3 ms·

I don't know man? Just Devil's Advocate. But what if these legacy admits are not as dumb as people think they are? Just kind of, throwing that possibility ou

• eropple 7y ago
  It's less "dumb", more "trained." Ezra Klein had an excellent podcast with Daniel Markovits a couple weeks ago that touched on this--being optimized (by parents and the local culture around you) to succeed at getting to Harvard (or Yale or whatever) doesn't mean that it's the best thing for you or for society to be afforded the significant benefits that we, both consciously and unconsciously, assign to that.
• mtnGoat 7y ago
  the fact they are using the legacy backdoor to get in, instead of the great academics route... kinda would dictate they aren't on the same level of "smarts". People only use the backdoor when the front one wont work.
  • paulgb 7y ago
    I agree, but to clarify a point: the "nearly half" number includes athletes, legacy admits, children of faculty and big doners, whether or not they would have otherwise gotten in on academic merits. The authors estimate that only a quarter would have. I didn't read deeply enough to see if they broke that number by legacy admits only.
  • gnicholas 7y ago
    Does the study say that they "used the legacy backdoor"? I think most college applications just ask the applicant if any family members attended or teach at the institution. It would be pretty foolish to leave that blank if you had family members that had gone or taught there.