Exercise: Analysing a Press Article on Legacy Admissions

Lisez l'extrait ci-dessous puis répondez aux questions en anglais, en rédigeant des phrases complètes et argumentées.

Document

For generations, the sons and daughters of Harvard graduates enjoyed a quiet advantage in the admissions process, a practice known as legacy admission. Supporters argued it strengthened alumni loyalty and, in turn, donations that fund scholarships for less privileged students.

Critics saw things differently. They pointed out that legacy applicants were admitted at a much higher rate than the rest of the pool, regardless of academic merit, effectively locking in advantages for already wealthy families.

Following the Supreme Court's 2023 ruling against race-conscious admissions, several universities came under renewed pressure to abolish legacy preferences as well. A handful of institutions, including some smaller liberal arts colleges, have already done so, arguing that fairness cannot apply to race alone while ignoring inherited privilege.

Questions

What is a legacy admission, according to the text?
What argument do supporters of legacy admissions put forward?
Why do critics consider the practice unfair?
What connection does the text make between the 2023 Supreme Court ruling and legacy admissions?
What have some liberal arts colleges already decided to do, and why?
In your opinion, is it consistent to ban race-conscious admissions while keeping legacy preferences? Justify your answer.
What alternative criteria could universities use to select students fairly? Suggest at least two.

From Chalkboards to Campuses: Why Formal Education Still Matters