Trego's Mountain Ear

The Supreme Court has ruled against – well, call it race-based admissions discriminating against students of Asian origin at Harvard and UNC.  It gets me thinking back to college admissions back when I was 17 – maybe 16.  I had all but completed my first term in college when I turned 18 and registered for the draft.

On one hand, I had the test scores -SAT and ACT – for admission to any university in the country.  On the other hand, my scores didn’t get scholarship offers from the Ivies.  On the third hand (and it’s an important hand, though it suggests physical deformity) travel cost a bunch back in 1967.  I had an academic full ride offered at a Florida university – but when I looked at the cost of traveling to Florida, and compared it to in-state tuition and a small scholarship, MSU (with a $250/year scholarship) and UM (offering $450) were far more affordable.  If I recall correctly, my checkbook for my first year of college showed $1,308 in expenses. 

It’s a good idea to know where you rate – MIT and Cal Tech were always a cut above my performance – and besides, 1967 was a time when college students traveled by bus, not planes.  What Flights Used to Cost in the ‘Golden Age’ of Air Travel provides this explanation:

“Part of the reason flying was so exclusive and relatively luxurious in the ’40s, ’50s, and ’60s was that it was very expensive. Until the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, airlines were considered a public utility and airfares were set by the federal government, which ensured airlines always made more than enough money.

Even after deregulation, a basic domestic round-trip airfare in 1979 averaged $615.82 in today’s money. That average fare dropped to $344.22 by 2016.”

I wasn’t concerned about getting into an Ivy League school – the cost of travel pretty well kept them unavailable for LCHS graduates in 1967.  Face it, Harvard is still a lot more accessible to a kid from Boston than a kid from Montana.  And, as a ranch kid, the Land Grant colleges were more for my type of people

“In reality, 43% of Harvard’s white students are either recruited athletes, legacy students, on the dean’s interest list (meaning their parents have donated to the school) or children of faculty and staff (students admitted based on these criteria are referred to as ‘ALDCs’, which stands for ‘athletes’, ‘legacies’, ‘dean’s interest list’ and ‘children’ of Harvard employees). The kicker? Roughly three-quarters of these applicants would have been rejected if it weren’t for having rich or Harvard-connected parents or being an athlete.”

Turns out, Harvard students aren’t that smart after all | Tayo Bero | The Guardian

“No one outside of the administration knew about the dean’s interest list or the similar director’s list — a group of select applications compiled by the director of admissions — until the SFFA lawsuit. But that hasn’t stopped the secret admissions practice from shaping Harvard’s student body for years. According to the Crimson, more than 10 percent of the Class of 2019 were on the two lists. Between 2010 and 2015, students placed on either list had a 42 percent chance of getting into Harvard, more than ten times the current acceptance rate.

SFFA’s filing referenced another little-known list called the “Z-List” — a “side door” to the elite university. Students on the list, who are often legacies, are guaranteed admittance but are asked to take a gap year before enrolling. 

Peter Arcidiacono, a Duke professor of economics, used the data Harvard released during the SFFA lawsuit to reveal the university’s staggering preference for legacy students. His research found that a typical white applicant with a 10 percent chance of admission would see his odds rocket five-fold if he were a legacy and seven-fold if he were on the dean’s interest list. The data also accounts for advantages children of faculty have.

And it’s not just white students who benefit. Across every racial demographic, LDCs (legacy, Dean’s interest list or children of faculty) all enjoy higher admission rates. In fact, admission rates for Asian and Hispanic LDCs are 34 and 37 percent respectively, compared to 33 percent for whites. African-American LDCs have the lowest admission rate at 27 percent. On average, LDC admits also have slightly weaker applications than the typical admit. Harvard’s claim to meritocracy and their 4 percent admission rate is a myth. Once your family has reached the privileged legacy status, your race doesn’t matter. It might help you or hinder you in comparison to your other legacy competition, but not significantly. America’s “normal” students are the ones being hurt.”

https://thespectator.com/topic/age-legacy-student-admission-harvard-donors

Somehow, it seems to me like there has always been an affirmative action element to admission – it just wasn’t legally mandated, and went under the initials ‘ALDC.’  I knew it – heck, Teddy Kennedy was a Harvard graduate – and several of my classmates proved that they could successfully drive a car, drunk, across a longer bridge than Teddy attempted at Chappaquiddick.   On that third hand, I do have a high regard for MIT and Cal Tech. 

Still, higher education has spots for everyone – from community colleges to MIT.   I won’t complain about my options – and I’m not ashamed of being a cow college graduate.  I can’t imagine Harvard being a comfortable place for an aggie – regardless of color.