
Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins - vo2maxer
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/why-we-ended-legacy-admissions-johns-hopkins/605131/
======
virtuous_signal
>The year I arrived, Hopkins had more legacy students in its freshman class
(12.5 percent) than students who were eligible for Pell Grants (9 percent).
Now those numbers are reversed—3.5 percent of students in this year’s freshman
class have a legacy connection to the university, and 19.1 percent are Pell-
eligible

This change happened in _five years_. Such a policy change would be extremely
popular. For proponents of race-based affirmative action, this would serve as
somewhat of a proxy due to the correlation between race and class. For
opponents, removing legacy preferences makes admissions more meritocratic.

The only groups with something to lose are (i) mediocre children of alumni,
and (ii) the university's endowments if alumni decrease their donations. I
don't believe (i) is a strong factor in a university's calculations, which
leaves (ii). I believe universities are happy to see the public fighting about
race-based affirmative action: indeed, dividing and pitting the low- and
middle-income groups against each other over their limited subset of the pie,
means they will not be working together to increase their overall share of the
pie.

(I think this issue could and should be considered _orthogonal_ to race-based
affirmative action. Race-based AA was never put on a stable enough legal
footing and will continue to bounce back and forth in the courts until it's
resolved, while this could be resolved quickly and uncontroversially.)

~~~
hooloovoo_zoo
Another group that stands to lose are those students who were admitted on
merit and no longer have access to “mediocre” students with good connections.

~~~
dan-robertson
This relies on a correlation between “legacy” and “good connections”. But if
it’s about good connections, why not just have a policy like: “if you’re
sufficiently good you get in and if you don’t have a ton of money we can
provide scholarships to make things more affordable or free; and if you’re ok
but rich, you can pay 2x the usual rate for admission up to some quota of
these admissions”

You could even replace “rich” with “rich and well-connected” though it may be
hard to determine the second part.

This seems like a more honest system and it doesn’t strike me as obviously
unfair or unreasonable to have. Someone paying double fees isn’t taking
someone else’s place so much as providing for someone else’s place.

~~~
sackofmugs
That's the current system. The rich people pay the MRSP (about 70K/year), and
the poor pays half as much on average due to various scholarships / grants /
aid.

Your way is just that in terms of outcome, except it's more antagonizing to
the rich.

~~~
AmericanChopper
They pay more than that. Legacy enrolment is one of the key ways that colleges
grow their endowments, which are (amongst other things) used for scholarships.

------
rm999
Really happy to hear this. As someone who went to Hopkins I would fully
encourage my children to apply (I had a great time and got an amazing
education). But the idea that I spent a few years of my life there 40 years
ago feels irrelevant to the admissions process. Any advantage given would be
counterproductive in several ways:

1\. It would coddle the child at a time in their life when it's essential to
learn independence. This can't be good for the values they are developing.

2\. It has no correlation to their success at the school. Getting admitted to
a tough school like Hopkins if they are not prepared would be incredibly
stressful and would probably be negatively correlated to their future success.
I saw a few students who got special admissions crash and burn their freshman
year and transfer out.

3\. The article goes into this a lot, but it's not good for equality and
encourages stratification. This isn't good for society. And it decreases
diversity which is probably bad for the university.

~~~
_jasper
With you on 1 and 3 and I'm curious how this decision polls with other
stakeholders (i.e. alumni with college-age children whom they want the best
for).

Your #2 is basically a restatement of mismatch theory[1] which has generated
tremendous controversy when applied to the affirmative action debate.

[1]: [https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/12/the-
nee...](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/12/the-needlessly-
polarized-mismatch-theory-debate/420321/)

~~~
xvector
Talking about affirmative action, what a horrible system. If you're unlucky
enough to be born Asian, your difficulty of getting into college has just been
doubled.

It baffles me that such racist policies are so prominent at some of the best
universities in the world. "Personality scores" too. What an inane cover-up
for rejecting people and races you don't like. While we're at it, lets get rid
of legacy admissions too.

