READ: 2 MIN
Just this week two Democratic state representatives from Colorado introduced a bill to the Colorado General assembly which would prohibit state-funded colleges from considering legacy status in the college admissions decision-making process. The measure is supported by the University of Colorado at Boulder and Clark Brigger, the school’s Executive Director of Admissions.
We believe that part of the vitriol directed to legacy admissions is really because it is tied to other preferences that often go hand-in-hand with legacy admissions.
It’s unclear whether this bill will gain traction in Colorado, but it’s indicative of the anti-legacy preference rhetoric that we’ve seen increase since the Varsity Blues scandal made everyone question how elite colleges make their decisions. And while we know it’s kind of a hot-button, let us make at least a partially spirited defense of legacy admissions. Legacy admissions, at most colleges, is not a huge point of differentiation on its own (even Brigger states that for CU, “it’s not a primary consideration”). Very few students are getting into elite colleges solely because they are a legacy. Can legacy status tip the scales in your favor as a student among many students who otherwise look the same? Yes. But why shouldn’t it? College admissions officers are faced with so many similarly qualified students, enough to fill 3-4 classes over, why not give preference to someone whose life has included their parent’s alma mater - especially if they show their own preference for that college by applying in the early round? Nobody is saying that legacy admissions is necessarily positive (although for colleges that rely on alumni donations, they partially believe it is), but we don’t see it as a negative either.
We believe that part of the vitriol directed to legacy admissions is really because it is tied to other preferences that often go hand-in-hand with legacy admissions. Specifically, preference for existing and future big-money donors. Here, it is not necessarily the legacy status that provides the tip, but rather the repayment for a history of generous giving or the possibility of future giving. In our experience, simply having a legacy status (with no development status) only breaks a tie between similarly qualified applicants. But development opportunities, paired with legacy status carry much more weight and can propel a less-qualified applicant into accepted territory. But even this is relatively rare. For a below-average student to gain acceptance to an elite school because of development opportunities, the payoff needs to be large, and the academic discrepancy relatively minor.
We’ll have to wait to see whether other states take up the cause for legacy admissions prohibition, but for now, we continue to advise students to carefully consider whether a legacy preference would help them in the college admissions process.
