Can State colleges be sued on admissions related decisions?

[UCDAlum82]

<p>There are public universities that consider legacies? What states?</p>

[barrons]

<p>Wisconsin for one.</p>

[Marian]

<p>The University of Virginia considers out-of-state legacies with the in-state application pool rather than the out-of-staters. This provides them with a substantial advantage in the admissions process.</p>

[M_sMom]

<p>EP = Equal Protection</p>

[curmudgeon]

<p>

@OP

So far, I have not got any real answers.

???

@OP

This is the background.

That part, I think we all knew. ;)</p>

<p>jym, lighten up. I should have had a smiley somewhere. Like a “winkie” right after “please withdraw my post”. I just meant that I didn’t want to take part in another interminable rant in favor of mathematically computed admissions (and against holistic admissions). And I won’t. I wasn’t upset with anybody. At the time I think I was sleepy enough to be dozing between key-strokes. LOL.</p>

[curmudgeon]

<p>

@OP

When the system does not appear fair or the system hides behind the bureaucracy / opaque rules in terms of not explaining why candidate A was selected and B was not then perhaps the only way to force some transparency into the system is maybe to sue.

The only explanation available is usually not easy on the ears for many parents: “This year, we thought that other kid would be a better fit for what we were trying to accomplish in building this class and our legislature has afforded us the discretion to make that determination in keeping with our goals and policy statements.”</p>

[curmudgeon]

<p>This might be helpful in understanding the intent and practices of admissions offices.
<a href=“http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/2006/sep/29/schools-revisiting-admissions-/[/url]”>http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/2006/sep/29/schools-revisiting-admissions-/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[curmudgeon]

<p>From the article:

While UCLA has altered the way it reads applications, other schools are attempting to increase diversity by other means.</p>

<p>Harvard University, Princeton University and the University of Virginia announced their decision to stop their early action and early decision programs in early September, saying their goal is to make the admission process more equitable for applicants of disadvantaged backgrounds.</p>

<p>Princeton and University of Virginia, as well as the University of Delaware – which decided to end its early admissions program in June – all had binding early decision programs, meaning applicants accepted early were required to attend. Students who are accepted early also do not have the opportunity to compare financial-aid packages from other schools. As a result, less wealthy students tend to be not as willing to apply early decision.</p>

<p>Subsequently, students who do apply early tend to be “advantaged” students with less financial-aid concerns, according to statements from these three institutions.</p>

<p>Often, students from low-income families are not as prepared to apply early than more advantaged students, said Cass Cliatt, a Princeton University spokeswoman.</p>

<p>“Students from more disadvantaged backgrounds often come from schools without the college-preparation resources to position them to apply early,” Cliatt said.</p>

<p>By abolishing these policies, these schools hope to send a message that lower-income applicants will receive fairer consideration and that the schools are committed to equality in the admission process, according to the press releases from the schools.

While the article is primarily concerned with Early Decision programs the statements from the schools are pretty clear to me.</p>

[curmudgeon]

<p>Here’s a UVA article. I haven’t had time to read it fully but it may be enlightening (or it may not. LOL.) <a href=“http://www.cavalierdaily.com/CVArticle.asp?ID=21787&pid=1233[/url]”>http://www.cavalierdaily.com/CVArticle.asp?ID=21787&pid=1233&lt;/a&gt;

In response, Wood said the University does not use **any<a href=“emphasis%20added”>/b</a> formulas in determining admission. </p>

<p>“We look at every individual,” she said. “Diversity or ethnicity is only one of many factors which we look at. We look at the whole person and we are trying to create the whole class.”

</p>

[mythmom]

<p>I hope state schools aren’t considering yield.</p>

[purplexed]

<p>Thanks, jym626 and curmudgeon, for the background links.</p>

<p>Interesting that gender was involved in the UGA case.</p>

<p>So what would happen if Big State U in another state had a qualified applicant pool that was 70% female, but the school tried for a semblance of gender balance among admitted students? I’m guessing this happens lots these days.</p>

<p>It makes schools with a better gender balance look like safer bets and thus more attractive to female applications (perhaps in more ways than one).</p>

[jym626]

<p>My pleasure, purplexed.
Mudge- you’ve still got me baffled. Not sure what’s up, but no matter.</p>

