PREFERENCES, RACIAL AND OTHERWISE

Boston Globe ^ | May 25, 2003 | Jeff Jacoby

[yonif]

The Supreme Court will soon rule in the University of Michigan affirmative action cases. However the court decides, the debate over race-based admissions is sure to intensify. And so will the discussion of other kinds of college preferences, particularly the boost many schools give to the children (and grandchildren) of alumni, or "legacies."

[Republic If You Can Keep It]

Good article.

Some colleges also have an admissions preference for Veterans, a point not mentioned in this article.

I would think that the veterans' preference generally helps monorities over whites.

[Republic If You Can Keep It]

monorities = minorities

sorry!

[mrustow]

"legacies" = alumni brats. Just thought some folks might need a translation.

[Mister Baredog]

I think legacy preferences tend to reinforce class privilege, and would lose no sleep if they were abolished. (At the state universities of California and Georgia, they already have been).

Ironically there are many Black alumni with children who are candidates for legacy enrollments. After all, anyone going to college in the 70's and at least half of the 80's, could have college aged children. I think the class argument is weak in 2003.

But I also think they are defensible in ways that racial preferences are not.

That would be correct.

[ccmay]

I went to Dartmouth some years ago with my grandfather for a class reunion. One of the alumni association chairmen spoke at length on this topic. His point was, Dartmouth College has hardly grown since we old men were here-- the so called "Thousand Men of Dartmouth" admitted every year are now men and women, but still only a thousand or so in number.

And yet, each old man attending the reunion had an average of five grandchildren. Dartmouth or any other college would have to grow fivefold every generation to admit all its legacies. Can't be done, so quit griping that your dim-witted grandson didn't get in, said he.

Moreover, he made the point that legacies would count for less and less as time went by, as the population grew and previously un-represented or under-represented groups were admitted. He told them to continue to encourage their descendants to be loyal to the school, but that preparing them academically would count for more in the future than ever before.

I can't say I object to this, even though it could have worked to my own disadvantage had I wished to attend Dartmouth. I think a pure meritocracy is the only way to be fair. If you are black or the grandson of a Dartmouth grad, bully for you, maybe we'll give you an interview, but first let's see your SAT scores.

-ccm

[Sonny M]

"legacies" = alumni brats. Just thought some folks might need a translation.

Not every legacy is an alumni brat, George W. Bush and his father certainly weren't. Ann Coulter did the research, something like seventy something percent of yale legacy's would have gotten in anyway based on there own grades and scores. I went to St. Johns University, if my kids wanted to go there one day (god knows why they would), they wouldn't be some alumni brat.

Personally, I don't like legacy programs, or automatic addmissions to university staff kids or kids of big time donors or race admissions, the only thing that I can say I would support are either race blind socio-economic preferences and to a limited extent, very limited, kids who generate revenue for the school to subsidize the kids who get acadmeic scholarships (somone's got to pay, usually its because the sports teams bring in money that can be used to pay out scholarships). However, first and foremost, should be grades, like the 10% programs.

[ladyinred]

Grades should be the only criteria for admission to universities, but I am a bit old fashioned I guess.

[FITZ]

I went to St. Johns University, if my kids wanted to go there one day (god knows why they would), they wouldn't be some alumni brat.

As long as they got in on their own merit, I wouldn't see why they'd be considered that. If preferences are given, that seems wrong ---the best students should be given the best chances for getting in. I can see "best" being different things, not necessarily just grades or test scores, possibly other kinds of acheviement should count.

[Sonny M]

I wouldn't mind as much if legacys were only given preference as say a tie-breaker, assuming everything and all things being equal, and your looking for one more thing to tip the scales.

What I do not like about the legacy programs today, and this is the truth, its a reward, and its reward to people who as alumni donated money to the school. It is the only reason schools really look at it, if you've had relatives go to a school, and they see that they gave money, it definatley boosts your chance

In theory, its supposed to be a reward or future promise of consideration to students who apply to the school, in essence saying, if you come to our school and graduate, in the future we promise to give your kids extra consideration. In theory, I feel this is wrong also, but I do not blame legacy kids for applying to or going to schools where other family's went to, to call them trust fund brats is just wrong.

Calling a legacy a trust fund brat, because they went to a school where a relative went, is simply stupid, especially considering there are real trust fund brats out there.

[AGreatPer]

I just read this somewhere, I forget where, but here is what I remember:

The toughest schools to get into"

1. Yale
2. Harvard
3. Notre Dame
4. Princeton

#3 suprised me.

[Sonny M]

You probably got that from either princton review or US world and news report.

