Article #1 – “The Curse of Nepotism” in The Economist



Article #1 – “The Curse of Nepotism” in The Economist

• Nepotism v. Meritocracy

• Even though goal is meritocracy, it is not always achieved

• Money, influence

If Ivy League schools were meant to be based on mediocrity, why is it that a larger majority of those being admitted are legacies? For example, Harvard University, a prestigious Ivy League knows for its merit, admits 40% legacy applicants in comparison to the ordinary 11%. In relation to nepotism, admittance to colleges and universities has become unfair and not based on merit. As a result, legacies have made up 10-15% of every freshman class which shows that money has become the sole purpose of admittance over scholarly merit.

Article #2 – “May the Best Man or Woman Win” by Mariam Schulman

• Affirmative action, equality, “equality is not necessarily fair”

• Is it a moral issue?

The main point of this article is that equal is not necessarily fair with college admissions. Even though the article begins with a certain idea, it drifts away from its main points repeatedly. She uses race and diversity as her arguing factors towards the beginning of the article but it is unclear how she ties it into her first main point, which is equal is not necessarily fair. In relation to the other articles, his one supports article 3, that there is no single standard to judge by. One of here clearer points was in the second paragraph, stating “we all favor some sorts of criteria. The ethical trick is to make those criteria morally relevant.” This article has good main points, but weak supporting evidence.

Article #3 – “Legacy Admissions are Defensible Because the Process Can’t Be ‘Fair’” by Debra Thomas and Terry Shepard

• Defending admissions process, and in doing so, defending legacy, nepotism

• Process cannot be equal; inequality is inherent to the process of college admissions

• No single standard to judge by

• Rebuts (in a sense) “equality/fairness” and merit-based judgment/admission

The article addresses the issues presented with legacy admissions and how they are defendable. Unlike the “Time to Bury the Legacy,” this article presents readers with the idea that the admission process cannot be equal and how inequality is inherent to the process of college admissions. The “Time to Bury the Legacy” article addresses how easy it is for legacy students to be admitted to Ivy League schools ad how they are less qualified than the average Ivy students; this article discusses how all universities have a standard for admission and would not admit students unqualified to complete the course of study.

Article #4 – “Time to Bury the Legacy” by Robert DeKoven

• Addresses how easy it is for legacies to be admitted to Ivy League schools

• Against legacy admission policy: legacies are pervasive, abuses the system, admits less qualified applicants over more qualified applicants

• Diversity

• Applies common argument of affirmative action applicants and applies that to legacies

The article is discussing how legacy is bad, and its overall viewpoint is that legacy needs to be stopped. Legacy is stopping eligible students from obtaining spots at the university. In many cases legacy students are not the most qualified. Legacies defeat the purpose of having a diverse population. The article argues that if you criticize affirmative action you should equally criticize legacies. Like “The Curse of Nepotism,” being born into an affluent family gives an advantage in college admissions and the articles both recognize that total fairness is not always achieved.

Article #5 – “The History of Legacy Admissions”

• Summarizes the evolution of admissions process, particularly in relation to legacies

• Legacies have lower SAT scores; scholastic performance matters less than who your father is

Legacies have and are preferred over regular students. Regardless of test scores and grades, alumni named students are admitted. Even though admissions of legacy students is not fair and has been a problem for many years, they are continually admitted over more qualified students. Legacies statistically have lower SAT scores and grades are admitted by “demonstrating minimum level of ability.”

“Preserve Universities’ Right to Shape Student Community” USA Today

• Legacies are preferred over other students in the admission process

• Universities should be able to shape their own admissions policy

Universities favor legacy admissions as a way to boost the alumni. The alumni are more likely to donate and stay active with the university if their children are enrolled. There is going to be more white kids because no minority legacy. Legacy donations keep tuition down. Also, legacies reflect their unique character for the university. Students with alumni as parents have more active lives at the university.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download