Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 103 posts

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#51

Post by geofft »

bradleyjg wrote: post #23
virtuous_signal wrote: post #4

>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…

> (ii) the university's endowments if alumni decrease their donations. The tax law says you aren't supposed to be able to deduct contributions to charitable organizations if you get something in return. Edit: Point being that this system is illegitimate in the first place, not that it doesn't happen.

Legacies are considered more favorably for admissions regardless of how much (or even whether) they donate, right? Or have I misunderstood the system?

That is, the only thing that donations get you is the vague hope that your university will never make the decision Johns Hopkins just made, and it's a vague prisoner's dilemma - as long as enough alumni donate, legacy admissions stay around for all alumni.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#52

Post by blululu »

hooloovoo_zoo wrote: post #18
virtuous_signal wrote: post #4

>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…

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.

Maybe this is an added benefit since those well connected kids will go somewhere else and increase the access to those networks.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#53

Post by MandieD »

eesmith wrote: post #10
notlukesky wrote: post #3

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

Enough people falsely believe they are Native American - the "Cherokee princess" myth; 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 th…

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.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#54

Post by virtuous_signal »

geofft wrote: post #51
bradleyjg wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (ii) the university's endowments if alumni decrease their donations. The tax law says you aren't supposed to be able to deduct contributions to charitable organizations if you get something in return. Edit: Point being that this system is illegitimate in the first place, not that it doesn't happen.

Legacies are considered more favorably for admissions regardless of how much (or even whether) they donate, right? Or have I misunderstood the system? That is, the only thing that donations get you is the vague hope that your university will never make the decision Johns Hopkins just made, and it's a vague prisoner's dilemma - as long as enough alumni donate, legacy admissions stay around for all alumni.

No -- I'm going off news that came out in light of the lawsuit against Harvard recently, but I have no reason to believe other elite universities handle it differently. These things are shrouded in secrecy for the precise reason that it is massively unpopular, but at least in this case we got an inside look because of discovery for the lawsuit.

Harvard creates a special "Dean's Interest List" (https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/10/18/day-three-harv...) which includes celebrities, "top donors", and certain athletes. The admissions rate restricted to this list was 42.2% in 6 recent years.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#55

Post by susijdjdjxa »

rm999 wrote: post #32

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 independ…

I’m having a hard time squaring reasons 1 and 2. If legacy admits struggle, are they really being coddled? Personally, I didn’t apply to Hopkins because it sounded like boot camp. So your reason 2 seems a lot more plausible.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#56

Post by guelo »

hooloovoo_zoo wrote: post #18
virtuous_signal wrote: post #4

>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…

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.

The good connections' access to outstanding smart college kids would also be threatened. Which means these connections will have to find other, hopefully less dynasty-reinforcing ways to recruit.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#57

Post by ryan93 »

motohagiography wrote: post #35

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 af…

Are you saying you support legacy admissions?

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#58

Post by zdragnar »

_jasper wrote: post #50
rm999 wrote: post #32

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 independ…

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...

Mismatch is a very real thing, at least at the extremes.

My friend was a teacher at a private technical school (for manufacturing, electrician work etc) that started having revenue problems. The attempted fix was to lower the bar of candidates they took in and pushed them through more and more remedial classes, including basic maths. Their graduation rate plummeted, enrollment kept shrinking, and they went under.

I also saw a less extreme version of this in college and university while I was a student. Kids were being accepted well below standard, then pushed through remedial (aka developmental) courses to get them up to par on reading / writing / maths. The graduation rate for these students was far lower than those who didn't take the courses.

Mind you, this isn't (or at least, just because of) affirmative action. The state in question had a massive gap between what high school students graduated knowing, and what colleges required, and so was a systemic issue that affected all races.

Since then, common core was supposedly attempted, and colleges were banned from testing students into remedial courses if they met certain conditions. The end result is fewer students spending money without earning credit (remedial courses didn't count towards a degree) but it has been too recent to know whether it has had a positive impact on graduation rates or if the students who would have been forced to take them but now aren't are floundering.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#59

Post by 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.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#60

Post by pm90 »

susijdjdjxa wrote: post #55
rm999 wrote: post #32

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 independ…

I’m having a hard time squaring reasons 1 and 2. If legacy admits struggle, are they really being coddled? Personally, I didn’t apply to Hopkins because it sounded like boot camp. So your reason 2 seems a lot more plausible.

The point is that the legacy admit will be coddled at the admission stage but will struggle once they’re in. Which, to be honest seems even worse: the kid was praised a year ago for getting into a good college but one year in they bomb out leading to a lot of stress for everyone.
Post reply on HN