College admissions is one of the nerve wracking events in many young people’s lives. Part of why college admissions is so scary is because how much is unknown in the process. The idea of holistic admissions, although good in theory, often leads to it being impossible to know what true metric determines who receives an offer of admission and who does not. Last summer, the Supreme Court handed down a decision banning affirmative action regarding admissions. In other words, colleges and universities are no longer allowed to consider race when considering admissions. This put considerable pressure on both Congress and the Supreme Court to either go back on the decision, or also go after legacy admissions.
Legacy admissions, where colleges take into account whether an applicant’s family has a connection to the university, either as an alumni or as a donor, has proven to be a significant factor in whether or not an applicant is offered admissions to universities, top universities in particular. Now, in response to this pressure, there is currently a bipartisan bill on the floor of Congress that may put an end to legacy admissions.
The effort by Senators Tim Kaine (D-Va) and Todd Young (R-Ind), has resulted in the “MERIT Act,” or Merit-Based Educational Reforms and Institutional Transparency Act, which seeks to end all non-meritocratic considerations in college admissions. Young describes the bill, saying “our bill will end legacy preferences in the admissions process and promote upward mobility for Americans of all backgrounds,” also commenting that “America is a land of opportunity, not a land of aristocracy.”
The bill amends the Higher Education Act to include that colleges and universities that use non-meritocratic criteria will no longer be accredited. The language of the bill states that no “preferential treatment” is allowed, which can include more than just legacy admissions. For example, it could be argued that it codifies into law that affirmative action is also banned. This means that it would take more than a new Supreme Court decision to bring back affirmative action. The bill does, however, include a caveat that allows religious schools to use an applicant’s faith as a metric.
Many universities have already moved away from using legacy admissions, and more follow their lead every year. The schools that would be particularly hurt by this bill are schools that receive a lot of donations, such as the Ivy League. It is feared—and for good reason—that if schools cannot give preferential admissions to those students whose parents have given substantial funds to that university, alumni may donate less money.
Another concern with the bill is that although banning legacy admissions is a significant landmark towards a more fair and transparent system, it affects a tiny percent of applicants. According to a study where admissions data was collected by Duke University Professor Peter Arcidiacono, only 2% of all admits were admitted with the help of legacy. The energy applied to the creation of it, it has been argued, could be better spent on other things.
Overall, this bill’s hope is to make admissions more fair and easier to understand for average Americans. It also has significant odds of passing due to bipartisan public support and many prominent members of Congress on both sides of the aisle speaking in favor of it. This, together with the recent affirmative action decision, will make college admissions in the coming years far different than when it was when any current Stevens student was applying for school.
