Quinlan wrote, adding that “Yale has already realized a dramatic increase in the representation of these students on our campus in the past decade, without eliminating other admissions preferences.”

The Yale College Council has passed numerous resolutions condemning the role of legacy preference in the University’s admissions.

In an open letter to the University published in the News this summer, YCC President and Vice President Julian Suh-Toma and Maya Fonkeu called on Yale to move away from its use of legacy and donor-biased admissions.

“We urge Yale to take this moment to reconsider the role of legacy status in admissions,” Suh-Toma and Fonkeu wrote in the letter. “We are struck by the irony of continued consideration of an arbitrary privilege in the face of new restrictions in ensuring diversity on college campuses. A system that has by and large benefitted Yale’s most fortunate communities further augments the inequities that this ruling has exacerbated.”

Yale to review its legacy admissions preference: ‘Everything is up for discussion’

In his first public comment on the subject since the fall of affirmative action, University President Peter Salovey said that the future of legacy admissions preferences at Yale is under deliberation.

yaledailynews.com

 

[ShadowRun]

No surprise they support terrorism also .. what a shocker

 

[nostradumbass]

That push is a clear giveaway to private schools because of lobbying. It is akin to private prisons. They want to funnel public taxpayer money to get rich.

Not really. It's the opposite. A giveaway is you getting taxed and the money getting funneled into bloated administrator salaries at failed schools your kids can't use. Using vouchers so that same money is spent on schools you actually use

If you have $10,000 in funding attached to each student, how is it a giveaway for that to go to the school they attend, but not a giveaway for it to go to a school they don't even go to?

 

[Hog-train]

Not really. It's the opposite. A giveaway is you getting taxed and the money getting funneled into bloated administrator salaries at failed schools your kids can't use. Using vouchers so that same money is spent on schools you actually use

If you have $10,000 in funding attached to each student, how is it a giveaway for that to go to the school they attend, but not a giveaway for it to go to a school they don't even go to?

Because the vast majority of these voucher programs are only used by wealthier people. Vouchers are largely tax subsidies for existing private school families. In most cases, the schools charge tuition and fees far above the amount provided by the voucher and the majority of families still can't afford it. A lot of the schools also have exclusive admissions policies.

So the end result is that wealthier families simply get a cheaper tuition due to subsidization.

 

[nostradumbass]

Because the vast majority of these voucher programs are only used by wealthier people. Vouchers are largely tax subsidies for existing private school families. In most cases, the schools charge tuition and fees far above the amount provided by the voucher and the majority of families still can't afford it. A lot of the schools also have exclusive admissions policies.

So the end result is that wealthier families simply get a cheaper tuition due to subsidization.

So your complaint has inverted, and now you do want a giveaway?

Who in the absolute hell told you "the vast majority of these voucher programs are only used by wealthier people"? Again, the exact opposite of true. You're excluded from it if your family even makes average income. FFS, the average household income for people using it is $29k. Who the hell is that "wealthier" than?

 

[Hog-train]

So your complaint has inverted, and now you do want a giveaway?

Who in the absolute hell told you "the vast majority of these voucher programs are only used by wealthier people"? Again, the exact opposite of true. You're excluded from it if your family even makes average income. FFS, the average household income for people using it is $29k. Who the hell is that "wealthier" than?

I'm not sure what you mean by inverted?

I must have read the wrong article. Yes you're right most of the vouchers go to people who can't afford it. I did a bit more digging and it says most really good private schools with strong academics do not participate in the voucher program.

So the problem is that a lot of the schools that do get vouchers are struggling schools. The typical voucher school is a financially distressed, sub-prime private provider often jumping at the chance for a tax bailout to stay open a few extra years.

And the academic results are poor with a lot of student turnover and bad test scores. Additionally, there are a lot of "pop-up" private schools that fail after just a few years.

I'm not this huge proponent of the public school system. I realize it's complete shit, but the way they're implementing private school vouchers also doesn't seem to be the answer. The proof is in the results.

 

[nostradumbass]

I'm not sure what you mean by inverted?

