4 ms·
Affirmative action is often the scapegoat - legacies and donors are often entirely absent in conversations about it. Which honestly doesn't make much sense.
by thosakwe 8y ago
Affirmative action is often the scapegoat - legacies and donors are often entirely absent in conversations about it. Which honestly doesn't make much sense.
- philwelch 8y agoIt's likely the combination of the two. If you have an x% quota for URMs, and you have another y% effectively earmarked for legacies, that sets an implicit (100-x-y)% cap for Asian-Americans and low-SES whites. Also, you have to factor in that legacy admissions are part of the benefit conferred by Harvard and other elite institutions. It transforms Harvard admission from a one-time personal benefit to a durable and heritable asset that can be passed down from generation to generation.
- jakelazaroff 8y agoIt's a blatantly racist benefit, though. Princeton, for example, accepted its first black students in 1947 [1]; there are likely even students today whose legacy status is a result of their still-living grandparent or great-grandparent taking advantage of this. [1] https://www.jbhe.com/chronology/ https://www.jbhe.com/chronology/