�Legacy admission� at US universities

How did George W Bush, the 43rd US president and an average student at Phillips Academy in Andover (Massachusetts) with no particularly mentionable extracurricular talents, get into Yale University? His SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test) score was mediocre _ well below the median score of his Yale peers.

How did Vice-President Dan Quayle, famous for his gaffe at teaching a sixth grader how to spell “potato(e),” gain admission into Indiana University’s law school? His undergraduate grades at DePauw University in Illinois were so bad (he had failed an undergraduate comprehensive exam) that he would not have been able to satisfy the minimum requirements for admission at any law school. 
These two cases reveal flawed and controversial criteria used in the admission process at US colleges and universities. 
Applying for admission to American universities is like a roller coaster ride. It is a high-stake game viewed with dread by both the students and their parents, especially when the students are applying to elite and most competitive schools. 
Apart from SAT scores that should meet a basic threshold, the schools give weight to various characteristics such as artistic and/or athletic ability, evidence of leadership and public service, volunteerism, membership in honor societies and diversity of interests (choirs, orchestra, debating, acting, sports, science club, math club, chess club, etc.). 
The reality, however, is that if the applicant is the scion of powerful alumni or donors, merit takes a backseat. This practice of preferential treatment given to an applicant because of his/her blood-line is called ‘legacy admission’. It is a hot-button issue practiced by most of the universities, particularly the elite and private ones. 
The rationale behind legacy admissions is the bottom line. Private universities cannot afford to alienate the alumni whose donations amount to a huge chunk of the university’s revenues. For these universities, encroaching on alumni privileges is highly risky because if the powerful alumni’s or donor’s child is refused admission, there is a real possibility that the donations will either stop or would result in a significant reduction.
George Bush was the beneficiary of legacy admission. His academic accomplishments, according to the Dean of Students of Phillips Academy, were not good enough for admission into top tier schools. Looking over his record, the dean suggested that the young Bush consider applying to schools other than Yale. Nevertheless, Yale gave preference to him because his famous father and grandfather are both alumni of Yale. 
Dan Quayle, on the other hand, got into Indiana University through backdoor _ using the ‘equal opportunity’ program for poor and minority students and the influence wielded by his father James Quayle, owner of several newspapers. 
By the way, the youngster who had to add an “e” at the end of the word “potato” later said that it “showed that the rumors about the vice president are true – that he’s an idiot”. While addressing the United Negro College Fund, Dan Quayle, referred to as “vapid” by one of his professors at DePauw University, changed the slogan “a mind is a terrible thing to waste” into “what a waste it is to lose one’s mind.” So much for the brilliance of the alumnus of my alma mater.
In the fall of 1973, Bush with an official Yale diploma and a transcript that shows he was a C student also used equal opportunity to get into Harvard Business School. Interestingly, as the keynote speaker at Yale’s 2001 commencement ceremony, he quipped, “To the C students I say, you, too, can be president of the United States”.
Ironically, after becoming the president, Bush realized that legacy admission is “offensive in a nation whose constitution forbids the granting of titles of nobility.” He also wanted to end the equal opportunity program because he found that it “amounts to a quota system that unfairly rewards or penalizes prospective students based on their race.”
The practice of legacy admissions is a touchy issue for both the universities and the parents. There is now a broad consensus among the Americans that the practice is distasteful and discriminatory. It smacks of “entitlement” for the rich, the famous and the powerful. They believe that giving preference based on a student’s lineage is equivalent to “affirmative action for the wealthy.” 
One cannot deny that legacy admission lowers the weight of academic merit in exchange for a financial one. Critics believe that the practice confers an arbitrary advantage, based on ancestry and/or aristocracy. In fact, Thomas Jefferson believed that America should develop a “natural aristocracy” based on “virtue and talent,” not an “artificial aristocracy” based on hereditary status. Mainstream Americans, therefore, want the colleges and universities to end this anachronistic practice of legacy admission. 

