Connect with us

Education

Why Legacy Admissions Are at the Center of a Dispute in Higher Education

Published

on

Why Legacy Admissions Are at the Center of a Dispute in Higher Education

The U.S. Supreme Court ruling gutting race-conscious admissions last month placed a spotlight on legacy preferences in higher education, a practice that mostly helps white and wealthy students.

That focus intensified on Tuesday with the news that the Education Department had opened a civil rights investigation into Harvard University’s legacy admissions policy. That inquiry will examine allegations by three liberal groups that Harvard’s practice of showing preference for the relatives of alumni and donors discriminates against Black, Hispanic and Asian applicants in favor of white and wealthy students who are less qualified.

Here’s a short guide to understanding legacy admissions.

Many selective colleges give a boost during the admissions process to the children or grandchildren of alumni, making them more likely to gain admission.

The exact number of colleges that use legacy preferences is unknown, but a survey by Inside Higher Ed in 2018 found that 42 percent of private universities — including most of the nation’s elite institutions — and 6 percent of public colleges used the strategy.

Advertisement

Critics have said for years that the century-old practice perpetuates privilege, and a handful of colleges, including Amherst and Johns Hopkins, have recently stopped using the preferences.

Others, including the University of California system, the University of Georgia and Texas A&M University, ended the practice after they were pressured by lawsuits and ballot initiatives to stop using affirmative action, according to a Century Foundation analysis.

Colleges say that legacy preferences help create an intergenerational community on campuses and grease the wheels for donations, which can be used for financial aid. Some college leaders have said that legacy preferences play a small role in admissions decisions and that the students who are admitted under the system are highly qualified.

A Harvard committee expressed worry in 2018 that no longer considering whether an applicant’s parent had attended Harvard could lead to diminished donations from alumni — financial support that helps “the diversity and excellence of the College’s student body.”

Jeremiah Quinlan, the dean of undergraduate admissions at Yale, said at a legislative hearing last year that a state ban on legacy admissions would undermine academic freedom and that he was skeptical that such a move would have a “material effect” on the number of low-income students or those from underrepresented groups.

Advertisement

“The process for selecting students for admission, together with the processes for hiring faculty and deciding which courses to offer, defines a campus community and culture,” Mr. Quinlan said in written testimony.

The Supreme Court ruling put a renewed emphasis on fairness in college admissions. The high court voted 6 to 3 to reject affirmative action programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina, a decision expected to lower the number of Black students at selective college campuses.

Since the ruling, a handful of colleges have dropped legacy preferences, including the University of Minnesota and Wesleyan University. In an interview, Michael S. Roth, Wesleyan’s president, said legacy status had played a “negligible role” in admissions but that it was becoming a distraction and “a sign of unfairness to the outside world.”

The opposition to legacy preferences is bipartisan. President Biden; Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York; and Senator Tim Scott, Republican of South Carolina, have all spoken out against the practice.

In a concurring opinion in the ruling on race-conscious admissions, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch criticized preferences for the children of donors and alumni, saying they “undoubtedly benefit white and wealthy applicants the most.”

Advertisement

Even before the Supreme Court ruling, the practice was not popular with the public. A Pew Research Center survey last year found that 75 percent of those asked believed legacy status should not be a factor in college admissions.

Legacy preferences face an uncertain future on campuses.

After the Supreme Court decision, Mr. Biden said he would ask the Education Department to examine “practices like legacy admissions and other systems that expand privilege instead of opportunity.”

In the Harvard investigation, the Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights has a powerful enforcement authority that could eventually lead to a settlement with Harvard or set off a lengthy legal battle.

Nicole Rura, a spokeswoman for Harvard, said in a statement that the university was already reviewing the way it admitted students to ensure that it was in compliance with the law after the court’s decision and would continue to “strengthen our ability to attract and support a diverse intellectual community.”

Advertisement

Reporting was contributed by Anemona Hartocollis, Stephanie Saul and Michael D. Shear.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Education

Four Fraternity Members Charged After a Pledge Is Set on Fire

Published

on

Four Fraternity Members Charged After a Pledge Is Set on Fire

Four fraternity members at San Diego State University are facing felony charges after a pledge was set on fire during a skit at a party last year, leaving him hospitalized for weeks with third-degree burns, prosecutors said Monday.

