3 ms·

Legacies are considered more favorably for admissions regardless of how much (or even whether) they donate, right? Or have I misunderstood the system? That is,

by geofft 7y ago

Legacies are considered more favorably for admissions regardless of how much (or even whether) they donate, right? Or have I misunderstood the system? That is, the only thing that donations get you is the vague hope that your university will never make the decision Johns Hopkins just made, and it's a vague prisoner's dilemma - as long as enough alumni donate, legacy admissions stay around for all alumni.

virtuous_signal 7y ago
No -- I'm going off news that came out in light of the lawsuit against Harvard recently, but I have no reason to believe other elite universities handle it differently. These things are shrouded in secrecy for the precise reason that it is massively unpopular, but at least in this case we got an inside look because of discovery for the lawsuit. Harvard creates a special "Dean's Interest List" (https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/10/18/day-three-harvard-admissions-trial/ https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/10/18/day-three-harv...) which includes celebrities, "top donors", and certain athletes. The admissions rate restricted to this list was 42.2% in 6 recent years.
leetcrew 7y ago
my guess is that legacies are just a good proxy for donations in general. if someone encourages their child to apply to the same college they attended, they probably feel more connected to the institution than the average graduate (and have donated more accordingly). legacy admissions policies may also encourage people to donate more because they know their children will have a better chance of benefiting from the investment. it's likely a decent proxy for wealth, too; someone who graduated from an elite institution is probably well above the median income. so basically it correlates with a lot of things that the institution wants, but doesn't want to state as an explicit policy.

3 ms·

Legacies are considered more favorably for admissions regardless of how much (or even whether) they donate, right? Or have I misunderstood the system? That is,

by geofft 7y ago

virtuous_signal 7y ago
No -- I'm going off news that came out in light of the lawsuit against Harvard recently, but I have no reason to believe other elite universities handle it differently. These things are shrouded in secrecy for the precise reason that it is massively unpopular, but at least in this case we got an inside look because of discovery for the lawsuit. Harvard creates a special "Dean's Interest List" (https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/10/18/day-three-harvard-admissions-trial/ https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/10/18/day-three-harv...) which includes celebrities, "top donors", and certain athletes. The admissions rate restricted to this list was 42.2% in 6 recent years.
leetcrew 7y ago
my guess is that legacies are just a good proxy for donations in general. if someone encourages their child to apply to the same college they attended, they probably feel more connected to the institution than the average graduate (and have donated more accordingly). legacy admissions policies may also encourage people to donate more because they know their children will have a better chance of benefiting from the investment. it's likely a decent proxy for wealth, too; someone who graduated from an elite institution is probably well above the median income. so basically it correlates with a lot of things that the institution wants, but doesn't want to state as an explicit policy.