The College Scandal No One Talks About
“Keep it quiet, and no one gets hurt.”
There was a widely reported college admissions scandal in 2019. In a nutshell, high-profile people used bribery to help their children gain admission to prestigious universities. Some people were sent to prison. Others paid hefty fines.
The story is simply a drop in the bucket, however. There are much larger forces at play.
Today, I want to talk about legacy admissions and the power of money in the college admissions office.
Legacies: The larger scandal
Legacy admissions policies do not get the attention they deserve. Why is that? These policies should be less controversial than race-based affirmative action.
A college applicant would get a second look if their parents graduated from the same school. You increase your chances of getting an acceptance letter in the mail just for being born into the right family. Sometimes, a student’s extended family is also taken into consideration.
Legacies, often from wealthy families, gain admission to brand-name colleges by using a backdoor.
Colleges defend legacy admissions.
Harvard itself says that it relies on the “generous financial support” of its alumni.
“…the committee is concerned that eliminating any consideration of whether an applicant’s parent attended Harvard or Radcliffe would diminish this vital sense of engagement and support.”
It always comes back to money, doesn’t it? Why am I not surprised?
Therefore, can we safely argue that giving preference to legacy applicants is a form of indirect bribery?
For example, it’s easy to get your foot in the door when the school library has your last name engraved on the roof. And the only reason why your last name is so relevant is that someone in your family decided to donate millions of dollars to the school a few decades prior.
In addition, studies refute the colleges’ claims.
“There is no statistically significant evidence of a causal relationship between legacy preference policies and total alumni giving among top universities.”
Legacy admissions continue to exist outside of school.
We all know how important networking is. The entire game has been summarized using one platitude:
“It’s not what you know. It’s who you know.”
The sons and daughters of Fortune 500 CEOs live relatively easy lives. They get internships and job offers at their parents’ companies regardless of whether they are qualified. HR managers must deal with it. Otherwise, they risk losing their jobs.
This is quintessential nepotism.
What a world, am I right?
Conclusion
Although not explicit, bribery still exists within the college admissions process.
Alumni donate to schools not just out of generosity, but because of an ulterior motive. They want to make sure their children can attend the same schools.
If elite colleges truly cared about leveling the playing field, then they should end legacy admissions. They should have done this a long time ago, way before affirmative action took off.
What do you think?