In college admissions, a student's name, race, and background should be
obfuscated. Test scores and rhetorical skills should be the sole measure of a
student. _Maybe_ a boolean telling us if a student was below the poverty line
or not. It's not perfect, but this would be far better than what we have
today.

At least California law prohibits affirmative action, and I was able to go to
a fantastic university without having to worry about institutional racism.

~~~
_jasper
So I think it's possible for colleges to make progress on the legacy
admissions front without even touching affirmative action. I would just hope
the courts make the right decisions in the future. I doubt affirmative action
is a solution that really makes anyone "happy", including the people it is
intended to benefit.

------
JumpCrisscross
Legacy admissions for nonprofit institutions are a scam on the public.

If a university wants to keep legacy admissions, fine, that’s their right. But
no more tax exemption for their revenues, property or endowments. (And no
more, I’d argue, publicly-subsidised loans for its coffers.)

Same for “institutional advancement,” _i.e._ granting the progeny of the rich
seats in exchange for patronage.

------
peterwwillis
There's huge waiting lists for international students to get into Hopkins.
What this will probably result in is that it makes headroom for more
international students to get in (because if you're sourcing "qualified and
promising students from all backgrounds" there's probably gonna be more of
those across the whole globe rather than locally).

Also, the Pell Grant averages just over $4K, going up to about $6K. The
tuition for JHU is about $52K, but with room and board, books, and other misc
living expenses this goes up to $69K.

~~~
jl2718
Good point. Somebody did the math and found out that internationals are worth
more than legacies.

~~~
jeegsy
An important point. Internationals typically have to pay in full at a higher
rate.

------
lgleason
Admissions should be 100% merit based. No special favors for anybody.

~~~
xnyan
That sounds very tidy, but reality is not that simple. Here is a very real
situation many schools face: you have 100 slots in your school. You
objectively determine that X skills are needed to do well in your school. 1000
applicants demonstrate meeting X level of skills. Some of the 1000 clearly
show they have skills well above X, but most of the 1000 are roughly
equivalent.

Which 900 get turned away and how do you decide which?

~~~
angry_octet
Is that really so hard? Random selection?

~~~
patmorgan23
Why is that better than any other method? Why not have legacy factor in after
they've met the admissions standards?

~~~
stoops
Why not do it based on their favorite color?

~~~
ravar
If that somehow increases revenue for the institution, why not?

~~~
wy35
Selecting applicants for the highest revenue is literally discriminating
against the poor.

------
notlukesky
So long as admissions are not solely test based (like in many countries) then
it will be gamed. The 2019 college admissions bribery scandal is the tip of
the iceberg.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_college_admissions_briber...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_college_admissions_bribery_scandal)

There are also other ways of getting easier admission to selective schools in
the US by saying you are for example Native American.

~~~
eesmith
Enough people falsely believe they are Native American - the "Cherokee
princess" myth; [http://www.native-
languages.org/princess.htm](http://www.native-languages.org/princess.htm) \-
that I can't believe that simply saying one is Native American is enough to
get easier admission.

Here's how I envision it. I write in my essay that "I'm proud that I'm part
Native American. My grandmother told me that her great-grandmother was
Cherokee. My ancestors were forced off their land, and I think that's a
tragedy.", etc.

Admissions officer reads it, rolls eyes, then plops it into the rejection
pile.

Do you have something more substantial in mind than just "saying" to get
easier admission?

~~~
MandieD
I grew up being told by various family members about a great-great grandfather
whose mother was Comanche. “You’re so very lucky to have taken after your
grandmother, with those high cheekbones! They’re from her Comanche great-
grandmother.”

The whole “Comanche/Cherokee princess” thing is not an uncommon family myth in
Texas and Oklahoma, and I had a high school classmate whose mother thoroughly
believed she was 1/8 Native and therefore eligible for all sorts of
scholarships.

I now realize that it is probably unlikely that said great-great-great
grandmother of mine was Comanche.

------
elfexec
I remember Harvard defending their race-based admissions policy because of
privileges some groups had and disadvantages other groups had. But they never
addressed their legacy admissions. After all, who is more
advantaged/privileged than the children of harvard grads? If Harvard was truly
interested in leveling the playing field, they would also eliminate legacy
admissions. If Harvard and other elite schools were consistent, I'd be less
annoyed by their admissions policy.

Hopefully this move by Johns Hopkins gets the ball rolling and other schools
will soon follow suit.

