August 12, 2004
WHY SHOULD FIVE GENERATIONS OF IMBECILES BE ENOUGH?:
Why Colleges Should Favor the Kids of Alumni (Adam B. Kushner, August 11, 2004, LA Times)
What Bush may not realize is that legacy admissions have a positive effect as well.Most of the nation's elite colleges practice what's known as "need-blind" admission, which means that they consider the strength of applicants, not their ability to pay tuition. If you're admitted to Princeton, that school will help you find a way to finance your education, even if it means wads of financial aid. Naturally, less-privileged applicants benefit most from need-blind admissions. And many of those applicants are members of minority groups.
Problem is, keeping schools need-blind is expensive for the universities. An administrator at Columbia University, for example, told me that even students who paid their full tuitions — about $32,000 this year, without travel, living expenses, housing or books — were covering only 50% of the cost to educate them. Universities make up the difference out of grants (usually earmarked for research), investments and donations from alumni. And it is those critical donations from past graduates that are significantly boosted if those graduates believe it may help their own children gain admission.
What's more, according to administrators at several schools, these legacy donors often donate money specifically to finance aid for underprivileged students. So in effect, legacy admissions subsidize diversity.
I couldn't agree more (and the fact that I got my only A in college in a class that met in the Orrin Judd Room has nothing to do with it). Posted by Orrin Judd at August 12, 2004 4:56 PM
You only got one A in college?
Posted by: Brandon at August 12, 2004 7:45 PMbarely
Posted by: oj at August 12, 2004 8:19 PMI fully support legacy admissions. Every class needs a bottom half.
Posted by: Ethan at August 12, 2004 8:46 PMBottom 1%
Posted by: oj at August 12, 2004 11:16 PMMaybe the "problem" is with the huge amounts colleges waste. The "true cost" of an education need not be anywhere near the amount stated. College "costs" have increase at a rate far greater than inflation, as the quality of education has declined.
Posted by: Steve at August 13, 2004 3:10 AMIn direct proportion to federal student aid
Posted by: oj at August 13, 2004 7:51 AMIt'd be interesting to see whether, in fact, it is the legacy grads who give the most money.
I recall, some years ago, that Wang gave MIT $50M (I believe that was the figuree). I'm not sure, but I'd bet he was the first of his family at MIT.
The big bucks, I suspect, come from guys who had little to begin with and struck it rich with what they learned in college.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at August 16, 2004 2:30 PM