First gen students at elite universities (including Emory) favor elimination of legacy preferences

[fragbot]

If legacy applicants as a group are as well credentialed or better credentialed (credentialed as defined by the university) then why do universities deploy a legacy preference (defined differently at different schools) at all?

Because they believe it’s in their best interest. You may agree or disagree but that’s why they do.

You seem awfully exercised about this. Do you fundamentally believe that legacy preferences give a tip to people who otherwise aren’t qualified for admissions? By and large, I don’t. While I would agree for developmental admits, I also understand that developmental admits by their very nature are anomalous enough that they don’t really matter.

As my anecdotes demonstrate, not all alum children are treated equally in the eyes of the admissions office. Legacy admissions as it’s actually practiced - a huge advantage to the unqualified kids of large donors/celebrities/alums who maneuver to obtain high profile alumni posts - and little to no advantage to other alums is unfair - even to the vast bulk of actual alums who don’t have the wealth or connections to play this game. (And here I limit my observation to the Ivies about which there’s much public data.)

You are conflating two things–legacy preferences which are usually a minor tip (at my alma mater, they are clear that it only helps if you are willing to apply ED) and developmental admits who often appear like a quid pro quo (BTW: I’m okay with this as only a moronic college president would bite the hand of a large donor).