The fire happened on Feb. 17, 2024, when the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity held a large party at its house, despite being on probation, court documents show. While under probation, the fraternity was required to “demonstrate exemplary compliance with university policies,” according to the college’s guidelines.

Instead, prosecutors said, the fraternity members planned a skit during which a pledge would be set on fire.

After drinking alcohol in the presence of the fraternity president, Caden Cooper, 22, the three younger men — Christopher Serrano, 20, and Lars Larsen, 19, both pledges, and Lucas Cowling, 20 — then performed the skit, prosecutors said.

Mr. Larsen was set on fire and wounded, prosecutors said, forcing him to spend weeks in the hospital for treatment of third-degree burns covering 16 percent of his body, mostly on his legs.

Advertisement

The charges against Mr. Cooper, Mr. Cowling and Mr. Serrano include recklessly causing a fire with great bodily injury; conspiracy to commit an act injurious to the public; and violating the social host ordinance. If convicted of all the charges, they would face a sentence of probation up to seven years, two months in prison.

Mr. Larsen himself was charged. The San Diego County District Attorney’s office said that he, as well as Mr. Cooper and Mr. Cowling, also tried to lie to investigators in the case, deleted evidence on social media, and told other fraternity members to destroy evidence and not speak to anyone about what happened at the party.

All four men have pleaded not guilty.

Lawyers representing Mr. Cooper and Mr. Cowling did not immediately respond to messages requesting comment on Tuesday. Contact information for lawyers for Mr. Serrano and Mr. Larsen was not immediately available.

The four students were released on Monday, but the court ordered them not to participate in any fraternity parties, not to participate in any recruitment events for the fraternity, and to obey all laws, including those related to alcohol consumption.

Advertisement

The university said Tuesday that it would begin its own administrative investigation into the conduct of the students and the fraternity, now that the police investigation was complete.

After it confirmed the details, the dean of students office immediately put the Phi Kappa Psi chapter on interim suspension, which remains in effect, college officials confirmed on Tuesday.

Additional action was taken, but the office said it could not reveal specifics because of student privacy laws.

“The university prioritizes the health and safety of our campus community,” college officials said in a statement, “and has high expectations for how all members of the university community, including students, behave in the interest of individual and community safety and well-being.”

At least half a dozen fraternities at San Diego State University have been put on probation in the last two years, officials said.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Education

Video: Several Killed in Wisconsin School Shooting, Including Juvenile Suspect

Published

on

Video: Several Killed in Wisconsin School Shooting, Including Juvenile Suspect

new video loaded: Several Killed in Wisconsin School Shooting, Including Juvenile Suspect

transcript

transcript

Several Killed in Wisconsin School Shooting, Including Juvenile Suspect

The police responded to a shooting at a private Christian school in Madison, Wis., on Monday.

Around 10:57 a.m., our officers were responding to a call of an active shooter at the Abundant Life Christian School here in Madison. When officers arrived, they found multiple victims suffering from gunshot wounds. Officers located a juvenile who they believe was responsible for this deceased in the building. I’m feeling a little dismayed now, so close to Christmas. Every child, every person in that building is a victim and will be a victim forever. These types of trauma don’t just go away.

Advertisement

Recent episodes in Guns & Gun Violence

Continue Reading

Education

Video: Biden Apologizes for U.S. Mistreatment of Native American Children

Published

on

Video: Biden Apologizes for U.S. Mistreatment of Native American Children

new video loaded: Biden Apologizes for U.S. Mistreatment of Native American Children

transcript

transcript

Biden Apologizes for U.S. Mistreatment of Native American Children

President Biden offered a formal apology on Friday on behalf of the U.S. government for the abuse of Native American children from the early 1800s to the late 1960s.

The Federal government has never, never formally apologized for what happened until today. I formally apologize. It’s long, long, long overdue. Quite frankly, there’s no excuse that this apology took 50 years to make. I know no apology can or will make up for what was lost during the darkness of the federal boarding school policy. But today, we’re finally moving forward into the light.

Advertisement

Recent episodes in Politics

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending