McGowan: Intuition on College Legacies
by Richard McGowan, Ph.D.
An outcry greeted the Supreme Court after its ruling that prohibited the use of
affirmative action in admissions. Opponents of that ruling quickly argued that legacy
admits to schools also do not deserve ‘preferential treatment.’ Legacy admits “are often
favored in the application process to encourage alumni ties and donations” and do not
deserve an edge.
However, the arguments against schools providing a preference for legacy
admits misrepresent the function of admissions departments. Some anecdotes might
help to clarify the situation of legacy admits.
Years ago, I put one of my students, Pat Neshek, in touch with my friend, Virgil
Trucks. Pat was a good pitcher on the Butler University baseball team. He had a
good shot at getting to “the Bigs.”
Virgil, on the other hand, is the only major league pitcher to toss two afternoon
no-hitters in one season; winner of game two in the 1945 World Series; winning pitcher
in an all-star game, with a save in another; and owner of a .557 won-lost record.
In other words, he was an accomplished advisor to a young pitcher.
I gave Virgil’s address to Pat and encouraged him to send a note. Later, I read in
the New York Times sports section that Virgil wrote a three-page note to Pat, suggesting
ways to handle being in the major leagues and how to deal with hitters.
Virgil’s experience in the major leagues helped enable Pat to find success and
become a two-time all-star.
When my oldest son was a senior in high school, he bombarded me with
questions about college. I was a good source of knowledge since I graduated from
Grade 24 with a Ph.D. and became a professor. However, my experience of
underperforming in my undergraduate years may have helped him more than my years
of teaching.
As President George W. Bush said in a commencement address, “To those of
you who are graduating this afternoon with high honors, awards and distinctions, I say,
‘Well done.’ And as I like to tell the C students: You too, can be president.” I would have
said, “You, too, can become a professor,” one who understands the challenges of
higher education.
I always told my students of my less than stellar undergrad years. My telling
them did two things. For one thing, it showed them the possibility of redemption, thus
teaching them hope. As well, when I gave advice on what to avoid, I had an authentic
voice when I recommended that they make their own mistakes and not duplicate mine.
Young people who tap into the knowledge and experience of older folks are likely
to perform better. The apprentice guilds of medieval times recognized that truth.
Today’s unions are built along the lines of that truth. Venice’s Original Murano Glass,
“handmade in Venice Italy, since 1291,” continues the practice of experienced artisans
teaching and helping less experienced workers.
It’s the same for people who hike. People who have traveled the path already
have insights that make for a better journey. Our friend Bill, a park ranger at
Yellowstone National Park, told us where to be careful and what to watch for on the
trails.
It’s the same with legacy admissions to college. The experience of an alum,
especially if it is a mother or father, helps a child succeed at the specific college the
child attends. When my son attended Marquette, I could advise him on which
professors would help him succeed, what enhancements to his education were
possible, what bars and neighborhoods to avoid, and so on—inasmuch as I am a
Marquette alum. Like a master plumber advising an apprentice or a park ranger making
recommendations about hiking, alums, including and especially parents, have
knowledge that enable young people to succeed.
If an admissions department wished to enroll potential students who are more
likely to succeed and graduate from the school, I would advise the department to favor
legacy applicants over non-legacies — and that goes for non-white legacies, too.
What About the Data on Legacies?
Of course, not everyone supports legacies getting an edge. Biden took a shot at
legacies getting an edge. He asked the Education Department to examine legacy
preferences and other practices that “expand privilege instead of opportunity.” His
comment was prompted by the Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action’s
impermissibility. In former President Biden’s view, legacy admits and affirmative action
admits are the same. How is an edge by race the same or different from an edge by
legacy status, if at all?
If my analysis is correct, legacies will outperform affirmative-action admits.
Massey and Mooney used “data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Freshmen
(NLSF), a sample of nearly 4,000 students in 28 elite American colleges and
universities, we develop models that test claims about the effects of affirmative action.”
They found that “In terms of grades, legacies appear to do best, earning a GPA
of 3.26 over the first two years of college, followed by athletes at 3.12, and minorities at
3.05.” Between the three ‘favored’ groups, affirmative action based on race produced
the poorest outcome, as determined by the GPA (grade point average). High grade
points are associated with higher graduation rates inasmuch as students who find
success tend to remain at the school to the completion of a degree.
That is exactly what Massey and Mooney discovered in their research. “In terms
of school leaving, athletes have the lowest departure rate (just 5 percent) through the
junior year, followed by legacies (7 percent), and minorities (11 percent).” If admission
counselors prefer enrolling students who are more likely to complete the degree
requirements and graduate, an edge would be given to legacies over minorities.
