The Other
Affirmative Action

Many Colleges Favor Children
Of Alumni. Is That Any Different
From Racial Preferences?

By Daniel Golden
Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal

With two cases challenging affirmative action before it, the Supreme Court will soon decide the fate of race-based preferences in college admissions. But the cases also may affect the future of a longer-standing kind of admissions preference: the one favoring children of alumni.

The legacy preference, as it is known, is nearly as widespread as those based on race and ethnicity. Colleges like it because it keeps alumni happy and more inclined to donate. But overwhelmingly, the legacy preference benefits whites. Now, calls to abandon the legacy preference are on the rise from minority groups and others who see it as perpetuating class distinction and white advantage.

Because it isn't racially discriminatory on its face, the legacy preference may be less vulnerable to legal challenge than affirmative action is. Politically, though, the fates of the two preferences appear intertwined. "If the Sup-reme Court were to end affirmative action, colleges would be under tremendous pressure to reconsider whether they give preference to alumni children, of whom the vast majority are white and privileged," says Gary Orfield, a Harvard education professor.

But curbing them could have serious financial implications for colleges. Alumni provide 28% of the private donations to higher education-$6.83 billion in the 2000-2001 school year. When their children are rejected for admission, alumni sometimes react as Princeton graduate Richard Hokin did. He stopped giving to his alma mater after it turned away two daughters several years ago. "I took it as a personal affront," says Mr. Hokin.

Schools are candid in saying that long-term financial support is the chief reason for the legacy preference, although some, such as Harvard, also cite the importance of encouraging graduates to get involved with interviewing applicants and other institutional tasks.

Some of these "legacies," as the admitted students are often called, tell of an uneasiness similar to that felt by some minorities at elite schools. "I'm a little uncomfortable with the idea that I'm a legacy, and that people think I got in because I'm a legacy," says Sara Sedgwick, a Harvard freshman whose Crimson roots go back five generations. She had straight A's in high school and captained soccer and basketball teams, but her SAT scores-in the high 1300s-were below those of about three-fourths of her Harvard classmates.

No Bones About It

The legacy preference was formalized early last century, in some cases partly to limit enrollment of Jews. Today, the practice often has that effect on other groups. At the University of Virginia, 91% of legacy applicants accepted on an early-decision basis for next fall are white, compared with 73% among those with no alumni parents.

Virginia Admissions Dean John Blackburn makes no bones about the reason for the preference. "In light of very deep budget cuts from the state, our private support particularly from alumni is crucial to maintaining the quality of the institution," he says. "The legacy preference helps ensure that support by recognizing their financial contributions and their service on university committees and task forces."

The University of Michigan has a 150-point "Selection Index" for undergraduates, with 100 points usually enough to get in. It awards a four-point bonus to children and stepchildren of alumni. Michigan also gives an automatic 20-point bonus to blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans. This practice is the target of one of the Supreme Court cases-filed by two white students who were denied admission in 1997.

'A Happier Place'

Defenders of that racial preference say it compensates for the legacy edge as well as for certain other preferences Michigan awards, such as six extra points given to applicants from under-represented regions of the state. One such region is the Upper Peninsula, which happens to be overwhelmingly white.

"What does legacy preference do to advance fairness and merit?" asks Theodore M. Shaw, a lawyer for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., who represents 17 minority high-school students granted defendant status in the suit against the university. "Why is it more defensible than an attempt to include people from minority groups that have been excluded in the past and are still under-represented?"

The reply from the white students' lawyer, Michael Rosman: "Because some small percentage of white students are getting legacy preference, that doesn't mean we should disadvantage all whites" with racial preferences.

At Harvard today, Admissions Dean William Fitzsimmons says he personally reads all applications from children of alumni, which numbered 727 last year. He says the average SAT score of legacies admitted is just two points below the school's overall average, and that legacy status is basically used as a tie-breaker between comparable candidates.

Harvard's legacy students are becoming more diverse, reflecting the surge in minority enrollment in the 1970s. Still, only 7.6% of legacy applicants accepted last year were black, Hispanic or native American, compared with 17.8% of all successful applicants.

Asked how he defends a policy so little rooted in merit, Mr. Fitzsimmons says that alumni "volunteer an immense amount of their free time in recruiting students, raising money for their financial aid, taking part in Harvard Club activities at the local level, and in general promoting the college." He adds, "They often bring a special kind of loyalty and enthusiasm for life at the college that makes a real difference in the college climate ... and makes Harvard a happier place." he says "When their sons and daughters apply, we review their applications with great care and will give a 'tip' in the admissions process to them."