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

61–70 of 103 posts

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#61

Post by michaelt »

mobilefriendly wrote: post #14
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…

"mediocre children of alumni" This is an unfair description of the advantage of legacy at an elite school. It's typically an edge, like playing a sport or belonging to an under-represented demographic.

If the impact of legacy is small - equivalent to gaining 0.01 points of GPA - then if they need legacy to be admitted, they're only 0.01 points above being rejected - one of the least qualified students at the school.

And if the impact is large - equivalent to 1 point of GPA - then there are legacy admissions a full GPA point worse than the least capable of their non-legacy peers, which is even worse.

I agree mediocre is inaccurate, because mediocre means half way to the top, and students who need legacy admissions are at the very bottom of the class.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#62

Post by sackofmugs »

dan-robertson wrote: post #46
hooloovoo_zoo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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 “ric…

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.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#63

Post by xnyan »

lgleason wrote: post #44

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

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?

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#64

Post by MiroF »

rayiner wrote: post #33
rb808 wrote: post #30

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 w…

Endowments and reputation fading is a good thing. One of the things that drives up cost of college is the competition among universities. If we are going to publicly subsidize higher education, through loans or otherwise, we need to reduce differentiation. Obviously there will be better or worse ones still, but going across the country to attend a “top 50 school” is not something we should be encouraging. (And that p…

Many of these top schools that have legacy programs don't have subsidized enrollment because they meet full need. Most public funding there goes to research, not subsidized loans.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#65

Post by MiroF »

wbl wrote: post #34
rb808 wrote: post #30

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 w…

Caltech doesn't have legacy admits. They have a top notch reputation while Harvard somewhat unfairly has a reputation of being easy.

Like many public schools, the difficulty of Harvard is largely contingent on the classes you choose to take and the program you're in.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#66

Post by MiroF »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31
rb808 wrote: post #30

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 w…

> 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. Addin…

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.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#67

Post by xnyan »

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…

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?

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#68

Post by xvector »

_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...

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.

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#69

Post by angry_octet »

xnyan wrote: post #63
lgleason wrote: post #44

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

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 d…

Is that really so hard? Random selection?

Re: Ending Legacy Admissions at Johns Hopkins

#70

Post by angry_octet »

MiroF wrote: post #66
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Addin…

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.

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.
Post reply on HN