In fact, Massey and Mooney found that SAT scores suggest a mismatch between
a minority affirmative action admit and a legacy admit. They discovered that “the
greater the gap on campus between minority SAT scores and those at the institution
generally, the lower the grades earned by individual minority students at that institution.”
Or, individual minority students admitted under affirmative action policy perform worse
than individual legacies, by way of the GPA.
Further, as the NY Times reported, “New data shows that at elite private
colleges, the children of alumni, known as legacies, are in fact slightly more qualified
than typical applicants, as judged by admissions offices.” (July 27, 2023)
Given the data above, were I running an admissions department and I wanted to
admit students who could do the work and graduate, I’d be inclined to give an edge to a
legacy, President Biden’s comments notwithstanding. But an edge in admission is not
the same as a guarantee of admission. As Biden said, “It means understanding the
particular hardships that each individual student has faced in life.” The important word
is ‘individual,’ not group identity. Individuals of all races face hardships.
Other arguments exist to retain legacy admissions. Richard Reeves, writing for
the Brookings Institute, wrote that “Creating more connections across class lines –
either through greater economic integration of our institutions and neighborhoods or
more opportunities for cross-class social engagement – looks to be the most promising
route to improving rates of upward economic mobility in the U.S.” Legacies, especially
at elite schools, often have the upper socio-economic status (SES). Connection by
young people from high and low SES will lead to improving rates of “upward economic
mobility in the U.S.”
Reeves’s analysis was based on the work of R. Chetty et al. Their research
showed that “The share of high-SES friends among individuals with low SES — which we
term economic connectedness — is among the strongest predictors of upward income
mobility identified to date.” While neighborhoods produce connections among people
with similar SES, universities and colleges produce connections among people with
high and low SES.
To utilize President Biden’s words, those connections “expand privilege to and
opportunity” for people with low SES.
And schools that admit legacies will be able to provide those connections for
individuals, regardless of race.
Richard McGowan, Ph.D., an adjunct scholar of the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, has taught philosophy and ethics cores for more than 40 years, most recently at Butler University. Research citations for Dr. McGowan’s articles are available at www.inpolicy.org.
Quotations and Sources
“New data shows that at elite private colleges, the children of alumni, known as
legacies, are in fact slightly more qualified than typical applicants, as judged by
admissions offices.”
NY Times, July 27, 2023
“Legacy Admissions: An Insidious Form of Racial Discrimination” Ashley Kim
https://www.culawreview.org/journal/legacy-admissions-an-insidious-form-of-racial-
discrimination we do find some evidence of a negative effect of minority affirmative action as
hypothesized under the social subversion hypothesis, though not for the other two
groups [athletes and legacies]. As indicated by the significant negative coefficient in the
fourth panel of Table 1, the greater the gap on campus between minority SAT scores
and those at the institution generally, the lower the grades earned by individual minority
students at that institution. It appears that minority affirmative action as applied in the
institutions under study does serve to undermine the perceived legitimacy of minority
students’ presence on elite campuses.
In his assessment of minority affirmative action at U.S. law schools, Richard H. Sander
(2004) argued that black students were substantially less qualified than whites and that,
as a result, they clustered at the bottom of the class, dropped out at higher rates, and
failed the bar more often. Based on these data, he concluded that affirmative action
actually undermined the goal of producing black lawyers. The fact that blacks earn
lower test scores, achieve lower grades, and graduate at lower rates is well-
documented across all institutions, selective or not, but critics have argued that these
facts alone provide no basis for concluding that affirmative action is causing academic
problems (see Chambers et al. 2005).
In terms of grades, legacies appear to do best, earning a GPA of 3.26 over the first two
years of college, followed by athletes at 3.12, and minorities at 3.05. In terms of school
leaving, athletes have the lowest departure rate (just 5 percent) through the junior year,
followed by legacies (7 percent), and minorities (11 percent).
Whereas 70 percent of athletes and 77 percent of minorities evinced SAT scores below
the institutional average, the figure was only 48 percent for legacy students. Among
those members of targeted groups who appeared to benefit from affirmative action,
athletes and minorities received roughly the same SAT bonus of 108 points, followed by
legacies with 47 points.
At the institutional level, however, we do find some evidence of a negative effect of
minority affirmative action as hypothesized under the social subversion hypothesis,
though not for the other two groups. As indicated by the significant negative coefficient
in the fourth panel of Table 1, the greater the gap on campus between minority SAT
scores and those at the institution generally, the lower the grades earned by individual
minority students at that institution. It appears that minority affirmative action as applied
in the institutions under study does serve to undermine the perceived legitimacy of
minority students’ presence on elite campuses.