~~~
dehrmann
Talking about disadvantages and privilege is great and all, but alumni donate
money. Best to let in a few legacies and keep the cash flowing.

------
Bostonian
The principle that you should not be penalized by the family you are born into
would also prohibit racial preferences, but I don't see that addressed in the
article.

~~~
iecheruo
When deeply accustomed to privilege, attempts to restore merit often present
as penalty.

Removing legacy preference in favor of merit is not penalization.

The article does not advocate admission based on racial preference. It does
point out that a level playing field allows more applications of merit from
races that would traditionally be displaced.

------
rb808
I think legacy admissions are a good thing for the organization and the other
students who go there. People in the US have a close attachment to their
university, they would like their children to go there and they donate a lot
of money.

Take away legacy admissions and you just get people who want to go there for
the reputation and endowment. The endowment quickly fades because people are
less likely to donate, and when your reputation slips suddenly your students
dry up and there is no loyal customer base of families who are committed.

Legacy admissions are a great way to generate loyal customer base. Top schools
would be crazy to give this up.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _People in the US have a close attachment to their university, they would
> like their children to go there and they donate a lot of money_

Why link first two to the last?

Pride in one’s _alma mater_ , and encouragement towards one’s children to
attend, can remain without a codified edge in admissions.

There are numerous advantages a parent familiar with the process and people at
an institution can give their kids. Adding to that edge is superfluous.

~~~
MiroF
That's true, and I absolutely agree with this decision, however studies have
found a clear empirical link between legacy admissions rate and fundraising
rates.

~~~
angry_octet
I wonder if this continues to hold in the presence of fees calculated on
ability to pay? That is, some schools will charge full tuition to people with
rich parents and discounted tuition to those with less well off parents.

~~~
MiroF
Yes, as the studies have confirmed this to be the case with Harvard alone -
which has the model described. Indeed, most of the elite schools with
controversial legacy admissions have practices like that and the effect is
still noticeable.

------
motohagiography
Commenting to register disappointment at this outcome, but no point in arguing
a forgone conclusion. The opportunities this creates will be in how to satiate
the need for validation for this new class of burghers. Imposter syndrome is a
trillion dollar opportunity.

Surely there is some new thing we can invent for them to take pictures of
themselves with?

Edit: the author is using the Atlantic to take a victory lap after having
infiltrated, destroyed and dismantled something. Their cant deserves scorn.

~~~
xnyan
I am trying really hard to parse what you are saying. Please help.

>Commenting to register disappointment at this outcome, but no point in
arguing a forgone conclusion.

Understood. It reads like you really want people to know you own a thesaurus,
but register your forgones to your heart's content.

>The opportunities this creates will be in how

Huh?

>to satiate the need for validatiom this new class of burghers.

A new class of mid-level paramedieval bureaucracy will be created from the
fact that rich kids who don't meet school admissions requirements don't get
rich people admissions slots?

>Imposter syndrome is a trillion dollar opportunity.

Elaborate?

>Surely there is some new thing we can invent for them to take pictures of
themselves with?

Why are you sure?

>The author is using the Atlantic to take a victory lap after having
infiltrated, destroyed and dsmantled something.

How can you dismantle something that has been destroyed?

>Their cant deserves scorn.

Hypocritical and sanctimonious speech is fine with me. What do you have
against cants?

~~~
motohagiography
Indeed, your struggle is apparent.

~~~
dang
Personal attacks will get you banned here. Please read
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
and stick to the rules when posting.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

