The Price of Admission (Updated Edition)

1. Legacy admissions perpetuate privilege and undermine meritocracy

"Like a modern-day Othello, Zucconi loved Brown not wisely but too well, and his excessive zeal on its behalf was his downfall."

Legacy preference entrenches inequality. At elite universities, children of alumni receive a significant advantage in admissions, often equivalent to hundreds of SAT points. This practice overwhelmingly benefits wealthy, white applicants and perpetuates social stratification.

Statistics reveal the scope:

• Legacy applicants are 2-4 times more likely to be admitted than other candidates
• At Harvard, 40% of legacy applicants are admitted vs. 11% overall
• Legacies make up 10-25% of students at many elite schools

Justifications fall short: Universities claim legacy admissions foster tradition and boost donations. However, evidence suggests alumni giving is not significantly impacted by legacy policies. The practice ultimately compromises academic standards and diversity.

2. Wealthy applicants gain unfair advantages through development admits

"There was no way anybody in the administrative office of the school thought he would on the merits get into Harvard."

Money talks in admissions. Many elite universities maintain lists of "development cases" - applicants from wealthy families expected to donate. These students often receive admission despite subpar academic credentials.

The price of admission:

• $100,000+ donation can influence admission at top-25 universities
• $250,000+ may sway decisions at top-10 schools
• Some families pledge millions to secure spots for their children

Ethical concerns abound: This practice further tilts admissions toward the wealthy and well-connected. It compromises academic integrity and takes spots from more qualified applicants of modest means.

3. Athletic recruitment favors affluent students in niche sports

"Title IX has evolved into an admissions giveaway to rich women."

Recruited athletes get a boost. While many assume athletic recruitment primarily benefits minority and low-income students, the reality is more complex. Many elite colleges give admissions preferences to athletes in upper-class sports rarely played in public schools.

Examples of favored sports:

• Crew
• Squash
• Fencing
• Equestrian
• Sailing
• Water polo

Title IX's unintended consequences: Efforts to achieve gender equity in college sports have led to the expansion of women's teams in these niche sports, further advantaging affluent applicants.

4. Faculty children receive preferential treatment in admissions

"We bend like crazy for faculty children."

Professors' kids get a leg up. Many universities offer free or reduced tuition to faculty children, along with preferential treatment in admissions. This perk is often more generous than legacy admissions.

The scope of the advantage:

• At Notre Dame, 70% of faculty/staff children are admitted vs. 19% overall
• Faculty children's SAT scores are often 100+ points below average admits
• Some schools admit nearly all qualified faculty children

Ethical quandary: While intended as a job benefit, this practice further disadvantages applicants without connections and raises questions of fairness.

5. Asian Americans face discrimination in elite college admissions

"Asian Americans are the new Jews, inheriting the mantle of the most disenfranchised group in college admissions."

A new ceiling. Despite strong academic credentials, Asian American applicants face higher standards for admission at many elite universities. This echoes historical discrimination against Jewish applicants.

Evidence of bias:

• Asian Americans need SAT scores 140 points higher than whites for equal chances
• Harvard consistently rated Asian Americans lower on "personal qualities"
• Admission rates for Asian Americans lag behind whites with similar credentials

Stereotyping persists: Admissions officers often view Asian applicants as one-dimensional "academic grinds," overlooking their individual qualities and diverse backgrounds.

6. International students struggle with financial barriers to admission

"It was horrible... I was at the point of thinking that probably I would not go to college."

Global talent faces hurdles. Many talented international students are shut out of U.S. universities due to financial barriers. Most schools offer limited aid to non-U.S. citizens, even as they court wealthy international applicants.

Key challenges:

• Ineligibility for federal financial aid
• Limited institutional aid for international students
• Higher tuition rates at public universities

Lost opportunities: This approach deprives U.S. universities of global talent and perpetuates a system that favors wealthy international students over those with the greatest academic potential.

7. Political influence shapes admissions decisions at top universities

"Little Johnny got in."

Power and politics sway admissions. Politicians and influential figures often leverage their connections to secure spots for their children or constituents at elite universities.

Examples of influence:

• Senators calling admissions offices on behalf of applicants
• Universities admitting children of key lawmakers who control funding
• Special consideration for "VIP" applicants flagged by development offices

Quid pro quo concerns: This practice raises questions about the integrity of admissions and the potential for political favors in exchange for admissions consideration.

8. Efforts to increase socioeconomic diversity face resistance

"To expand access for low-income students without abandoning the middle class, colleges have little choice but to dismantle the preferences of privilege."

Rhetoric vs. reality. While many universities have announced initiatives to increase enrollment of low-income students, progress has been limited. Entrenched preferences for wealthy and connected applicants make significant change difficult.

Obstacles to diversity:

• Fear of alienating wealthy donors and alumni
• Reluctance to reduce legacy and athletic preferences
• Limited slots available without expanding class sizes

The zero-sum game: Adding more low-income students often means displacing middle-class applicants without connections, rather than reducing spots for privileged applicants.

9. Caltech stands out for its merit-based admissions approach

"Nobody gets into Caltech because their families are rich, famous, or well connected; they get in because of their talent and passion for science, period."

A true meritocracy. The California Institute of Technology (Caltech) is a rare example of an elite university that admits students purely on academic merit, without considering legacy status, athletic ability, or donor potential.

Caltech's approach:

• No legacy preference (only 1.5% of admits are alumni children)
• No athletic scholarships or recruitment
• Limited consideration of faculty children

Results speak volumes: Caltech consistently produces top-tier research and graduates, demonstrating that merit-based admissions can yield excellence without compromising standards.

10. Berea College and Cooper Union offer alternative admissions models

"Berea ought to reserve its places for children who couldn't be educated otherwise."

Different paths to access. Two smaller institutions, Berea College and Cooper Union, demonstrate alternative approaches to admissions that prioritize merit and economic diversity.

Key features:

• Berea College: Admits only low-income students, all receive full tuition scholarships
• Cooper Union: Highly selective, merit-based admissions with no legacy or donor preference

Proving it's possible: These schools show that it's feasible to maintain academic excellence and financial stability without catering to wealthy and connected applicants.

11. Reform is needed to create a more equitable admissions system

"If we believe in diversity of class, ethnicity, origin, and interest among our students, then we must also embrace economic diversity."

Time for change. To truly level the playing field in college admissions, significant reforms are necessary. These changes would increase opportunities for talented students from all backgrounds.

Potential reforms:

• Eliminate legacy preferences
• End consideration of donor potential in admissions
• Reduce emphasis on niche sports in athletic recruitment
• Increase transparency in admissions practices
• Expand need-based financial aid

A fairer future: Implementing these changes would help elite universities better fulfill their mission of identifying and nurturing the most promising students, regardless of background or connections.

Last updated: September 20, 2024