Article “gifted”.
3 Likes
The bill defines preferential treatment as “making an admissions decision or awarding tangible education benefits where an applicant’s relationship with an alumni of, or donor to, the deciding institution serves as the determinative factor.”
To me, it sounds like the only kids affected are thse who are statistical outliers of the average applicant’s academic record.
If a kid has competitive grades, ECs, test scores (or TO), any school can argue that legacy was not the “determinative factor” in their admission.
3 Likes
I don’t think that was the intended reading of “determinative” where legacy/donor status was the deciding factor in the “yes” admit decision. I think they mean that if someone is given extra consideration by mere fact of legacy or donor status, it would run afoul of the legislation in the same way race cannot be used as a factor in of itself. We don’t have the full draft bill in the article which we would need to read in the whole but I doubt the legislation would be so narrowly tailored.
1 Like
Since donor status matters greatly to those in Congress, I can’t imagine this bill getting far.
1 Like
That term will open to determination unless Congress locks it down. It’s loose enough for schools to run a truck through it, as CFP has shown. In fact, I’m sure that’s intentional. It will allow the sponsors and supporters of the bill to talk out of both sides of their mouths.
1 Like
One of the sponsors (Kaine) has the initial version here:
1 Like
I wonder how many in Congress benefited from legacy admissions? I honestly have no clue, just wondering.
2 Likes