Ethical Reflection on College Legacy Admissions free essay sample

Prestigious American colleges and universities, such as Dartmouth, Princeton, UVA, and Harvard, are internationally renowned for providing exceptional scholarly opportunities and ensuring an above-average career for the brightest minds; acceptance into one of these institutions is considered by many as a sign of great intellectual promise. Is it not shocking, then, that in many of these institutions, approximately 10 to 25 percent of the student body consists of legacy admissions, a majority of which would be considered academically incompetent for these institutions? In â€Å"Are Legacy Preferences in College Admissions Un-American? † Michael Lind argues that the tradition of legacy preferences, adopted by over three quarters of America’s selective colleges, is at odds with the fundamental design of a democratic republic because it reduces social mobility by promoting an economic and educational aristocracy. To further this point, it has been estimated that beneficiaries of legacy preferences are disproportionately white, Protestant, and upper income. Hence adding on to Michael Lind’s argument, legacy admissions are not only an un-American tradition, but also an important ethical issue, as they disadvantage meriting students of color, various religions, and lower income. We will write a custom essay sample on Ethical Reflection on College Legacy Admissions or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page As noted by James Conant, â€Å"Each generation must have the possibility to start life afresh†¦ Sons and daughters must and can seek their own level, obtain their own economic rewards, and engage in any occupation irrespective of what their parents might have done. † It is clear that opting to keep legacy preferences would bring about the most harm if one evaluates the issue using the ethical decision framework, a method of finding alternative actions to ethical issues that considers the benefits and harms each course of action will produce, which moral rights will be affected by this course of action, whether or not a particular course of action shows favoritism or discrimination, which course of action will advance the common good, and lastly, which course of action will bring about the development of moral virtues. As Michael Lind argues, legacy preferences promote privileged access to one of the most precious income-generating assets– diplomas and professional credentials— as well as ration access to higher education partly on the basis of birth rather than solely on the basis of individual abilities. Although often advertised as a means of â€Å"breaking the tie† between candidates, research suggests that legacy adds 160 SAT points to a candidates record, increasing ones chances of admission to a selective institution by approximately 20 percentage points. This tradition of quasi-hereditary aristocracy of MBAs, MDs, and PhDs can hardly be justified by any of the ethical approaches, whether one considers the utilitarian, rights, justice, common good, or virtue approach. With regards to the first, legacy preferences produce the most harm as they advantage only a select undeserving few. Legacy preferences also fail to score points with the rights approach, as they greatly violate the rights of applicants to be selected based on merit, although some might argue that the university has the right to select the kind of individuals that make up their student population. However, this argument is destroyed if one considers the justice approach, which considers whether a particular option treats people equally or proportionately. Seeing as the beneficiaries of legacy preferences tend to be white, Protestant, and rich, legacy preferences are unethical. It is evident that banning legacy-based admissions would be the ideal and logical solution. Admittance to a college would be based solely on merit, ensuring that applicants would not be discriminated against as a result of their color, religion, or socioeconomic status. In accordance with the common good approach, a ban on legacy preferences would be beneficial to the entirety of the community rather than to the privileged few who hold a majority of the political and economic power. Furthermore, considering the virtue approach, merit-based admissions would enable deserving people to receive the necessary formation needed to become world-changing individuals. Although the solution to this issue seems obvious, our society has yet to recognize that the tradition of legacy preferences is actually an ethical issue. Many remain unconvinced that legacy preferences even pose a problem because they believe can benefit from them or because they have accepted legacy as a criteria for selection. Yet, when presented with all the facts, it is evident that legacy-based admissions disadvantage all but a few wealthy elite.