4 ms·

Universities like Harvard typically like to market themselves as being the height of meritocracy, going so far as to proudly declare their miniscule acceptance

Universities like Harvard typically like to market themselves as being the height of meritocracy, going so far as to proudly declare their miniscule acceptance rates. It's hard to square that with a very obvious preference for students from a specific background regardless of merit.

asdf6677 3y ago
> market themselves as being the height of meritocracy This is how they market themselves to the general public, but everyone knows that Harvard and its admission policies were designed by and for the ruling class to educate their children and build connections. A Harvard degree would have no value if it selected based on merit alone. A meritocracy would turn a school like Harvard into a factory for upper middle class people like doctors and lawyers and defeat its purpose. Harvard wants to educate presidents and CEOs.
- 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
  Would you please explain the logic for the dishonesty as you explained the logic for diverging from meritocracy? Surely there is a good reason for such an allegedly respectable institution misleading the public that pays its bills, yes?
  - deely3 3y ago
    Why downvotes? Its an interesting question, and I'm curious too to hear the answer or opinion from parent commenter.
User23 3y ago
One reason that Harvard and the other ivies like legacy students is that they’re who grow up to be big donors. Edit: I’m willing to assume that Harvard’s admissions and development offices know what they’re doing, considering that they’ve been wildly successful for centuries.
- simonster 3y ago
  If this is true (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_preferences#Economic_impact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_preferences#Economic_im... suggests it's disputed), the effect is probably marginal, and in any case, Harvard has the largest academic endowment in the world. It seems unlikely that it needs legacy admissions to stay afloat.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - tnecniv 3y ago
    They don’t. Most major private institutions don’t. However why tap into your endowment when people will give you money?
- tnecniv 3y ago
  The other big thing is that these schools want to admit people they know will matriculate (they don’t want to over enroll or under enroll). Presumably, legacy applicants are statistically more likely to matriculate and hence there is a preference. When I was applying to schools, I remember reading that the policy UPenn used for legacies was that only those who applied early decision got any sort of statistical advantage over other candidates. If you weren’t ready to commit via early decision, your odds were the same as the general population.
maximinus_thrax 3y ago
> Universities like Harvard typically like to market themselves as being the height of meritocracy Perhaps their marketing sucks because as an external observer, I've never associated Ivy League schools with meritocracy.

asdf6677 3y ago

> market themselves as being the height of meritocracy This is how they market themselves to the general public, but everyone knows that Harvard and its admission policies were designed by and for the ruling class to educate their children and build connections. A Harvard degree would have no value if it selected based on merit alone. A meritocracy would turn a school like Harvard into a factory for upper middle class people like doctors and lawyers and defeat its purpose. Harvard wants to educate presidents and CEOs.

111111IIIIIII 3y ago
Would you please explain the logic for the dishonesty as you explained the logic for diverging from meritocracy? Surely there is a good reason for such an allegedly respectable institution misleading the public that pays its bills, yes?
- deely3 3y ago
  Why downvotes? Its an interesting question, and I'm curious too to hear the answer or opinion from parent commenter.

User23 3y ago

One reason that Harvard and the other ivies like legacy students is that they’re who grow up to be big donors. Edit: I’m willing to assume that Harvard’s admissions and development offices know what they’re doing, considering that they’ve been wildly successful for centuries.

simonster 3y ago
If this is true (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_preferences#Economic_impact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_preferences#Economic_im... suggests it's disputed), the effect is probably marginal, and in any case, Harvard has the largest academic endowment in the world. It seems unlikely that it needs legacy admissions to stay afloat.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- tnecniv 3y ago
  They don’t. Most major private institutions don’t. However why tap into your endowment when people will give you money?
tnecniv 3y ago
The other big thing is that these schools want to admit people they know will matriculate (they don’t want to over enroll or under enroll). Presumably, legacy applicants are statistically more likely to matriculate and hence there is a preference. When I was applying to schools, I remember reading that the policy UPenn used for legacies was that only those who applied early decision got any sort of statistical advantage over other candidates. If you weren’t ready to commit via early decision, your odds were the same as the general population.

maximinus_thrax 3y ago

> Universities like Harvard typically like to market themselves as being the height of meritocracy Perhaps their marketing sucks because as an external observer, I've never associated Ivy League schools with meritocracy.