Immigration may have played a larger role. Immigration rules and patterns favored the immigration of people like graduate students and skilled workers. Since the prior Asian American population was very small, the more recent immigrants from Asia, selected for higher educational attainment, defined the Asian American population as a whole in the minds of many, and were more likely to work in higher skill higher pay jobs. Immigrants from Africa show similar patterns, but are few in number compared to the existing African American population, so they do not affect popular perception or overall stats on educational attainment, pay levels, etc. by very much.
Just discovered that UMichigan/UNC-Chapel Hill/UVA all consider LEGACY status unlike all UC campusesâŠ
I also wonder what is a typical range of % of annual admits through legacy for these public elite institutionsâŠ
And what is the major race/ethnicity group of legacy admits?
Just curious!
To test or not to test has become a rather complex issue for admission!
I also wonder how corporate America these days conduct employee performance appraisal? Thru pure race-blind/merit-based or holistic criteria, sort of speak?
IMHO, itâs difficult to say one is really âbetterâ than the other⊠><
Regarding UMichâs usage of legacy status, they say itâs not used in the admissions decision any longer.
I read that as some double speak happening. If the enrollment planners (typically admissions staffers and/or those from external companies who devise/run the admissions algorithm) are using legacy to come up with a projected yield % for each applicant (a common analytical methodology among colleges), then UM is using legacy in their admissions decisions. The higher the applicantâs yield projection, the greater their rate of acceptance.
Maybe, butâŠ
@Mwfan1921 @sushiritto for Post #146, #147 : Double speak, possible. But doesnât UMich conduct some sort of holistic admission or just the merit-based one?
Holistic AFAIK. My point was if they are using legacy in their predictive analytics model then it seems legacy is part of the admission decision.
Why would they have enrollment mgrs who are seemingly managing for yield if that whole analysis/modeling is not part of the admission decision?
I think youâre quite right on this.
It seems like Michigan waitlists lots of qualified candidates. So maybe what they mean is they decide if you are qualified for admission without considering legacy and then use the yield optimization (which considers legacy status) to decide who to offer a place to and who to waitlist?
My read is that admission offers will go out to applicants, without considering legacy status, maybe focusing on each individual HSâs yield. And then after offers have gone out, admissions will try to estimate yield now with the knowledge of the admitted applicantâs legacy status.
I wonder will other state flagship universities in the east (e.g., UMich, UVA, UNC) would also follow to drop ACT/SAT requirement for frosh admission?
That could be, but thatâs not how it works at some schools (I donât know what Mich does).
Many schools use their predictive analytics model real time during the admission process. For example, the admission staff will craft a class, send the info to the enrollment management firm who runs number overniteâŠwith the output being yield and/or revenue or whatever they want to measure. Then the admission staff adjusts the makeup of the class the next day, and rerun the model, and so on. Trinity collegeâs process is something like this and is discussed in a NYT article from last fall, as well as Paul Toughâs book The years that Matter Most.
Other schools put each application thru the predictive analytics model before the app is even read. The applications are deciled by likely yield, and applications from deciles with higher yields receive a more thorough read than those from applicants which the model says are less likely to attend if offered admission (models include variables that a school has found to be correlated with higher yield, etc)
I like Michigan, and am not being critical of them, I just thought that article was speaking out of both sides of their mouth.
I donât know what the point would be of estimating yield after a school makes admissions decisions⊠perhaps they are doing different or enhanced marketing activities to those accepted kids they really want to attend, but leaving yield to chance after admission offers are made seems a bit backwards.
There could be a nuance that it is possible that Michigan does not consider legacy in evaluating applicants to score them for potential admission, but does consider legacy when making an individual yield prediction (which includes other factors as well, such as stronger students being less likely to yield than students reaching for admission). Even if maximizing yield is not the goal, predicting yield is necessary to admit the number needed to fill, but not overfill, the class.
So your own status as a legacy or not would not affect your admission, but if you are at the margin of admission based on admission reading scoring or evaluation, how many legacies there are among those rated more highly in admission reading could affect whether there is enough space for you to be admitted when getting to the margin of admission.
@Mwfan1921 @sushiritto @ucbalumnus: Please stay on topic please. UMichigan and legacy is not the topic for this discussion.
Thank you.
**âGrades are subject to more manipulation, which skews the playing field in favor of those who have the means and connections to game the system. Wasnât eliminating the SAT/ACT supposed to level the playing field?â/b
An opinion article, **âUC, please keep SAT, ACTâ/b
Just wondering what pplâs thoughts are on the recent court temporary injunction of not allowing UCs to use ACT/SAT. I know 3 of the UCs were intending on using it, but the other optional test UCs would be impacted. I believe this particular argument is about kids with disabilities not being able to find test locations.
Was this where the UCâs were going to use it like other college that are âtest optionalâ do - meaning if you submit them, they will look at them (helps) but if you donât submit it supposedly wonât hurt you? If thatâs the case, then I have to agree with the decision. I think even for other colleges with the policy, its hard not to think that not submitting a test score doesnât hurt you. It certainly doesnât help, and if other submit, then effectively its hurting.
Iâm not a fan of test optional and I think UCs are making a mistake by removing testing (long term) for all applicants. I understand the short term Covid testing issues, but long term, its a mistake. Grades are so variable as to be almost meaningless.