[curmudgeon]

<p>OT: Aaarrgghhh. LOL. Nothing is up. I was never upset, jym. I promise. Cross my heart and hope to die. I was merely saying I was considering the case from a viewpoint of : could there ever be a justiciable claim based on these facts as given? (Which did not have race, age, gender, disability, origin, or religion facts.) So I looked at it from a quasi-contractual, fraud-like, detrimental reliance-y perspective ignoring immunity arguments and answered it as such with the best way I knew to try to make such a case. Then I said why it wouldn’t work. ;)</p>

<p>You perceived it as a reverse discrimination question like the Michigan and UGA links you provided or the UVA link I provided. We answered different questions and I was pointing that out . Not acting miffed. Sorry for that confusion. </p>

<p>That’s all that happened.</p>

[Princedog]

<p>You would probably lose based on the fact that there is no open admission based on specific requirements and therefore there is nothing inherently wrong in them choosing who they want to. They aren’t going to just randomly choose worse people for fun - that doesn’t make any sense in their goal to further the school. You also probably checked off some term of agreement saying you understood this. Disclaimers don’t hold up legally often, but in this case I don’t think that would happen. </p>

<p>I know UVA entertains calls and they will tell you the general reason for your rejection, i.e. if your courseload wasn’t hard enough. I don’t know if UNC does.</p>

[jack]

<p>People always seem to have the mistaken idea that public universities run their admissions “strictly by the numbers” (unlike private schools, apparently). Many don’t; many have “holistic” admissions policies, just like any other school. </p>

<p>A question the OP might want to ask himself-- would you ever consider suing a private university for the same admissions decision your son faced with his public university (same circumstances)-- or is the thought of suing the public school based solely on the fact that you’re a state taxpayer, financially supporting (in part) the school that rejected your son? Just something to consider. </p>

<p>Also, did you ask admissions outright why your son was rejected? They should be willing to talk with you, especially since he was accepted out-of-state to an equally outstanding public university. </p>

<p>purplexed: While I understand what you’re saying, I would suggest that the universities where the balance is significantly skewed more towards one gender than another–that those schools are the ones that are gender neutral in their admissions. The schools that maintain a 50/50 balance (or close to it) are, in fact, the ones who are NOT gender neutral when making those decisions. I actually find that much less of a “safer bet.”</p>

[jym626]

<p>ok, OK OKAY 'mudge. I just asked if something I said bothered you. Then you said to lighten up. Then I said I didn’t understand . It’s OKAY. It doesn’t need an epistle. Really. Glad to hear you arent, and never were upset. Really… REALLY!!! I am-- REALLY!!! Glad we are all— OK!!</p>

[curmudgeon]

<p>OT: LOL. Well, I am glad that’s settled.</p>

[jym626]

<p>:D me too!! :D</p>

[Chedva]

<p>One of the first things we learned in law school: The answer to the question of “Can I sue?” is always “Yes.” The answer to the question of “Can I win?” is something else entirely. And in the case of the OP, the answer to the latter question is most likely “No.” Unless the school has stated that it accepts students only by the numbers, it can consider other factors: family situation, socio-economic differences (and don’t assume you know anyone’s financial situation based on where they live or what school their kid goes to), etc. They may like one kid’s recommendations or essays better than another’s. The accepted kid may have interviewed and blown someone’s socks off, while the other didn’t. Or did interview but had a lackluster one. There is always some degree of discretion in admissions. And the fact that the OP is a taxpayer doesn’t matter either; the school could argue that the student had a whole host of public schools to apply to, and there is no guarantee of admission to a particular public school, especially not the flagship.</p>

<p>OP, it will cost you more to litigate this matter than you will be paying in both taxes and OOS differential in tuition.</p>

[jack]

<p>Chedva: Excellent points, all, especially the fact that no in-state applicant is promised acceptance to his/her flagship university, which seems to be key here. </p>

<p>Also, I have no idea what school this is, but I know that UNC-CH, for instance, really seems to look very, very carefully at those essays. I often wonder if in-state students don’t put the time into those like they do for other schools, for the very reason that they are in-state. That’s always a big mistake.</p>

<p>I’m curious, too, did the OP actually get to read those recommendation letters?</p>