The Effects of America’s Three Affirmative Action Programs on Academic
Performance
Douglas S. Massey, Margarita Mooney
Social Problems, Volume 54, Issue 1, 1 February 2007, Pages 99–117, https://doi.org/
10.1525/sp.2007.54.1.99
Associated Press: “President Joe Biden suggested last week that universities should
rethink the practice, saying legacy admissions “expand privilege instead of opportunity.””
“It means understanding the particular hardships that each individual student has faced
in life, including racial discrimination that individuals have faced in their own lives.”
President Biden
https://www.google.com/search?
q=President+Biden+on+legacy+admission&rlz=1C1VDKB_enUS991US991&oq=Presid
ent+Biden+on+legacy+admission&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIICAEQABg
WGB4yDQgCEAAYhgMYgAQYigUyDQgDEAAYhgMYgAQYigUyDQgEEAAYhgMYgAQ
YigUyCggFEAAYogQYiQUyCggGEAAYgAQYogQyCggHEAAYogQYiQUyCggIEAAYogQ
YiQUyCggJEAAYgAQYogTSAQoxNTUyMWowajE1qAIIsAIB8QVQnH_vckUKjw&source
id=chrome&ie=UTF-8
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_preferences
https://universitypolicy.unc.edu/news/2024/05/17/unpacking-legacy-a-moral-inquiry-into-
college-admissions/
“Creating more connections across class lines – either through greater economic
integration of our institutions and neighborhoods or more opportunities for cross-class
social engagement – looks to be the most promising route to improving rates of upward
economic mobility in the U.S.”
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/7-key-takeaways-from-chettys-new-research-on-
friendship-and-economic-mobility/?ref=stanfordreview.org
Critics of legacy admissions ignore the key reality of human history: that the existing
elite is almost always deeply entrenched, and breaking into it requires more than just
individual talent – it requires access. And this is where legacy admissions play their most
crucial role: by enabling meritorious non-elites to mix with the existing elite, they open
up the real opportunity for upward mobility. Ironically, the president of Johns Hopkins
gave the most eloquent defense of legacy admissions precisely when justifying its
removal: “liberal-democratic societies make a compact with their citizens that anyone
with enough grit and talent can move beyond the confines of the class into which they
were born and live a better life than their parents.”
Elite colleges need legacy preference to accomplish their true purpose: joining new
merit to old elites. To attack this process – just to open up a few hundred spots for non-
elites at places like Stanford – isn’t just an injustice against those meritorious students. It
does a disservice to society as a whole. And, if history is any guide, it’s a secular folly.
https://stanfordreview.org/a-defense-of-legacy-admissions-the-surprising-engine-of-
meritocracy/
“The share of high-SES friends among individuals with low SES—which we term
economic connectedness—is among the strongest predictors of upward income mobility
identified to date10,11. Other social capital measures are not strongly associated with
economic mobility. If children with low-SES parents were to grow up in counties with
economic connectedness comparable to that of the average child with high-SES
parents, their incomes in adulthood would increase by 20% on average.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04996-4
Social capital I: measurement and associations with economic mobility
“We show that about half of the social disconnection across socioeconomic lines—
measured as the difference in the share of high-socioeconomic status (SES) friends
between people with low and high SES—is explained by differences in exposure to
people with high SES in groups such as schools and religious organizations. The other
half is explained by friending bias—the tendency for people with low SES to befriend
people with high SES at lower rates even conditional on exposure. Friending bias is
shaped by the structure of the groups in which people interact. For example, friending
bias is higher in larger and more diverse groups and lower in religious organizations
than in schools and workplaces.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04997-3
According to the 2023 Senior Survey, over three-quarters of legacy students finished
with a GPA of 3.7 or above, with less than 60 percent of non-legacies accomplishing the
same feat. Eight percent of legacy students graduated with a GPA of less than 3.5, with
this number rising to 18 percent among non-legacy students.Jul 19, 2023
How do Princeton’s legacy students stack up to their peers …
The Daily Princetonian
https://www.dailyprincetonian.com › article › 2023/07
Using data from a sample of seniors in the spring of 1998 at a set of private, highly
selective colleges and universities, I am able to estimate how well legacies performed
academically relative to their peers.1 I find that legacies perform nearly as well as
nonlegacies. In general, legacies performed at least as well in the classroom, if not
better, than nonlegacies; and conditional on individual, institutional, and familial
characteristics legacies are only 3.08 percentage points less likely than comparable
nonlegacies to get a B plus or better in overall grade point average, and only 1.86
percentage points less likely to get an A minus or better in their major field of study.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165176599002074?via%3Dihub
“President Joe Biden has instructed the Department of Education “to analyze what
practices help build more inclusive and diverse student bodies and what practices hold
that back — practices like legacy admissions and other systems that expand privilege
instead of opportunity.””
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/6/30/legacy-scrutiny-sffa-harvard/
Comments...