The writer is Professor of Physics at Fordham University, New York.

Photo: Google Image

�Legacy admission� at US universities

How did George W Bush, the 43rd US president and an average student at Phillips Academy in Andover (Massachusetts) with no particularly mentionable extracurricular talents, get into Yale University? His SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test) score was mediocre _ well below the median score of his Yale peers. How did Vice-President Dan Quayle, famous for his gaffe at teaching a sixth grader how to spell potato(e), gain admission into Indiana Universitys law school? His undergraduate grades at DePauw University in Illinois were so bad (he had failed an undergraduate comprehensive exam) that he would not have been able to satisfy the minimum requirements for admission at any law school. These two cases reveal flawed and controversial criteria used in the admission process at US colleges and universities. Applying for admission to American universities is like a roller coaster ride. It is a high-stake game viewed with dread by both the students and their parents, especially when the students are applying to elite and most competitive schools. Apart from SAT scores that should meet a basic threshold, the schools give weight to various characteristics such as artistic and/or athletic ability, evidence of leadership and public service, volunteerism, membership in honor societies and diversity of interests (choirs, orchestra, debating, acting, sports, science club, math club, chess club, etc.). The reality, however, is that if the applicant is the scion of powerful alumni or donors, merit takes a backseat. This practice of preferential treatment given to an applicant because of his/her blood-line is called legacy admission. It is a hot-button issue practiced by most of the universities, particularly the elite and private ones. The rationale behind legacy admissions is the bottom line. Private universities cannot afford to alienate the alumni whose donations amount to a huge chunk of the universitys revenues. For these universities, encroaching on alumni privileges is highly risky because if the powerful alumnis or donors child is refused admission, there is a real possibility that the donations will either stop or would result in a significant reduction. George Bush was the beneficiary of legacy admission. His academic accomplishments, according to the Dean of Students of Phillips Academy, were not good enough for admission into top tier schools. Looking over his record, the dean suggested that the young Bush consider applying to schools other than Yale. Nevertheless, Yale gave preference to him because his famous father and grandfather are both alumni of Yale. Dan Quayle, on the other hand, got into Indiana University through backdoor _ using the equal opportunity program for poor and minority students and the influence wielded by his father James Quayle, owner of several newspapers. By the way, the youngster who had to add an e at the end of the word potato later said that it showed that the rumors about the vice president are true that hes an idiot. While addressing the United Negro College Fund, Dan Quayle, referred to as vapid by one of his professors at DePauw University, changed the slogan a mind is a terrible thing to waste into what a waste it is to lose ones mind. So much for the brilliance of the alumnus of my alma mater. In the fall of 1973, Bush with an official Yale diploma and a transcript that shows he was a C student also used equal opportunity to get into Harvard Business School. Interestingly, as the keynote speaker at Yales 2001 commencement ceremony, he quipped, To the C students I say, you, too, can be president of the United States. Ironically, after becoming the president, Bush realized that legacy admission is offensive in a nation whose constitution forbids the granting of titles of nobility. He also wanted to end the equal opportunity program because he found that it amounts to a quota system that unfairly rewards or penalizes prospective students based on their race. The practice of legacy admissions is a touchy issue for both the universities and the parents. There is now a broad consensus among the Americans that the practice is distasteful and discriminatory. It smacks of entitlement for the rich, the famous and the powerful. They believe that giving preference based on a students lineage is equivalent to affirmative action for the wealthy. One cannot deny that legacy admission lowers the weight of academic merit in exchange for a financial one. Critics believe that the practice confers an arbitrary advantage, based on ancestry and/or aristocracy. In fact, Thomas Jefferson believed that America should develop a natural aristocracy based on virtue and talent, not an artificial aristocracy based on hereditary status. Mainstream Americans, therefore, want the colleges and universities to end this anachronistic practice of legacy admission. The writer is Professor of Physics at Fordham University, New York. Photo: Google Image