I must have read the wrong article. Yes you're right most of the vouchers go to people who can't afford it. I did a bit more digging and it says most really good private schools with strong academics do not participate in the voucher program.

So the problem is that a lot of the schools that do get vouchers are struggling schools. The typical voucher school is a financially distressed, sub-prime private provider often jumping at the chance for a tax bailout to stay open a few extra years.

And the academic results are poor with a lot of student turnover and bad test scores. Additionally, there are a lot of "pop-up" private schools that fail after just a few years.

I'm not this huge proponent of the public school system. I realize it's complete shit, but the way they're implementing private school vouchers also doesn't seem to be the answer. The proof is in the results.

Yes, that is the point of them. You choose where the money goes, so if the school doesn't perform or they misuse funds, you take it elsewhere and aren't forced to stay until your parents win the lottery and can afford to either pay for private school or buy a house in a school zone far away from any diversity.

It's ridiculous that a major factor when buying a house is what school it's zoned for, so the NIMBYs will just make sure there are no minority neighborhoods anywhere near them when buying a house, so not only do the schools stay shitty, but the whole area stays shitty because nobody with any money who gives a shit about their kids is going to move into it.

Not sure what results you're talking about, but almost every study has shown an increase in graduation rates, increase in college enrollment, and an increase in subsequent degree attainment, and black kids are largest beneficiaries.


M. Danish Shakeel, Kaitlin Anderson, and Patrick Wolf, “The Participant Effects of Private School Vouchers Across the Globe: A Meta-Analytic and Systematic Review,” EDRE Working Paper No. 2016-07 (May 2016).


Megan Austin, R. Joseph Waddington, and Mark Berends, “Voucher Pathways and Student Achievement in Indiana’s Choice Scholarship Program,” The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences (March 2019).


Matthew M. Chingos and Paul E. Peterson, “Experimentally Estimated Impacts of School Vouchers on College Enrollment and Degree Attainment,” Journal of Public Economics (February 2015).

 

[oldshadow]

Fine with me if they end it. It will most likely cause tuition to go up. The the same people that wanted this will bitch when it does.

 

[dirtypablo]

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.

You sure about that? Harvard has one of the highest graduation rates of American universities.

I read something along the lines of, if lots of students were failing out, it would mean they failed in their admissions process. Can't admit that, so once you're in, you're in.

 

[Whippy McGee]

Then I hope you also disagree with the pushes in Red States to allow private schools to be funded with public money.

You do realize K-12 is required, college is not?

You do realize that Harvard and other private universities receive massive endowments allowing them to operate without government money, should they so choose? If a K-12 school received strong endowments like JSerra, then I would agree with you.

 

[Pharenheit]

Out of curiosity I’d be curious to find out what percentage of those “whites” were Jewish

 

[hitcher]

so everyone non white is black now??

Sure buddy. That’s exactly what it means.

 

[Crawler89]

You sure about that? Harvard has one of the highest graduation rates of American universities.

I read something along the lines of, if lots of students were failing out, it would mean they failed in their admissions process. Can't admit that, so once you're in, you're in.

So just cause they may have a last name like Clinton, but failing grades, or suck at their job they get a pass?

fuck that.

 

[Arkain2K]

So just cause they may have a last name like Clinton, but failing grades, or suck at their job they get a pass?

fuck that.

Academic qualification doesn't seem to be the issue with Legacy applicants.

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.

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

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...

forums.sherdog.com

 

[RonDante]

“Based on self-reported SAT scores from the Class of 2026 Frosh Survey, legacy students had higher SAT scores, with 38 percent having had a score higher than 1550, compared to 32.5 percent of nonlegacy students, and 2.2 percent having had below 1390 on the standardized test, compared to 12.8 percent of non-legacy ...”

self reported and only from Princeton but it seems like these legacy students would be getting in either way

 

[RonDante]

“Based on self-reported SAT scores from the Class of 2026 Frosh Survey, legacy students had higher SAT scores, with 38 percent having had a score higher than 1550, compared to 32.5 percent of nonlegacy students, and 2.2 percent having had below 1390 on the standardized test, compared to 12.8 percent of non-legacy ...”

self reported and only from Princeton but it seems like these legacy students would be getting in either way

Although looking at that 12.8% below 1390 for non legacies, maybe the affirmative action cases are making the legacies look better than they actually are

 

[Arkain2K]

How many colleges consider legacy admissions? Maybe more than you think​

By Nirvi Shah USA TODAY | Dec 12, 2023


Legacy admissions are under scrutiny after the undoing of affirmative action in college admissions. New data shows, for the first time, how widespread the practice may be.

