<p>What is not surprising to me is how this discussion is founded on the false notion that there is some definable merit -based set of qualifications that should decide admissions to elite schools, and that deviations from that hypothetical norm are flawed, whether those are legacies, URMs, athletes, savants, whatever.</p>
<p>It is the false notion that there is definable merit that is flawed.</p>
<p>Two issues:</p>
<p>1) I have to say that the criticizing of admissions favoring factors OTHER than race is quite healthy. I’ve had considerable specific discomfort reading the railing against affirmative action on this site, as if AA were the ONLY or the MAIN admissions boosting consideration and that all others were accepted only under merit. Legacy admissions appear to be more common than AA admits; add in other factors and it’s clear that at the elite colleges there are many people being admitted based on considerations that are measurably merit-based.</p>
<p>2) The comments that the legacy admit programs are acceptable because - by statistics - many of them match entrance profiles is spurious for one simple reason: MOST applicants meet those profiles. Brown rejects 80% of applicants who score 800 on the SAT math; Princeton accepts less than 20% of students with a 4.0. The question that admissions favoring policies raise is this: since MOST applicants are qualified for admittance and are capable of doing the work, is there a compelling reason to favor the children of alums to such a great extent over other similarly qualified candidates?</p>
<p>Uh, plainsman . . . go back and read what I wrote. You and I are making the same point. I didn’t say there are going to be lots of URM legacies. I am saying, just how many spaces are going to be left for the unhooked if a significant fraction of the places in the entering class are basically reserved for affirmative action candidates, and another 10-25% of the places are reserved for legacies, the “children of privilege” as I call them or the “MORE fortunate” as you call them. Plus an undetermined number of places for recruited athletes. That means an admit rate of 7% like Harvard’s or Yale’s could translate into a “real” admit rate of, what, 4 percent or so for the far larger numbers of unhooked applicants—that is, white and Asian kids who are neither URMs (obviously) nor legacies nor recruited athletes?</p>
<p>I believe that most people realize that there is no defined set of qualifications that ensures entrance to some of the “top” schools. </p>
<p>Regarding AA, if schools do not consider socio-economic background when making these decisions, you wind up with many kids who are not disadvantaged in any way (my son, for instance). Not only are they not disadvantaged, but they don’t really even add any different perspective to the mix of admits. Just another upper middle class suburban kid…maybe with different skin color, but maybe not. </p>
<p>For these kids, its not much different from being a legacy. Luck of birth.</p>
<p>Again, not to totally rant on AA…for some kids these policies are totally appropriate!!!</p>
<p>^^^ My S isn’t disadvantaged either, but he certainly adds a different perspective. I hadn’t thought of that. Coming from the Mexican upper-middle class, AA seems gratuitous for us. Maybe “adding a different perspective to the mix” is a small justification.</p>
<p>@bclintonk, you bring up a very good point about the acceptance rate for the average Ivy League applicant. Average in the sense of 2150+ and 3.9+ UW.</p>
<p>Let’s look at Dartmouth ED for the Class of 2013:
</p>
<p>Out of the 401 who were accepted how many are legacy?
Out of the 401 who were accepted how many are recruited athletes?
Out of the 401 who were accepted how many are a child of a famous actor/actress or a child of a billionaire?
Out of the 401 who were accepted how many are URMs?</p>
<p>I’m curious to see out of the 401 people who are accepted ED how many got in based off of their own merits?</p>
<p>^^Good question. If by “own merits” you mean super high scores, GPA, ECs and so forth, I’d bet very few. And since ED admits represent about 40% of the entire freshman class that’s a very high number.</p>