Despite the massive amount of effort and resources dedicated to college admissions, the procedures used are still a mystery to most, and the Duke admissions process is no different. With a 9.4 percent acceptance rate for the Class of 2019, Duke’s high selectivity merits even closer scrutiny to see how it turns down those applicants who are promising but simply without space in the class. From test scores and GPA to less concrete and more controversial metrics like background and legacy status, the process indeed has complex considerations. However complex it may be, we must aim for a fair process that looks to benefits both individual students and the communities and University at large that they join. Today we question whether legacy relations should affect a prospective student’s value to admissions.
Like many other academic institutions, Duke considers legacy status as one preferred factor among many, but according to the Duke Alumni Association, “alumni affiliation is far from a guarantee of admission.” Although there are no published numbers on our legacy acceptance rates, legacy status is widely talked about as a booster for student applications alongside diversity and athletic ability.
Those who argue against legacy admissions argue for a system based on intellectual ability, demonstrated passion and any number of other characteristics unconnected to being born into a “Duke family.” There is nothing wrong with the children of alumni applying to their parent’s alma mater. What is wrong is if the bonus unduly compensates for another part of their application and they are not able to meet the same standards required of their peers. A 2008 study concluded that legacy admits, on measures of academic performance, are less prepared than other students whose parents went to college in the first year.
One must also consider what legacy admits add to the Duke community as a whole. Those that believe legacy students bring a coherent or uniquely beneficial background to Duke are deluding themselves. Affirmative action based on gender, race or geographic diversity has been used to increase diversity of thought in thriving academic communities. But the children of Duke graduates are very skewed to uniformity in their demographics, and this justification cannot stand in trying to show legacy students bring something to the table of diversity.
The most common argument used to defend legacy admissions policies is that legacy families make large donations. However, the way students are admitted should not be shaped by the end goal of growing the endowment, especially at a “need-blind” institution like Duke. Enriching the experience of students is a goal of any university, and the endowment is a necessary means to that end. Even still, a study we have cited in the past casts serious doubt on the financial justification for legacy preference policies when it concludes “there is no statistically significant evidence that legacy preferences impact total alumni giving.”
On its face, the purpose of legacy preference policies is dubious. If being a legacy has impacted a student’s desire to come to Duke, they should explain how the effect their relation had and how it forms their vision of Duke. Otherwise, legacy preference policies should be removed altogether. Upon further consideration of how current policies may benefit the admitted student, their peers and their university, it becomes clear that the few benefits—and even harms—of the legacy policy do not justify the cost of denying acceptance to qualified candidates who lose this tiebreaker but would impact the Duke community in positive ways.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.