Nearly 600 colleges consider whether applicants' parents, siblings or other relatives attended the institution to which they are applying, according to data published Tuesday by the National Center for Education Sciences.

The 579 colleges identified by an NCES survey said that as of fall 2022, they considered whether college hopefuls had a familial link to their respective institutions. That was about a third of the more than 1,900 schools in the survey with so-called competitive admissions − colleges where students cannot simply enroll and start taking classes. NCES said it was the first time it has collected information on the practice.

Legacy admissions are often associated with the nation's most elite universities, such as the Ivy League. Though NCES didn't name which colleges responded yes, the number who did so indicates the practice extends far beyond top-tier schools.

A search of the federal database on higher education shows those that said they would consider legacy admissions − though it's unclear how often it is considered or how many students are admitted because of it − include Flagler College in St. Augustine, Florida; the State University of New York at Potsdam; and Spelman College, a historically Black private school for women in Atlanta.

"Access to data on legacy applicants is essential for colleges and universities reevaluating their admissions practices and working to build diverse student bodies in the wake of the Supreme Court’s disappointing ruling on affirmative action earlier this year," Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said in response to the findings.

Who benefits from legacy admissions?​

In that ruling, on cases filed against Harvard and the University of North Carolina, Justice Neil Gorsuch questioned Harvard's use of legacy admissions in a concurring opinion, pointing out who they are most likely to benefit.

"Its preferences for the children of donors, alumni, and faculty are no help to applicants who cannot boast of their parents' good fortune or trips to the alumni tent all their lives," Gorsuch wrote. "While race-neutral on their face, too, these preferences undoubtedly benefit white and wealthy applicants the most."

A 2019 analysis conducted on behalf of the plaintiffs in the Harvard and UNC cases found 43% of Harvard’s white admissions were legacy students, recruited athletes, children of faculty and staff or applicants affiliated with donors.

Shortly after the ruling, a civil rights group filed a federal complaint against Harvard with the Education Department over the practice. The agency opened an investigation in response.

Some colleges have declared they will no longer consider applicants' relationship to their institutions, however. For instance, the University of Virginia said it will do away with an option on its application for students to indicate personal or historic relations with the university. Others that changed their policies over the past few years include Amherst College, the University of Minnesota and Wesleyan University.

How many colleges consider legacy admissions? Maybe more than you think

Nearly 600 colleges consider whether applicants' parents, siblings or other relatives attended the place where they are applying, new data shows.

www.usatoday.com

 

[Belaya Smert]

Next thing you’re gonna tell me they get jobs they don’t deserve and aren’t qualified for out of college based on the same system of networking.

 

[Arkain2K]

This bipartisan Senate duo wants to end legacy college admissions​

By Eric McDaniel | December 27, 202

Senators Todd Young (R-Ind.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) have introduced new legislation that aims to ban the practice of considering applicants' relationship to school alumni and donors in college admissions.

The Merit-Based Educational Reforms and Institutional Transparency Act, or MERIT Act, would prohibit accredited higher education institutions from granting preferential treatment in admissions processes based on an applicant's relationship to alumni or donors. The amendment to the Higher Education Act would be paired with a required study to improve data collection on the influence of legacy and donor relationships in admissions decisions.

How many colleges consider legacy status in admissions decisions?​

Roughly half of higher education institutions offered some form of legacy preference to applicants in 2020, according to a report by the advocacy group Education Reform Now.

Among the 64 highly-selective institutions — who admit fewer than one quarter of applicants and legacy status could make candidates three times more likely to be admitted — 80% weighed legacy status.

