We have all heard by now that the Supreme Court has ruled against Harvard University and University of North Carolina by striking down race-conscious admissions. While the impact of this is debatable, we know that affected colleges will need to make some adjustments as to how they handle applications.
Affirmative Action has, however, recently only been used by a relatively small group of colleges. Like Harvard and UNC, they are typically more selective colleges. Less selective colleges don’t share the same struggles to enroll minorities. Additionally, nine states, California included, had already banned race-conscious admissions.
Even though a majority of schools are not directly affected by SCOTUS’s decision, colleges are focused and determined to enroll diverse student bodies. The learning environment is enriched by the presence of a variety of perspectives inherent in students from different backgrounds and cultures with a variety of experiences and interests. Even with their usually sincere dedication to enrolling more underrepresented students and increasing accessibility, colleges are being scrutinized for hanging on to a tradition many feel negates these efforts, the consideration of legacy in admissions.
The tradition of giving admission preference to children of alumni is primarily money driven. Studies show that legacy alumni are more likely to donate to their alma mater as they have a multigenerational loyalty which is often expressed in the form of large checks. Yield is yet another plus for the universities; legacies are more likely to attend, if admitted, taking the guesswork out of planning a freshman class.
In wake of the decision to ban Affirmative Action, colleges are coming under more pressure to prove that they are not giving preferential treatment to white applicants coming from advantaged backgrounds. Schools are being pressured to ban legacy admissions to prove to the world that they are truly striving to enroll racially diverse student bodies. The feeling is that if race cannot be considered, then neither should legacy.
Some of the schools that have claimed to have stopped the practice include MIT, Northeastern, Cal Tech, Johns Hopkins, Amherst, the University of California system, University of Texas and Texas A&M. Nevertheless, it’s been estimated that 42% of private colleges and 6% of public schools still use the practice to some degree.
Organized protests are springing up in the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling. One organization is asking alumni to withhold donations until the practice is banned. Another was formed by a civil rights group and later piggybacked by the NAACP asking colleges to “’even the playing field” by taking measures such as banning legacy admissions. At the end of the day, consideration of legacy in admissions is not a “good look” for universities. The question is, are they willing to give up the $?