Abigail Fisher, Affirmative Action, & Nepotism

My social media feeds have included a quite a bit about a Supreme Court case - Fisher v. University of Texas - regarding affirmative action (a topic I also address in a previous post). It is not the goal of this post to provide background on the case, though you can read more here, and many have offered very worthwhile commentary on the need for affirmative action, the hegemony of White privilege, and the racism inherent in the US education system. Check out #staymadabby for more.

I stand by my earlier assertion that we need affirmative action.

And I want to bring up something people keep missing.

I want to give you insight to another tool being used in admissions, one many might consider unfair if it weren't so pervasive, so ingrained, that we don't even notice it. And it heavily benefits Whites.

Yes.

And it isn't exactly racism, even. Though it does end up perpetuating systemic inequality in addition to the racism involved in the funding of K-12 schools, colleges, admissions, and other factors. That is, it is one of many problems, but it is one that seems largely ignored.

I mention nepotism in the title of this post. In fact, nepotism is a much larger factor in admissions than anyone would like to admit.

How so?

Have you ever noticed a little box on the admissions application to almost every program in higher education? It's labeled legacy, or it may say, "do you have a family member that has attended this institution? Or program?"

It's a box that I have never gotten to check. My family members did not attend institutions that had the majors or programs that I needed, so I didn't get to. Many say this box is not that important. They say that it gives only a minimal admissions boost, or is used only for data collection. But the statistics don't lie. Legacy consideration, according to a Harvard study referenced in the Chronicle of Higher Education, may drastically improve an applicant's chances. In fact, some studies suggest that legacy status may be the equivalent of adding 160 points on the SAT (on a 400-1600 scale, as was typical before 2005 and will be again in 2016). Let me tell you, given my line of work, that I know test scores: 160 points is a LOT.

Abigail Fisher would have gotten to check that box. Her father and sister both went to UT. So in fact, one could argue, and I believe Abigail Fisher believes, that she deserved a spot partly because her family had attended that institution before her. And she wanted to continue that tradition. It seems innocent enough.

But she already had an advantage in admissions to an elite institution that many students wouldn't, and disproportionately, students from racial minority backgrounds wouldn't. Given that institutions of higher education were segregated until relatively recently, and that admissions legacy policies benefited White students for a long time after, White students actually still have an admissions advantage that no one is discussing. Because if your grandparents, or your parents, your aunts and uncles, could not get into the school of their/your choosing due to racial bias, then you automatically have a disadvantage.

And this makes it ever more important that we use affirmative action to make sure that seats are given to the students who cannot check the legacy box. Those who would like to ban affirmative action policies by arguing that they prevent the most qualified applicants from attending a school should ALSO be complaining about the legacy policies.

How strange that they complain about policies that benefit racial minorities and are silent about policies that favor Whites.