While the direct impact of the policy is limited — fewer than four-in-10 Americans have a bachelor's or higher degree and a tiny number attend the most selective institutions — legacy admissions critics say it is important to consider the ways admissions decisions shape American society more broadly.

Richard Reeves, who studied the policy during his time at the nonpartisan Brookings Institution, said that the highly-selective schools are ultimately in the business of selecting America's elite.

"The question is, then, are they also at risk of reproducing an elite by giving a leg up to the sons and daughters of the existing elite?" Reeves said. "Should meritocracy be driving college admissions? Or is the role of these institutions to help pass the baton on from one generation to the next?"

Admissions processes are in the public eye in the wake of the Supreme Court decision that ended race-conscious admissions​

As students across the country complete their college application process this winter, they become the first pool of students to experience a dramatically reformed system.

In June, a conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court effectively ended race-conscious admission programs at colleges and universities across the country as unconstitutionally discriminatory.

The decision reversed decades of precedent and ended the ability of colleges and universities — public and private — to consider race as one of the factors in selecting which applicants to admit.

The logic of affirmative action, according to admissions offices, was to redress the systemic inequities disproportionately experienced by students of color, particularly Black students, in both the American educational system and society more broadly.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Neal Gorsuch indicated that, in his view, legacy preferences at Harvard — one of the defendants in the case — "undoubtedly benefit white and wealthy applicants the most" because of who has, historically, been admitted to the school.

The Supreme Court's decision helped to inspire student activism on the issue​

In the wake of the Supreme Court's decision, a group of students at Georgetown University began to explore ways they could use their influence to make their school's admissions process more equitable.

The school's College Democrats group initiated a petition urging the school to end legacy preference in admissions. The document has now been signed by three dozen student groups and more than 1,000 students, faculty and alumni.

Georgetown did not respond to multiple NPR inquiries and, according to the College Democrats group, has not publicly responded to the petition's demands.

Approximately 10% of Georgetown students are legacy students — including Joe Massaua.

Massaua is a junior in the School of Foreign Service who grew up dreaming of attending Georgetown. He bonded with his dad watching the school's basketball games and visited the campus on trips to Washington, D.C., to see his grandparents.

"I worked my tail off to get here. I grinded," Massaua said. "I always had Georgetown in my mind as being the one school that I really, really wanted to get into."

And, now that he's there, he loves it. He's active on campus and also serves as a local elected official in the D.C. government. But, as campus discussion ramped up around legacy admissions, he began to reflect on his own path to achieving his dream.

"It made me rethink my college application process," Massaua said, "and wonder that for all the work that I did to get into Georgetown, was it just the tiny little box that I checked?"

Massaua told me that he hopes that his future kids choose to attend Georgetown one day — but that they shouldn't have a leg up over other, equally qualified applicants. So, he decided to sign the petition.

"It was difficult because it's not something that I — as a legacy student — want to think about, Massaua said. "But the whole process is flawed."

"I think that this is one step that could be reformed to be fairer for all college applicants," Massaua said.

A growing, bipartisan movement​

Massaua and his peers at Georgetown have powerful allies across town at the U.S. Capitol — including Senators Tim Kaine and Todd Young.

"I think families of kids don't like the notion that they start off already behind, because maybe they didn't go to the school or somebody else has more money than them," Kaine said in an interview.

"If the attack on affirmative action on the grounds of race is, 'you gotta put merit first,'" Kaine said, "well, then let's put merit first."

Kaine said that he and Young are both heartened by the number of universities who have begun to end the practice.

Since the Supreme Court's affirmative action decision this summer, several prominent universities — including Wesleyan and Carnegie Mellon — have announced the end to legacy admissions preference.

And — while it remains to be seen whether the MERIT Act will eventually be brought up for a vote — the notion is attracting support from all corners of Congress.

In June, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) called legacy admissions "affirmative action for the privileged." Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), then a presidential hopeful, said on Fox News that month, that the question is, in order to create a culture where education is the goal "for every single part of our community," schools should end "preferential treatment for legacy kids."