I assume you were one of those “low income URMs” once upon a time? By insisting on admission privilege, in additon to all the other privileges you now enjoy, don’t you feel that you’re taking away opportunties for those “low income URMs” who need and deserve more?
6 Likes
I’m not sure I agree with comments on who will benefit from the removal of legacy preferences (though we are all just guessing). Saying that it will help poorer students (for example) assumes that Amherst would have preferred a different socioeconomic mix among its student body, but was forced to take more rich kids because of legacy preference. Wouldn’t it make more sense to assume that admissions officers knew the basic class they wanted to build beforehand, knew that legacy kids would provide a lot of the wealthier and white students in the class, and then built around that? Especially when so many legacy kids apply early? Admissions offices are smart and plan well in advance.
In that case, the main beneficiaries of removing legacy privilege would be other applicants with similar demographics to the legacy kids, but who weren’t legacies. That is still importantly leveling the playing field. But I don’t know that it will change that much in terms of class composition. Amherst was already one of the most diverse LACs out there. I guess we will find out over time.
6 Likes
Amherst was also already accepting fewer legacies than many of its peer schools (11% of its tiny entering classes); the net effect on access is very small.
1 Like
While the legacy advantage has eroded at some schools, it remains quite strong at a number of them. And I believe the ability to donate seven-figures can turn that thumb on the scale into a whole arm. Sometimes even just the potential to donate such amounts is enough.
A few years ago the DE Shaw guy helped his kids by donating $1 m apiece to HYPS for a few years before they applied. I’m sure he did his research, so I assume $1 m is the magic number.
I would network with very wealthy alums at your alma mater to discreetly inquire what the bar is. Seems like there is a decent chance the legacy advantage is there for you and is possibly quite substantial.
The legacy advantage may be eroding for most kids, but from what I have seen it hasn’t gone anywhere for the wealthiest parents.
2 Likes
Would your kids really want to go to a school where their parents had to buy their way in?
My child was like the poster upthread and wouldn’t apply to our alma mater (also Cornell). Said she’d never know if she got in on her merit or if it was because of her grandfather’s $. (And it’s not so easy to hide your legacy status if you are multigenerational and your family donates).
I also agree that a smart and wealthy applicant isn’t going to have trouble being accepted to most schools and will have plenty of opportunities without a legacy bump.
4 Likes
This seems more like an argument both for and against URM consideration, not legacy, since all of that same stuff would apply whether or not the students in question were legacies for colleges they want to attend.
Would any of the above differ if you graduated from MIT (no legacy preference) instead of Cornell? Or if your kid does not like Cornell for any reason and therefore will not make use of legacy preference there? Maybe your kid is interested in Amherst…
3 Likes
This often gets swept under the rug in legacy discussions - the student’s own preference. What was a good school for the parent isn’t always going to be the best choice for the child.
Donating to ones school should be altruistic. If you are only donating to give your kid a leg up, there are better ways to spend your money.
2 Likes
The takeaway from the Varsity Blues case is that “the number” has exploded in recent years and now it takes $10,000,000 to maybe, possibly start a conversation. That is what drove people who are rich but not rich enough to have $20,000,000 to spare to pursue the “side door.”
3 Likes
I’ve seen enough personally to know those numbers were wildly inflated, probably by Singer to argue for his services. Those parents could have gotten pretty far via the legal back door!
5 Likes
Legal yet shrouded in mist. You won’t find these numbers on the admissions page.
Of course they are.
I think it depends upon the school. I believe some do have a 20 million dollar threshold to count as a developmental admit
1 Like
There may also be different levels of development preference. A building donor may get the highest development preference for their kids, while a large but not huge donor may get their kid some lesser preference.
1 Like
What’s a “lesser preference”? My classmates and I have observed that the ONLY preference that means something (to alums who care, and who have kids who are applying) is an acceptance- the other stuff- a nicer turndown letter, access to a college counselor who skillfully redirects the kid to colleges with higher admissions rates-- not meaningful. So if you’re giving 50K per year (not me) and you get a “lesser preference” unless that means that your high stats but not extraordinary kid gets accepted- meh. Doesn’t move the needle.
None of my kids were interested in any of the U’s their parents attended (undergrad, grad, so four institutions in total) so that was not even on our radar.
2 Likes
I think we are talking about two related but separate things.
If you have a candidate who is in the same ballpark, credential-wise, as regular applicants, then I agree with you that smaller but still substantial donations can help, but will still fall far short of a guarantee.
To get a guarantee, where the application doesn’t even meaningfully travel through the admissions office and holes in the transcript or testing are forgiven, it seems like the asking price is eight digits.
From what I can tell generally Singer’s clients had children who weren’t strong enough applicants for them to attempt the first route, nor were the families rich enough to buy the guarantee.
To bring this somewhat back on topic, it will be interesting to see how long it takes development, children of faculty, and athlete preferences to draw the same level of scrutiny that legacies did.
1 Like
As a URM I don’t believe merit exists. In my experience, it is white people who really buy into merit.
4 Likes
I think merit exists. And the last time I checked, I was not remotely white.
My kids think merit exists as well. And they were thrilled to be admitted to elite schools despite being completely unhooked. I think your talented kids would be as well.
5 Likes
So do you believe your success is due to your Ivy degrees but not your own merit?
1 Like
. . . 
6 Likes
You don’t think your kids hard work counts as merit?