Notre Dame doesn't surprise me, part of the blame game that was going on before the current head coach of the football team came in, was that the school was holding academics as a priority over recruits and if they couldn't cut it in the classroom, they weren't getting in.

The new coach now, having come from stanford understands the schools standards in regards to academics, and had been a winner before, he had no qualms about coming into ND and upholding academics while still having every intention of winning a national championship, and in his interview with the school, cited Duke's basketball program as a good model of "student/athlete".

[AGreatPer]

Sonny M, I remember now, I didn't read it, I heard it on the radio when driving in the Princeton area a few weeks ago for a soccer game with my son.

I heard the numbers and thought immediately, no way Notre Dame at #3.

I have talked to a lot of people since and your previous comments about the football coach at ND are correct.

Sidelight: Princeton coach scouted my son playing soccer (17), loved him. When he saw a 3.5 GPA on our resume, said to him, "You have a slight chance if you get up to 3.9 as a senior". Wow, they sure are selective.

Funny comment from the kid, "Dad, this place is too old for me (meaning the buildings that are beautiful).

[Coleus]

Is President Bush for Racial Quotas and Affirmative Action?
Is Miguel Estrada Pro Life?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/917638/posts

[mrustow]

"legacies" = alumni brats. Just thought some folks might need a translation.

Not every legacy is an alumni brat, George W. Bush and his father certainly weren't. Ann Coulter did the research, something like seventy something percent of yale legacy's would have gotten in anyway based on there own grades and scores.

My understanding is that GWB did get into Yale as an alumni brat. With that said, let me add that I am Annie's #1 fan, and if she did the research, and you have a link to her, I'll be glad to read what she had to say on the subject.

[Sonny M]

Here's the link

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/ac20030123.shtml

Just to also note, George W. Bush's Sat scores, I believe were around 1100 to 1200, either way, they were higher then Bradley's were, and his grades at Andover (which you could put together a good case in regards to) were good, not great, but considering the prestige of the school and its nickname as the pipeline to the Ivy Leagues, in all likely hood, he would have gotten in anyway. Also, Prescott Bush, GWB's grandpa, also went there, GHWB, was an exceptional student and a war veteran when he went.

[mrustow]

[Biden's] next irrelevant point was: "Give me a break. I mean how many people would get into Harvard, Yale and the rest of these places if their father had not gone?" There's an answer to that! This columnist did the math! On the basis of their SAT scores, 82 percent of legacies admitted to Harvard would have been admitted to Harvard even if they were not legacies. Only 45 percent of blacks admitted to Harvard would have been admitted to Harvard if they were not black.

Well, the article is certainly good, but there's nothing about legacies, GWB, and Yale.

[Sonny M]

In a post that was here less the 2 days ago, there was an article in regards to Bradley, Gore and Bush and SAT scores.

The whole article compares legacies to race preferences,I can see you read the article, I don't see where you miss anything on legacy's.

I'll try and dig around for the Bradley article, it had to do with the Times, and it should still be in the archives here. Also, there has been numerious articles on GWB, GHWB, and Prescott Bush in regards to Yale (also, going by the member ship rolls on the skulls, I think there were other family members that went there too).

[DMZFrank]

It is the ultimate in disingenuous reasoning to compare racial preferences to other types of preferences. Anyone of any race can be an athlete, legacy benificiary, scholar, musician, or veteran. ONLY people with the "politically correct" DNA, annointed by the mostly politically correct, can get the racial preference entitlement. This is nothing more than a form of wrongful appropriation through cultural Marxism.

The "gubmint schools" turning out students largely unable to compete fairly for slots at elite educational institutions need to be fixed. All this folderol about AA tends to mask this failure. For the record I am a Chicago black man who has seen the products of these pitiful public schools first hand as a police officer, am sick of it, and want a remedy, preferably in the form of educational vouchers.

[Sonny M]

I agree with you pretty much. I am a big believer in educational vouchers and this this whole "system is more important then the children it serves" arguement is used for union advantage. I don't like preferences in general, by legacy or donors connections (that is naive of me)or name recognition. I see nothing wrong with preferences for achievement, as you mentioned, athletes, scholar, musicians, veterans, etc.

Just to note, one of the best arguements that has been used, though it is very dubious, against legacy's, was that, many colleges did practice discrimination, up to the 1960's, and some, were still dominant into the 70's. That would give white kids legacy advantages over african americans, since if somone was african american and competiting with a white person who's grandfather went to the school, the african american would be at a disadvantage, due to the legacy getting a preferred slot. However, this sounds possible in theory, in reality, this would not, and guaranteed does not happen.